Responding to the Supreme Court (SC)´s order to furnish written clarification over the decision to form an election government-led by Chief Justice (CJ) Khil Raj Regmi, Bhattarai has stated that the writ petition is subjective and does not acknowledge the distinct nature of the current political situation and the ongoing peace process in the country. [break]
He has claimed that the writ petition is intended to drag the judiciary into political controversy and disrupt efforts being made by the political parties to forge consensus.
The prime minister has maintained that political parties agreed to form an election government led by the sitting chief justice after they failed to forge consensus on other alternatives.
Stating that political parties have arrived at consensus on the issue in accordance with the provisions enshrined in the interim constitution regarding the principle of separation of powers, Bhattarai said that the deal between political parties will be implemented in accordance with the existing constitution.
The prime minister has argued that formation of a CJ-led government will not violate the principle of separation of powers as the chief justice, once he heads an election government, will only execute the tasks of the executive and keep away from the day to day activities of a CJ.
“We have reached no agreement that blatantly undermines the supremacy of constitution and independence of judiciary as claimed in the writ petition,” reads the clarification sent by the prime minister to SC.
The prime minister has stated that involvement of chief justices and judges in non-judicial activities is also found in established democracies, including the United States of America and Australia.
Similarly, terming the writ petition subjective, the president´s office has said that the writ petition deserves to be scraped as it is related to an issue which is beyond the scope of the existing constitution. The president´s office has claimed that it has been made defendant in the petition based on hypothesis and subjectivity.
In his clarification, UCPN (Maoist) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal has termed the writ petition against the interests of the country and the people. He has stated that the apex court will function in accordance with the principle of independence of judiciary as the sitting chief justice will work as the head of an election related mechanism for a particular time.
Likewise, in its clarification, MoLJ has urged the apex court to dismiss the writ petition stating that the decision on forming a CJ led government is a natural political process.
MoLJ has also claimed that there is no constitutional ground for the apex court to issue any type of order on a “purely a political issue”.
Meanwhile, the Judicial Council (JC), the constitutional body which is headed by the chief justice himself, has said that it has not made any suggestions on the formation of a government headed by sitting or former CJ or judge. It has also maintained that it is not aware of any such decision.
Advocate Om Prakash Aryal on February 26 had filed a writ petition seeking the apex court intervention in the formation of a CJ-led government.
Related story
PM writes to SC requesting to scrap writ petition
-1784277548.webp)
