Submit your Article

Satish Kumar Singh of Janamat Samajbadi Party has been appointed as the Chief Minister of Madhes Province on Friday.

Province Chief Sumitra Subedi Bhandari in accordance with Article 168 (2) appointed Singh to the post after Singh submitted his claim with the support of CPN-UML, CPN (Maoist Center), CPN (Unified Socialist) and Nagarik Unmukti Party, among others.

Newly appointed Chief Minister Singh is scheduled to take oath of office and secrecy today itself.

Singh was elected as PA member from Saptari 2 (A) in the election held in November 2022.

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal has said that the budget for the upcoming fiscal year aims to develop the country as a hub of information technology (IT).  The budget has announced a decade for the IT enhancement, he added.

Speaking at the 'Digital Nepal Conclave 2024' organized by the ICT Foundation here today, the Prime Minister shared the government's goals of exporting IT services worth Rs 3,000 billion in the next fiscal year with the creation of 500, 000 direct employment opportunities and one million indirect jobs in the IT sector.

The budget has announced to establish IT as an instrumental for economic growth, enable a legal foundation for exploring and promoting IT innovations, and promote the development of artificial technology with the regulatory provisions in place, he said, adding that through the budget, the government has pledged to provide a durable and high-speed internet facility, data security and the protection of intellectual property.

The Prime Minister said that institutional measures will be implemented to revise the 'Digital Nepal Framework,' and initiatives will be launched to provide high-speed internet in Kathmandu Valley and Butwal, along with the establishment of an IT Park.

The government accords priority to the use of software developed within the country by public entities and plans to upgrade the government's data center to enhance data storage, security, and utilization capabilities, according to the Prime Minister.

He said that the development and promotion of communications and information technology is one of the top priorities of the government and the new budget highlights the government's three priorities.  Such core priorities are promoting the IT sector, promoting a digital economy, and exploring innovation and job opportunities, he said, adding that ongoing efforts include revising relevant laws and policies to meet these goals.

Prime Minister Dahal said various facts have proved that progress is being achieved in development, prosperity, and self-employment sectors, adding an environment of enthusiasm is being built in the country gradually due to continuous efforts of the government in the sector of production, productivity, and employment creation.

He took time to say that the government is doing its best to seek opportunities for lucrative jobs in the sector of information technology as well as a program along with innovation has been brought at seven provinces establishing a fund of one billion rupees for the first time in the history to promote startup and innovation.

The Prime Minister appealed to youths and entrepreneurs from the IT sector to collaborate in socio-economic transformation efforts through the use of technology.

 "You should not be disappointed. The government is grateful towards your contribution to employment creation and economic development through the IT sector", the Prime Minister said, adding the government is ready to address policy-level issues concerning the IT sector.

Stating that building a corruption-free society by improving 'digital governance' is the responsibility of the government, he said, pledging for the prevention of corruption, guarantee of good governance, smooth service delivery as well as the creation of a strong basis for improving intergovernmental coordination.

Wider discussions are expected to be held in separate sessions on various issues including 'Digitalization' and development, digital economy and investment in digital Nepal, digital empowerment, and inclusion in sustainable development in the event.

More than 600 people representing the IT sector have been participating in the Conclave themed “Harmonizing Digitalization and Development.”

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal said Nepal was fully committed to work for the collective well-being of the people of Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) region.

In a message delivered on the occasion of the 27th anniversary of inception of the BIMSTEC, Prime Minister Dahal expressed Nepal's unwavering commitment to the objectives and principles enshrined in the BIMSTEC Charter.

Extending best wishes to the governments and the people of the member-nations on behalf of the Nepal government and on his own, he said regional cooperation stood as a mainstay of stability, economic prosperity and solidarity in today's complex, dynamic and interconnected world.

The BIMSTEC was established as an intergovernmental forum comprising friendly countries of South Asian and SouthEast Asia to realize the shared aspirations of our peoples for a well-integrated, peaceful and prosperous region through strengthened regional cooperation and partnerships, the PM noted, adding the forum has made some landmark achievements and much remained to be done to translate the spirit of its Charter into a concrete reality.

"BIMSTEC as a region holds immense potential and opportunities in uplifting millions of people out of poverty, establishing missing links in connectivity; expanding energy cooperation; enhancing trade, investment and tourism; keeping progress of Sustainable Development Goals and leaving no one behind", the message reads.

By leveraging its diverse strengths and complementarities, BIMSTEC has continued to make strides towards institution-building process, forge synergies for win-win benefits and deepen collaboration in agreed areas of cooperation, the PM stated.

He further said that Nepal as a lead country in the people-to-people contact sector remained steadfast to further work closely with all the member-states in a spirit of unity and friendship for meaningful partnerships to unlock regional potentials for shared prosperity.

