Some members of the committee have proposed inclusion of a provision making it mandatory to reappoint all judges within three months of the new constitution coming into force. CA members mainly from the Unified CPN (Maoist) are in favor of the provision while Nepali Congress (NC) members are against. The provision also says that those who are not reappointed within the three months will be automatically dismissed from their posts.
"A panel formed by the committee recommended this provision for discussion at the full committee meeting on Friday. But some members are against this idea. They have said that retaking the oath after the enforcement of the new constitution is enough," said Maoist CA member Prabhu Sah, who is also chairman of the committee. Sitting judges were administered their oath of office again after the enforcement of the interim constitution. The members who are against the new provision are for continuing with the existing tradition.
Ram Krishna Chitrakar of NC opposed the idea, describing it as unjustified.
The committee has also proposed a provision under the new constitution making the code of conduct obligatory for judges, lawyers and employees in the judicial system. As per the new provision, a judge can be sacked if s/he is found violating the code of conduct, said Sah. At present, adherence to the code is voluntary. "We proposed the idea for the effective implementation of the code of conduct. And the committee is agreed," he said.
The committee is also to propose a new provision allowing lawmakers to discuss in parliament the annual report of the courts. In the existing system, the annual report is presented in parliament but lawmakers are not allowed to discuss it.
The committee had in the past set aside two major issues -- concerning the final authority to interpret the constitution and the body for appointing justices -- after failing to reach any consensus. The Maoists have advocated parliament as the final authority for interpreting the constitution while other lawmakers are for the Supreme Court as the final authority. Likewise, the Maoists are for appointing justices through a panel in parliament while CA members from other parties are for the existing provision under which the President appoints the justices on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council (CC). At present, CC nominees for SC justices are also subject to parliamentary hearings.
Related story
Revised interest rate corridor system introduced
