SCBA seeks explanation from JC member on judges' selection

Published On: April 9, 2019 04:30 AM NPT By: Republica  | @RepublicaNepal

KATHMANDU, March 9: The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on Monday decided to seek an explanation from a member of the Judicial Council (JC), who also represents Nepal Bar Association, on what ground the recent recommendation for the judges' appointment was made.

"We discussed this agenda and took the decision to seek clarification from JC member Ram Prasad Sitaula who represents the umbrella organization of lawyers on what basis were the judges selected," Khagendra Adhikari, chairperson of SCBA, told journalists.

According to him, their future move would depend on the explanation provided by Sitaula. Sitaula was appointed a member of the JC three years ago representing Nepal Bar Association.

The SCBA took the decision to seek explanation from Sitaula following the suggestion of its advisory committee which comprises of former chairmen, secretaries and senior advocates. During the discussion, senior advocate Shambhu Thapa clearly said that he would file a complaint with the parliamentary hearings committee regarding the recent selection of judges.

Other senior advocates also took the stance to bring protests programs against the selection.

Newly elected NBA President Chandeshwar Shrestha has publicly urged the chief justice-headed Judicial Council to rethink on its recent selection of judges' for the Supreme Court and high courts.

Various unions of staffers at the Supreme Court also made public their stance against the recent selection of judges and urged the JC and the parliamentary hearings committee to rectify the mistake. Otherwise, they warned to launch protests programs demanding resignation of the JC office bearers.

A joint press statement issued by the official trade union of the Supreme Court issued by Chairman Prakash Parajuli, Vice-Chairman Dal Bahadur Bajimaya and Secretary Hari Bhattarai clearly accused the JC for disregarding meritocracy and promoting nepotism and favoritism in the courts.

The statement states that the nominees were selected with power sharing among major political parties and the office-bearers of the JC and the relatives of the former Chief Justices showing the utmost situation of nepotism and favoritism.

The official trade union also accused most of the High Court and Supreme Court judges nominees undermining the qualification of continuity in the practice and also lacks public image and contribution in the law and justice sector.

Leave A Comment