Judiciary is a non-political institution and it should always be kept free from politics. Appointments in this institution should not reflect political color, given that judiciary stands as a symbol of impartiality. The JC that made the appointments seems to have forgotten this very essence this time as well. The constitutional body headed by the chief justice failed to resist political pressure while appointing judges. It is highly objectionable given the consequences that such appointments can bring to our judiciary in the days to come.
The JC should have moved cautiously given the timing of the appointments. The Constituent Assembly Committee on Determining Judicial System has already proposed transferring the power to interpret the constitution from the judiciary to the parliament. Such a provision deprives judiciary of its independence. And the appointments this time have given an excuse to those who champion the proposed provisions.
The JC is the appropriate institution to make judges’ appointments, as we argued recently in this space, but it should act impartially and transparently. Often those who have connections with political and judicial power centers get the opportunity to be judges. JC must give reasons why a particular person is eligible to be a judge while someone else is not.
Also, judiciary in Nepal is still an institution dominated by men belonging to so-called ‘upper caste’. Other institutions in the country are trying to change their exclusive character but this institution is yet to respond positively to the widespread call for inclusion. Only two women lawyers were appointed this time, though there were many others who were equally qualified and eligible. The JC set its covert subjective standards to eliminate eligible women lawyers from the race. Why did the body have to come up with new standards when the constitution already has set criteria for judgeship? The JC must answer this question. It is time we amended the Judicial Council Act with provisions allocating quotas for women, Madhesi, Janajatis and Dalits in judicial appointments, provided they have the required qualifications and experience.
A group of lawyers have already moved the Supreme Court with a public interest litigation against the appointments. The petition can be used as an opportunity to undo the wrong. The apex court will soon give its verdict for or against the litigation vis-à-vis the controversial appointments. Irrespective of the court’s decision, we expect the JC to show transparency and impartiality, something that is seriously lacking now, while appointing judges in the future.
Related story
Ensure Merit-based Appointments
