KATHMANDU, Aug 25: The Constituent Assembly (CA) Committee on Determining Judicial System voted on Tuesday in favor of a provision that allows the appointment of eligible individuals other than Supreme Court (SC) justices to the post of chief justice. [break]
As per the new provision all persons eligible to become Supreme Court justices will also be eligible to become chief justice. Under the existing system, the CJ is chosen only from among the sitting justices of the SC. Traditionally, the seniormost SC justice is appointed CJ.
The CA committee will recommend the new provision for inclusion in the preliminary report and concept paper to be presented for CA deliberations on the new constitution. The report needs to be endorsed by the CA.
Committee Chairman Prabhu Sah, who is a Maoist CA member, conducted a vote as CA members on the committee were clearly divided between those for and against the proposal.
CA members from the Unified CPN-Maoist, some from the Madhesi People´s Rights Forum (MPRF) and some others from a few small parties voted in favor of the proposal while members from the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-UML and some small parties voted against.
The proposal received 21 out of 38 votes cast while 17 votes went against. Four members of the committee were absent from the voting. Those who were absent are Ek Nath Dhakal of Nepal Family Party, Jay Prakash Yadav of Tarai Madhes Democratic Party, Jogilal Yadav of CPN-UML and Purna Prasad Rai of Unified CPN-Maoist.
The Maoists said they voted for the proposal as a new provision was necessary to give an opportunity to talented candidates other than SC justices. But NC, CPN-UML and other lawmakers argued that such a provision will make room for politicizing the crucial post of CJ.
The committee is yet to finalize four other provisions including those on appointment of justices at state/provincial courts and the high court/supreme court.
There is also some dispute over the mechanism for appointment of justices. The Maoists are for appointing the justices through parliament while the NC and CPN-UML are for continuing the existing system under which the head of state appoints them on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council (CC). CC nominees for the posts of SC justices are also subject to parliamentary hearings.
The Maoists are likewise pushing for a provision that makes parliament the final authority for interpreting the constitution and other laws while the other parties are for the apex court as the final authority for that purpose. Similarly, the Maoists are for authorizing parliament to take action against justices and sacking them while the other parties want to give this authority to the CC.
thira@myrepublica.com
Related story
Dismay mounts as govt fails to open swab test labs outside Vall...
