Constitutional expert Purna Man Shakya says anything less than the constitution or fresh mandate would not be welcome at the court. Even the state of emergency does not fit into the definition of legitimacy, he said.
Why not emergency? The provision of declaring an emergency up to six months was incorporated in the interim constitution to buy time for constitution writing in case of special situations like Civil War, uncontrollable aggression or extreme economical crisis. “Nothing like those situation exists in the country at the moment,” Shakya added.
Moreover, the emergency period was to be added to the initial two years of the CA. “The four years gone by and the provision is no longer applicable in the first place,” he said.
The November 25 verdict had stated three alternatives - new elections, referendum or any other worthy way out-in case the CA fails to promulgate the constitution.
What is that "worthy way out"? Shakya explained that the judiciary could not always give close-ended alternatives. Politics could take any turn. “Whatever, righteousness should always prevail," he added.
The idea of continuing legislative-parliament without the new constitution does not work either. “Such a parliament would not have a source of legitimacy. How can you have a parliament without a constitution?” Shakya said.
Even without the constitution or no decision for fresh mandate, there will be the principle of necessity to take charge of things. “The government and the president will remain adhoc as the country cannot stay in vaccum, and by way of political decisions, new elections will have to be held,” he said.
Related story
Parties, leaders call for ousting PM, impeaching Prez