The peace, prosperity and collective well-being of the peoples of the region hinges on success stories of BIMSTEC, he noted, highlighting urgency of building broader political commitments and consensus for enhanced collaborations and achieving people-centered development.

He further noted that the coming into force of BIMSTEC Carter since last May has provided added momentum to this end.

BIMSTEC aims to support the rapid economic development of member nations by implementing assistance projects for trade, investment, industry, technology, human resources, tourism, agriculture, infrastructure and connectivity expansion.

BIMSTEC was established on June 6, 1997 with the objective of jointly achieving economic growth and social prosperity of the member nations by embracing the spirit of equality and cooperation.

The Constitution of Nepal envisions three distinct branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. These branches are meant to function independently, free from interference from each other. 

While the legislative and executive branches are inherently political, the judiciary is intended to remain impartial and free from political influence to maintain its credibility. However, in practice, the Judicial Council, which recommends the appointment of judges in Nepal, is heavily influenced, if not dominated, by political interests. This political influence extends to the Constitutional Council, which recommends the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, making the executive a key player in judicial appointments.

This politicization of judicial appointments has raised significant concerns about the competency, impartiality, and integrity of the judiciary. Many court verdicts in Nepal seem to be influenced by political pressures, undermining the judiciary's credibility and eroding public trust. A competent and independent judiciary is essential for upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is administered fairly.

Shree Krishna Bhatarai, former District Judge, says: “The credibility of the judiciary has been declining due to increasing political interference. Political parties appoint their desired candidates as judges to serve their interests, and they resort to impeachment if any hurdles arise. This trend has recently been on the rise, undermining the principles of constitutionalism and judicial independence.” 

When did politics start infiltrating the judiciary?

Gandhi Pandit, professor of law at Tribhuvan University, says the turning point is often considered  the event of 2013 when then Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi was appointed the chairman of the Council of Ministers to remove then Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai, due to the lack of consensus among political parties. 

“This move laid the foundation for the political exploitation of the judiciary,” says Prof. Pandit 

According to him, political interference in Nepal’s judiciary began as early as 2047 BS. However, post-2062/63 BS, political meddling increased significantly, culminating in Regmi’s appointment as both the head of the executive and judiciary. Some analysts believe this appointment instilled a tendency among judges to seek political advantage.

Subsequent Chief Justices after Regmi have been embroiled in various controversies. After Regmi, Damodar Prasad Sharma served as acting Chief Justice, a period considered golden for middlemen and the corrupt. Sharma was notorious for appointing his nephew as a judge in the then-Appeals Court, fostering factionalism among Supreme Court judges, and failing to make permanent appointments for competent judges, allowing them to retire instead. Ram Kumar Prasad Shah, who succeeded Sharma, attempted some reforms but was not free from controversy. Kalyan Shrestha, who followed Shah, faced similar issues.

The first female Chief Justice, Sushila Karki, faced impeachment over a dispute regarding the appointment of the police chief. Although the impeachment was later withdrawn, this incident set a precedent for using impeachment as a tool against non-compliant judges, a tactic also used against suspended Chief Justice Cholendra Shamsher Rana.

Increasing political influence and power-sharing deals have eroded the judiciary’s credibility, shaking the foundation of the one institution people still trust. Experts argue that the root cause lies in the flawed appointment process. 

The structure of the Judicial Council, changed through the interim constitution after the second people’s movement of 2006, heightened political interference. The new system included only the Chief Justice and the senior-most justice from the Supreme Court, with three additional members: the Minister of Law, a lawyer sent by the Prime Minister, and another lawyer recommended by the Nepal Bar Association. This made it easier for politically affiliated lawyers to join the council. 

This structure led to a high level of political quota distribution in judge appointments in 2070 and 2071 BS. In 2070 BS, 15 newly appointed Appellate Court judges visited the UML party office to express their gratitude on the same day they took their oaths of impartiality and independence. Now, the UML, which facilitated political intrusion into the judiciary, is trying to distance itself from the issue.

In the midst of widespread controversy and disorder, some interpret the political manipulation of the judiciary as a crisis of the system itself. As major political leaders began using the judiciary to shield themselves and their associates from legal issues and irregularities, public trust in the institution has steadily eroded. Frequent political meddling with the judiciary during the implementation phase of the constitution could undermine confidence in the constitution itself. Therefore, political parties must be cautious, as such interference affects not just individuals but the entire judicial system.

International practice of judge appointment 

For democracy to thrive, the judiciary must be independent and free from political influence.

