Forgot your password?
Confusing Ruling Of Supreme Court Of Nepal
By KTM Metro Reporter
May 26, 2011: A full bench of five justices of the Supreme Court of Nepal headed by Chief Justice Khila Raj Regmi yesterday has given its ruling on a writ petition filed by Bharat Mani Jangam against the Constituent Assembly (CA) term extension a year ago, stating, "Article 64 of the Interim Constitution has a prohibitory phrasing that hints at the possibility of extending the CA term by up to six months, not indefinitely. Even such an extension is allowed for a time of state emergency." However, the full bench has missed to state, “Article 82: Dissolution of Constituent Assembly: The business of the Constituent Assembly shall end on the day of the commencement of the constitution passed by the Constituent Assembly.”
So, most of the legal experts question whether the full bench of the Supreme Court of Nepal giving ruling on the case of the petitioner’s demand for not extending the term of the CA has been biased against extending the term of the CA. Some legal experts even say that the full bench would have been clearly impartial if it has pointed out the Article 82 that clearly states, “The CA remains until it promulgates a new constitution.”
