Strong, independent courts are essential to upholding the rule of law
The judiciary's renaissance in Nepal may be traced to a number of historic decisions and reforms that have reinforced the court's position as the protector of the constitution and human rights. Ensuring merit-based nominations and improving judicial accountability have been made possible in large part by the Judicial Council, which is in charge of all judge appointments, transfers, and disciplinary proceedings.
The judiciary in Nepal has seen a remarkable shift in recent times, which has been referred to as its "resurrection." This recovery follows a time of great upheaval during which the legal system encountered many difficulties, including popular mistrust and political meddling. In Nepal's democratic history, the restoration of the judiciary as a strong and autonomous institution represents a significant turning point.This rebirth is evidence of the democratic institutions' tenacity and the people's unwavering desire for justice. Numerous reforms, significant decisions, and a renewed dedication to preserving the rule of law have all contributed to its revival. The resurgence of the judiciary represents not only a legal but also a broader democratic movement in Nepal.
Dreams in the Dawn
The judiciary in Nepal has long been a vital component of the democratic structure of the nation. The independence and function of the court have, however, varied greatly throughout time, especially in times of political unrest. The civil war that lasted for ten years, from 1996 to 2006, and the peace process that came after put a great deal of pressure on the court. Political parties frequently attempted to sway court rulings, which created a general impression of prejudice and corruption. The institution that was meant to protect the rule of law found itself in a dangerous situation as public faith in the court declined. The royal takeover in 2005, when King Gyanendra dissolved the parliament and took full control of the government, brought the situation to a breaking point. A new era for the judiciary began with the People's Movement (Jana Andolan II) and the restoration of democracy in 2006. The basis for re-establishing the rule of law and guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary was established by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the Interim Constitution of 2007. The selection of justices who were steadfast in their commitment to preserving judicial independence and the rule of law was one of the major turning points in the judiciary's rebirth. In particular, the Supreme Court started to demonstrate its strength by upholding the separation of powers and contesting acts that were illegal. Significant verdicts against corruption and violations of human rights, as well as the rescission of ordinances that eschewed legislative review, demonstrated the judiciary's revitalized strength.
The judiciary was severely limited in its operations, and as it tried to function in an increasingly dictatorial climate, its credibility was questioned. Both locally and internationally, this decision was largely hailed as a win for Nepal's democracy and rule of law. It was an unmistakable indication that the judiciary would actively participate in preserving constitutional values rather than continue to behave as a passive observer. In addition to boosting the judiciary's morale, the ruling emphasized how crucial judicial independence is to a healthy democracy. The judiciary faced several obstacles on its road to recovery, though. There were persistent claims that political concerns impacted court nominations, indicating that political meddling remained a major problem.
The judiciary's renaissance in Nepal may be traced to a number of historic decisions and reforms that have reinforced the court's position as the protector of the constitution and human rights. Ensuring merit-based nominations and improving judicial accountability have been made possible in large part by the Judicial Council, which is in charge of all judge appointments, transfers, and disciplinary proceedings. The Supreme Court's order to stay the House of Representatives' dissolution in 2021 was one of the most important decisions made in recent years. Many people viewed this decision as a daring declaration of judicial independence and a turning point in Nepal's democratic development. In addition to restoring the dissolved parliament, the court's ruling made it abundantly evident that the legal system would not bow to political pressure. The Supreme Court's decision on the citizenship law, which preserved women's rights to transfer citizenship to their offspring, was another significant decision. This decision was a big step toward advancing gender equality and guaranteeing the respect of the fundamental rights outlined in the constitution.
Following the 2020–2021 constitutional crisis, the judiciary in Nepal saw a pivotal moment in its resuscitation. The judiciary gained prominence during the political crisis that was caused by Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli's dissolution of the House of Representatives. Seen as a historic judgment, the Supreme Court's audacious decision to reverse the dissolution in February 2021 reaffirmed the judiciary's independence and its position as the protector of the constitution. Both locally and internationally, this decision was largely hailed as a win for Nepal's democracy and rule of law. It was an unmistakable indication that the judiciary would actively participate in preserving constitutional values rather than continue to behave as a passive observer.
The judiciary's resurgence in Nepal is evidence of how resilient democratic institutions can be. Strong, independent courts are essential to upholding the rule of law, defending human rights, and building public confidence in the democratic process as the nation continues to negotiate its complicated political environment. Though there are still obstacles to overcome, the judiciary's recent revival gives promise for a more egalitarian and just Nepal. In summary, Nepal's resuscitation of the judiciary is an incredible accomplishment that demonstrates the nation's dedication to maintaining democratic principles and the rule of law. Even if there are still difficulties, the judiciary's comeback gives optimism for a day when everyone may access justice and democratic values are deeply ingrained in Nepalese culture.
