Kathmandu, April 26

Political parties are divided over whether members of Parliament should be suspended when accused of a crime carrying a jail sentence of three years or more.

Committees formed to draft business regulations for the House of Representatives and the National Assembly are divided over the issue.

Coordinator of the committee formed to draft HoR business rules Krishna Bhakta Pokharel said he favoured suspending members of Parliament if they were sent to jail. “This does not mean that any MP accused of a criminal offence should be automatically suspended. But if an MP is accused of a crime carrying a jail sentence of three years or more or s/he is convicted by the last tier of the court or s/he  has been sent to judicial custody, then s/he should be suspended,” he added.

Pokharel said suspension of an MP accused of a crime carrying a jail sentence of three years or more was provisioned under the two HoR business rules enacted in two previous Houses under the Interim Constitution-2007.

Pokharel said government employees and police personnel accused of a crime carrying a jail sentence of three years or more also faced suspension, and if the same rule did not apply to MPs that could encourage impunity.

Nepali Congress lawmakers Minendra Rijal and  Min Bahadur Bishwakarma, who are members of the HoR business rules drafting committee,  said the ruling parties’ assertion to suspend MPs accused of crime was wrong. “MPs should not be suspended just because they face trial or have been sent to judicial custody,” Rijal said.

Bishwakarma said if an MP was suspended merely on grounds of being indicted or arrested by the police, then ruling parties could unfairly control MPs, particularly at a time when transitional issues had not been resolved. “We have seen how false cases were slapped on politicians during Panchayat system. Sometimes ruling parties employ unfair means to control MPs, and therefore, the Parliament should not be used by ruling parties to control lawmakers and impose their design,” he said.

“The current draft has already provisioned barring a lawmaker, who has been sent to judicial custody, from enjoying the rights as an MP. Moreover, such an MP cannot take part in parliamentary proceedings, and that should be sufficient,” Rijal said. He added that an accused facing trial should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Rastriya Janata Party-Nepal lawmaker Laxman Lal Karna said Article 103 of the constitution gave immunity to lawmakers and no parliamentary rules should be made to curtail that immunity. He added that an MP should not be suspended just because s/he has been indicted in a case or has been sent to judicial custody.

CPN-MC lawmaker Rekha Sharma, who is also a member of the HoR business rules, said  barring MPs accused of a crime from enjoying the rights of lawmakers should be enough. “We want consensus to emerge on the issue,” she added.