"The SC judgment on CA term extension is not ambiguous as claimed by some," said constitutional expert Purna Man Shakya during an interaction program organized by the Democratic Lawyers´ Association (DLA) in Kathmandu on Thursday. [break]
"The SC verdict hasn´t already set a legal precedent on whether the CA´s term can be extended for an unlimited timeframe." Shakya said that the SC verdict only underscored the already extended one year term of CA. "If CA members fail to carry out their duties, it is for the people to punish them. Judges cannot speak on how or when the CA can be dissolved," he said. "Only the major political parties can take decision on the matter."
CPN UML Senior Leader KP Sharma Oli concurred. "The SC verdict does not imply that the CA´s term can be extended for an unlimited time. From the verdict, we should understand that CA´s term is valid until May 28, and neither the court nor any other body can extend the CA term for an unlimited timeframe," Oli opined.
Pointing out that the provision of parliamentary hearing against Supreme Court Justices has forced them to frequent the doors of political leaders, Oli said he was of the view that the parliamentary hearing process must be scrapped.
Senior Advocate Badri Bahadur Karki said, "The verdict has failed to properly address the serious constitutional issue. Judges´ feelings have also been reflected in the verdict."
Nepali Congress Leader Dr Ram Sharan Mahat ruled out any possibility of further extending CA´s term.
Related story
30-month term extension recommended for Joint Project Office on...
