Concluding that Bam´s decision to release on low bail repeatedly-arrested notorious culprits involved in kidnap for ransom was wrong and controversial, the JC led by then chief justice Ram Prasad Shrestha had recommended to parliament nearly six months ago to immediately initiate an impeachment process against him. [break]
"I am tired of urging party leaders to begin the impeachment process against Bam," admitted Speaker Subas Nembang, adding, "Leaders of the major political parties had pledged through media that they would initiate the process without delay. Initiating the process depends entirely on the party leaders and hence they are responsible for the delay."
On the basis of a probe report prepared by ex-SC justice Bal Ram KC, the JC had found Justice Bam guilty of taking a controversial decision to release Sanjaya Shrestha, Rohit Paliwal Agrawal and Bhimsen Pundit, who were in police custody on charges of possessing arms and ammunition, abducting dozens of people and seeking ransom.
Even after Speaker Nembang asked the parties to initiate the impeachment process, they did not take any initiative. "It´s valid to say that we have failed to prioritize the issue," admitted CPN-UML Chief Whip Bhim Acharya, adding, "We should have prioritized the issue immediately after we publicly pledged action through media. But fast changing political ups and downs have pushed the issue into the shadow."
A knowledgeable source, however, claimed that the process has been halted due to intra-party conflict.
According to the source, party leaders, especially those from the western region, have been creating hurdles. Justice Bam, who has been without any responsibilities following the JC recommendation, hails from the western region.
Speaker Nembang had handed over the JC report to the chief whips of all the parties nearly five months ago. “As we are struggling with major problems, we could not focus on the issue,” said Nepali Congress Chief Whip Laxman Ghimire, adding, "The issue concerning Justice Bam is nothing compared to the issue of statue drafting and concluding the peace process, which have also been arrested for long."
The JC forwarded its recommendations to the House as it does not have authority to take action against a Supreme Court Justice. As per Article 105 of the Interim Constitution, impeachment of a SC judge falls under the jurisdiction of parliament.
As per Section 3(1) of the Impeachment (Regulations and Procedure) Act 2002, and the Legislature-Parliament (Procedure) Rules 2007, at least 25 percent of House members must register an impeachment motion against an apex court justice or the head or member of a statutory body, to formally begin the process. After that parliament forms an inquiry panel to furnish a report. Even if the inquiry finds the official on the wrong side of the law, only a two-third majority of the House can relieve him/her of responsibilities.
The probe panel had accused Justice Bam and then judge Hari Bahadur Basnet, who had resigned before the JC action, of ´dishonesty´, ´incompetence´ and ´non-transparency´ in ruling to release Shrestha, Agrawal and Pandit on very low bail instead of sending them into custody as required by existing law.
Bam and Basnet, the former in his capacity as chief judge at Patan Appellate Court, had released the three accused on low bail of Rs 100,000, overruling an order of Kathmandu District Office, which had sentenced them to three years in prison and slapped a Rs 22,000 fine each.
Related story
This is why the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Rana i...
_20211114122844.jpg)
