KATHMANDU, JANUARY 17
Deadlock continues in the judiciary though dissident justices of the Supreme Court had begun hearing cases after the lottery-based cause list was launched on December 1.
As a result, the Constitutional Council, which is responsible for making appointments to the constitutional bodies, Judicial Council, which is responsible for making appointments to courts other than the Supreme Court, and the Judicial Service Commission, which is responsible for issuing appointment letters to judicial service employees and transferring gazetted officers, have not been able to hold their meetings.
Even the Special Court has not been able to dispose of cases in full swing due to lack of judges.
The functioning of the judiciary was derailed in October when dissident justices started boycotting benches accusing Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana of lobbying the government to get his brother-in-law appointed to the Cabinet. The Nepal Bar Association and the Supreme Court Bar Association also started protesting against Rana for seeking 'a quid pro quo deal' with the executive and are continuing their protest even now. Bar associations are demanding that CJ Rana should quit in the face of the controversy.
Dissident justices have warned against sharing bench with Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana in the division bench, full bench or the constitutional bench. Ever since protests started in the judiciary, the SC has not been able to conduct constitutional bench that hears constitutional issues, including issues between different tiers of governments.
The NBA and the SCBA, which have accused Rana of corruption and creating hurdles in the much needed judicial reform, have also warned him against taking part in any constitutional body meeting where he is supposed to sit as an ex officio member, including the Constitutional Council.
SCBA President Purna Man Shakya said lawyers started their protest against the CJ today maintaining health protocols and limiting their numbers below 25 in view of the surge in COVID cases. He said it was wrong on the part of political parties not to make their position clear on the deadlock in the judiciary.
He said neither the government nor political parties were taking deadlock in the judiciary seriously. "If political parties think that it is not their duty to help end the stalemate in the judiciary, they are shirking their national responsibility,"
Shakya added.
Advocate Pankaj Kumar Karna said all stakeholders of the judiciary, political parties, the executive, bar associations, and the chief justice should be sensitive to help end the stalemate in the judiciary and show flexibility.
A version of this article appears in the print on January 18, 2022, of The Himalayan Times.
