KATHMANDU, Dec 13: There is widespread opposition to the amendment made to the Civil Criminal Procedures Code 2074 BS brought by the government with the aim of releasing various people, including Resham Chaudhary, who are in jail on criminal charges. Also, pressure has increased on the government to withdraw the ordinance.
The pressure on the government regarding the ordinance has also increased from within the ruling party. The government has clarified that an ordinance was necessary to bring the political groups or political parties involved in violent activities to a peaceful path and to the political mainstream. On Monday, the day after the decision to introduce the ordinance, Minister for Communication and Information Technology Gyanendra Karki held a press conference and said that the purpose of introducing the ordinance is to forgive groups or parties that disagree with the country's political system and bring them to a peaceful path. He also said that the ordinance has been recommended to the President.
Karki said, "It has been decided to bring the ordinance with the aim of allowing everyone to work in a comfortable environment with the internal unity of the country." Stating that previous governments have also brought such ordinances, he added, "The ordinance has been brought keeping in mind the current needs."
Criminal code passed, Chhaupadi criminalized
Nepali Congress General Secretary Gagan Thapa has requested the government to immediately withdraw the ordinance saying that the executive has interfered in the jurisdiction of the courts and parliament. "The ordinance is legally, politically and morally wrong. It is unconstitutional, undemocratic and against the spirit of the parliamentary system," wrote Thapa on social media, "the current government is a caretaker government. It cannot make decisions of far-reaching importance. This government does not have the legal and constitutional status to bring an ordinance. Its subject and intent are wrong.”
Thapa says that the government cannot withdraw a case pending at the court. He said, "Considering that this is a political matter, the new parliament, seeing the need, can make a law and take the process forward." The party has already decided that it is completely wrong to bring such an ordinance many times in the past. Currently, there has been neither any discussion nor any decision about this ordinance within the party. Therefore, whatever the party's stand was in the past, it is the same today," said Thapa, "So the party cannot bear the weight of this wrong decision made by the government."
Similarly, another General Secretary of the NC, Bishwa Prakash Sharma, has also opposed the ordinance. He said the decision to introduce the ordinance was not only a legal and political question but also related to ethics. Sharma has said on social media, "It is not only a completely wrong legal and political question for not keeping close discussions between the parties and within their own party to bring an ordinance during the transitional period, but also a moral question is attached to this case."
Likewise, NC leader Dr Shekhar Koirala said that the attempt to pardon those convicted by the court through the ordinance was a mockery of the political spirit. "Trying to amend the law through an ordinance and pardon those found guilty by the court is a mockery of the rule of law, parliamentary system, political and democratic spirit."
Similarly, Deputy General Secretary of CPN-UML Bishnu Rimal has strongly opposed the government's ordinance to release people in prison. He says that the ordinance has attacked the very spirit of the constitution. He has made it clear that UML will strongly oppose this ordinance. "The acting government has no right to bring any kind of ordinance," said Rimal, "the acting government cannot do anything of far-reaching importance."
Similarly, Rabi Lamichhane, chairman of the Rastriya Swatantra Party, has said that the decision to introduce the ordinance is the height of political shamelessness. He requested the government to withdraw the ordinance immediately. How long will it take for the new parliament to hold a meeting? A week, two weeks, three weeks, what kind of emergency had come that the government can't even wait for 1/2 weeks? This ordinance has violated the meaning of the new mandate," said Lamichhane on social media. He said, "There has been an attempt to violate the rights of the new parliament. This step is the height of political shamelessness.”
