Kathmandu, November 16 Private member’s bills are part of parliamentary democracy, but lawmakers in Nepal rarely register these bills in both the Parliament and provincial assemblies. Executive Director of Freedom Forum Taranath Dahal said unwillingness on part of the lawmakers to register private member’s bills in the Parliament and provincial assemblies indicated that they were either incompetent to draft these bills or hesitant to clearly put forth their views on issues of public importance. “We have seen opposition parties slamming the government over some bills recently, terming them restrictive and bad for democracy, but they did not bring their own bills to counter the arguments of the government,” Dahal said and added that Madhes-based parties, which seriously objected to citizenship bill brought by the government, could bring private member’s bill to educate the public, build pressure on the government and win people’s support. Dahal said the opposition parties vehemently criticised Guthi (Trust) Bill brought by the government, but opposition lawmakers did not bring their own bill to counter the government bill. Dahal said lawmakers had a chance to bring private member’s bills in the Parliament to challenge the restrictive provisions of the Media Council Bill, Information Technology Bill, Advertisement Bill and Citizenship Bill brought by the government. Neither the government nor the lawmakers have come up with these bills, Dahal said. In Nepal’s Parliamentary history only three bills — Legal Aid Bill, National Human Rights Bill and Health Bill — were moved by lawmakers as private bills and were enacted into law. Deputy parliamentary party leader of the ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP) Subas Chandra Nembang, who had moved the Legal Aid Bill in 1997, told THT that although very few members moved private member’s bills, lawmakers needed to exercise their legal rights to draft private bills as their efforts could draw the attention of the entire population of the country and build pressure on the government. Nembang said there was separate department of the US Congress which provided all required information to the lawmakers upon request, to help them draft their own bills and Nepal’s Parliament Secretariat should also set up similar department or research centre with modern library to help lawmakers draft private member’s bills. Nepali Congress lawmaker Radhe Shyam Adhikari said lawmakers were not exercising their right to draft private member’ bills mainly because they feared that their bills might be rejected by the ruling party. “Drafting a bill entails a lot of resources. A lawmaker who drafts a private member bill has to provide copies of his/her bill to all the lawmakers for review. This is one reason behind lawmakers’ unwillingness to draft their own bills,” Adhikari added. Adhikari, who played a role to remove jurisdiction of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority over public post holders for their improper action, wants to draft a private member’s bill to incorporate the provision under the jurisdiction of Prime Minister’s Office. “Prior to the promulgation of the Constitution of Nepal-2015, the CIAA could file case against public post holders for their improper action. This jurisdiction of the CIAA was removed from the new constitution as the CIAA massively misused the provision,” Adhikari said, “After removing the provision from the CIAA’s jurisdiction, power to monitor improper action of public post holders should remain with the PMO. No effort has been made to address the issue,” Adhikari said. Spokesperson for the Parliament Secretariat Dasharath Dhamala said lawmakers were not keen on moving private bills due to lack of resources, infrastructure and training. “Our parliamentary rules state that lawmakers can move private member’s bills, but this provision has not been used by the lawmakers,” he said.