Kathmandu, September 10:

The Supreme Court today refused to issue a stay order against a legal provision that prevents the Rayamajhi Commission-indicted former ministers of king Gyanendra-led cabinet, including Kamal Thapa and Tanka Dhakal, from contesting the November 22 constituent assembly elections. Demanding that the apex court issue a stay order against the provision, the former ministers had filed a writ petition in the apex court.

A three-member bench comprising judges Ram Prasad Shrestha, Bala Ram KC and Top Bahadur Magar said the final hearing, to be conducted on September 24, will decide whether or not to allow the former ministers to contest the elections.

Advocates Bishnu Bhattarai, Bal Krishna Neupane, Trilochan Gautam and Dharma Raj Regmi, pleading on behalf of the former ministers, said that the provision barring the former ministers, who have not been convicted, from contesting the elections curtails the fundamental rights of the former ministers.

Pleading on behalf of Speaker Subas Nembang, the Parliament Secretariat and the Election Commission, attorney general Yagya Murti Banjade and deputy attorney general Narendra Prasad Pathak claimed that the provision barring the former ministers from contesting the elections is not a punishment and that there is no need for the apex court to intervene in the matter.

Claiming that Clause 19 (G) of the Constituent Assembly Member Election Act 2007 contradicts with the Interim Constitution 2007, over 12 former royal ministers, including Kamal Thapa and Tanka Dhakal, had filed a writ petition. In their petition, they claimed that the provision of the 2007 Act — which bars them from contesting the elections — contradicts with Articles 12 (1)(2)(3), 13 (1)(2) and 24 of the Interim Constitution. They had sought an apex court order to declare the provision null and void.

Stating that nomination of candidates for the elections will start on September 30, the order said the “hearing on this case cannot be deferred.”

The bench also directed the government to clarify in writing whether an investigation had been launched against those who misused state powers and state coffers through the office of the Attorney-General. It also ordered the government to clarify whether those who misused state coffers and state powers had been prosecuted.