Such a body will be entrusted with the responsibility of appointing or dismissing the chief justice and appointing, promoting and dismissing other justices of the Supreme Court (SC) and members of constitutional bodies. [break]
After agreeing in principle to ensure an independent judiciary in the new constitution, the taskforce had agreed on Friday to work out a detailed agreement on the issues involved on Saturday.
"The discussion on issues like whether there should be a single or two or three separate mechanisms to deal with judicial matters and who should head the mechanisms is underway," UCPN (Maoist) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who heads the taskforce, told reporters after the meeting held at Singha Durbar.
The Maoists have proposed that the chief of the legislature [Speaker] should head the top mechanism while the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-UML and other parties have said that the head of the executive [executive prime minister or executive president] should head it.
Similarly, the Maoists have floated the idea of forming a single mechanism for handling judicials matters but NC leaders have lobbied for ensuring at least two separate mechanisms. "One of the options proposed by us is to entrust a single body with judicial issues," Maoist leader Dev Gurung, who is also involved in the talks, told Republica.
- Maoists for single body to deal with judicial issues, NC, UML for multiple bodies
- Maoists want legislative chief to head top judicial body, NC says executive head should lead it
- SC or Constitutional Court to be final authority to interpret constitution: Upendra Yadav
- Issue og final authority to interpret constitution yet to be resolved: Dev Gurung
NC leaders have stood against the idea of a single body. "Merging all the bodies into a single one and entrusting it with all the powers will be against the principle of an independent judiciary," NC parliamentary party leader Ram Chandra Paudel told reporters. He said there should at least be two bodies similar to the Constitutional Council (CC) and Judicial Council (JC) as practised at present. Though there is also one more body -- Judicial Service Commission -- at present, leaders from the NC and other parties have agreed to merge it into the JC. Paudel said the NC is for the JC being headed by the CJ.
Issues like the number of members and who should be represented on such body or bodies are also under discussion.
Similarly, the leaders are yet to resolve another thorny issue-- who should be the final authority to interpret the constitution and laws in case of conflict with the statute.
While the Maoists are for authorizing a special committee under parliament for this, non-Maoists are for entrusting the SC with the responsibility.
"We all members in the taskforce including Maoists have agreed to establish the SC or a Constitutional Court [if formed] as the final authority to interpret the constitution. There is no dispute at all in this connection," said Chairman of Madhesi People´s Rights Forum and member of the taskforce Upendra Yadav.
But Gurung refuted this, saying the issue is not resolved yet. "Since the matter of interpretation is interrelated with the making of laws, we are for authorizing a legislative body for that," he said. He further explained that since the full House cannot deal with such issues, the Maoist party is for forming a small committee under parliament for the purpose.
Related story
This is why the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Rana i...