17th-century French philosopher Montesquieu argued that when legislative and executive powers are concentrated in one body, independence cannot be maintained, and when the executive, legislative, and judicial branches are exercised by a single entity, democracy is hindered. This concept has been adopted by many democratic countries.

Since the constitution itself cannot exercise wisdom and judgment, there needs to be a development of constitutional culture and adherence to constitutional norms. Because the legislature makes laws, the executive may sometimes violate the constitution and laws or infringe upon individual rights. The executive, possessing both weapons and authority, can misuse power, making an independent judiciary necessary to prevent such actions.

Appointing judges by the legislature directly interferes with the principle of separation of powers and checks and balances, placing the judiciary under legislative control. When political representatives select judges, merit becomes irrelevant, which undermines judicial independence. Similarly, judges elected by popular vote must remain loyal to their voters, making impartiality difficult. Even appointments by executive order have not ensured judicial independence.

Therefore, the selection process for judicial officials must emphasize impartiality, independence, fearlessness, and individual qualifications, competence, experience, and conduct. The process and the laws governing appointments are crucial for judicial performance efficiency.

In the US, the President nominates Supreme Court justices, who must be approved by the Senate. This process often involves selecting candidates with similar political and ideological views. Despite the political nature of appointments, the judiciary operates independently. 

For instance, Joseph Story was appointed as a judge at the age of just 32 in 1811. James Byrnes, appointed in 1941, did not have a higher education certificate but gained legal knowledge through self-study. Brett Kavanaugh, who was recommended as a Supreme Court judge in 2019, faced allegations of sexual misconduct from three women dating back three decades. However, after discussions in the Senate, it was decided that his past behavior would not affect his current judicial performance, and he was appointed after receiving majority approval from the Senate. There are also examples of foreign-born individuals becoming judges. 

Supreme Court judges in the US are only dismissed under special circumstances or for misconduct, while experienced judges with 15 years of service and aged 65 or older can also be given responsibility in the Supreme Court.

After the US Federal Constitution was created, then-Chief Justice John Marshall in 1780 declared that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and it is the judiciary’s responsibility to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution. He asserted that even the President must operate under the Constitution. This interpretation strengthened American democracy and increased public trust that the President would not act against the country and its people. However, in 1857, then-Chief Justice Roger Taney’s interpretation that slaves could not be American citizens and that black people could not exercise the same rights as white people led to the American Civil War, causing great damage.

Consequently, although the US Constitution does not specify the age or qualifications of Supreme Court judges, it allows the President and Senate to determine qualifications as needed at their discretion. While the appointment of judges in the US appears to be purely political, it is claimed that there is no politicization within the courts, unlike in Nepal.

In the high courts of the United States and the United Kingdom, it is customary to appoint individuals as Supreme Court judges who have at least two years of experience as judges or have demonstrated exceptional expertise in the judicial field by practicing at the same level of court for 15 years. 

In neighboring India, although the constitution emphasizes the importance of executive power in the process of judge appointments, the judiciary has prioritized the role of the Chief Justice in these appointments through its interpretations and actions. A collegium of four senior-most justices, led by the Chief Justice, recommend appointments to the President, maintaining independence from the executive. Similar collegium system is followed while appointing judges for the High Court. 

In the British judicial tradition, individuals who have been associated with political parties, served as Attorney General, Members of Parliament, or Ministers are considered ineligible for judgeship. British society still believes that judges do not engage in corruption.

Policy for judicial appointments in Nepal 

According to Article 129 (2) of Nepal’s Constitution, the Chief Justice is appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council, and other judges are appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Judicial Council. Articles 140(1) and 292(1) outline the appointment process for High Court judges and the parliamentary hearing requirement for the Chief Justice and Supreme Court judges. Article 129(4) specifies a six-year term for the Chief Justice, while Articles 131(b) and 142(1)(b) set age limits for Supreme Court and High Court judges.

However, in practice, there has been noticeable political interference in the appointments of the Chief Justice and justices in the Supreme Court judges, as well as High Court judges. 

Balaram KC, former Supreme Court justice, says: “Individuals who have been MPs and ministers from political parties, presidents and officials of the Nepal Bar Association, Attorneys General, professors, individuals who have engaged in other businesses, amassed wealth abroad, or worked in influential law firms, and those who have failed to establish themselves in the legal profession are selectively appointed as judgesbased on connections, sometimes involving deals worth millions.” 

This manipulation undermines the judiciary's role in validating decisions and protecting political power, leading to significant degradation of public trust. The Nepal Bar, acting as a subsidiary of political parties, has further complicated the issue. Political statements, boycotts, and other disruptive actions are pushing Nepal’s judicial system into a critical state. The Judicial Council and other authorities must address these issues to safeguard the integrity of the justice system.