The apex court administration had rejected review petitions filed by the executive and the legislature against the November 25 verdict of the apex court that said the term of the Constituent Assembly (CA) will automatically expire in six months. [break]
On Tuesday, Chief Secretary Madhav Ghimire forwarded a copy of the SC administration´s decision to the prime minister.
"A copy of the decision has been submitted to the prime minister Tuesday," said the source, adding, "However, we found the prime minister not very enthusiastic to file review application."
As per the existing legal provision, a petitioner can file review application at the SC even after a review petition is rejected. The review application is however directly taken to the bench of an SC justice and the latter will come up with the final decision on whether to accept the review petition.
Another source at the Office of Prime Minister and Council of Ministers (OPMCM) told Republica that there is no indication of any possibility of the executive knocking SC door against the rejection order.
"We have not received any official/unofficial instruction from the prime minister for making necessary preparation to file review application. If the prime minsiter was enthusiastic about filing review application then we would have received strong instruction to study, analyze and prepare review application," a knowledgeable source at the prime minister´s office added.
As of Tuesday, no study and analysis have been carried out by the OPMCM officials on the matter.
The prime minister´s political advisor Devendra Paudel however said the government has consulted the attorney general on the matter but is still indecisive on whether or not to file review application.
"Initially, the prime minsiter was in favor of filing review application immediately after the rejection order," Paudel said, adding, "However, I don´t have information about the prime minister´s feelings of late.
Paudel informed that the prime minsiter has entrusted Attorney General Mukti Pradhan with the responsibility to carry out necessary preparations regarding the review application.
Attorney General Pradhan is however currently outside Kathmandu. "We are studying on whether or not to move the SC, but no decision has been made so far," Pradhan told Republica on the phone.
Stating that SC´s November 25 verdict on CA term extension has not contravened any constitutional provisions or any precedents, the apex court had refused to register review petitions a week ago.
Both government and the parliament had argued that the SC had infringed the jurisdiction of parliament while issuing verdict on CA term extension and sought that the ruling be reviewed.
We are also in two minds: Speaker
Meanwhile, Speaker Subas Nembang told Republica that the chance of filing review application 50-50. "We may file review application and we may not. We are also in two minds."
The apex court had refused to accept the review petitions citing three grounds.
Firstly, the petitions were rejected as the SC verdict was not found to have grossly infringing any constitutional provision. Secondly, it declined to take up the review petitions as they were satisfied that no crucial evidence had gone missing [or was overlooked] while issuing the verdict. And thirdly, the petitions were refused as the SC´s November 25 verdict was not against any precedent.
It is clear that these three branches of government are most likely to engage in confrontation, an expert said.
Related story
Nepali women keen to break jinx
