KATHMANDU: 52 people were appointed to constitutional bodies during Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli's last term, and the Supreme Court's Constitutional Bench is scheduled to consider this writ petition. Since they were announced, the ordinance-based nominations have been a source of controversy.
The writ petition, filed on January 2, questions the legality of these appointments, which bypassed the usual parliamentary hearing process. Despite being scheduled for a hearing this week, the case has been delayed for nearly four years without a resolution from the court.
The swearing-in of 32 people by President Bidya Devi Bhandari in compliance with the Constitutional Council's recommendations caused a stir and generated worries about possible procedural irregularities. Critics claimed the nominations compromised parliamentary oversight and questioned the judiciary's capacity to handle such matters.
Senior advocates Dinesh Tripathi and Om Prakash Aryal submitted the writ on February 2, 2021, seeking to halt the appointments and the subsequent oath-taking ceremony. They contended that proceeding without a parliamentary hearing could set a dangerous precedent for governance.
Despite the legal uncertainty surrounding their employment, several appointees have already started receiving retirement benefits, which further complicates matters. Public and legal discussions concerning the validity of their stances and the possible ramifications for governance have been stoked by this.
The case's unresolved state raises more general issues regarding institutional accountability and the prompt administration of justice. The forthcoming hearing is regarded as a crucial opportunity to evaluate the nominees' validity and guarantee compliance with constitutional requirements.
