Wednesday, 24 February, 2021
logo
MAIN NEWS
-
MUSTREAD

6th day of hearing on HoR dissolution: Govt. presents 'Nepal Gazette' in SC



6th-day-hearing-on-hor-dissolution-govt-presents-nepal-gazette-in-sc

By Ranju Kafle, Kathmandu, Jan.22: Hearing on 13 writ petitions filed against House of Representatives (HoR) dissolution continued for the sixth consecutive day on Friday in the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court.

Ten advocates pleaded on behalf of the petitioners on Friday. Twenty-two others have already completed their pleading in the court from the side of complainant in the last five days whereas 320 other incidences are waiting for their turn.

Attorney General Agni Kharel presented the evidence of the Lower House dissolution in Nepal Gazette at the beginning of the hearing session today. Lawyers had questioned about it in its previous hearing.

Advocate Om Prakesh Aryal had expressed concern about the absence of dissolution notice in Nepal Gazette. He had claimed that it was not published in the gazette. Not only Aryal, other lawyers too had mentioned the previous practices where major decisions of the government used to get published in the Nepal Gazette.

Then the bench on Thursday had asked the government to submit house dissolution notice in the Nepal gazette if it was published.

Advocates who pleaded on behalf of petitioners today spent their time on arguing the appointment of the Prime Minister, about how prime minister KP Sharma Oli was appointed to the post whether it was under article 76(I) or (II).

Advocate Raju Chapagain said that the Prime Minister was appointed to the post according to the provision on article 76(I). "He was there with two third majority votes, who has no rights to dissolve the house," he added.

Chapagain claimed that the PM neither attempted for an alternative government formation nor tried to get a vote of confidence from the House. "He is not accountable towards House, dissolution is not an appropriate move," he added.

Similarly, advocate Umesh Prasad said that a prime minister elected for full five years tenure with majority votes can't ask for fresh mandate before time.

Another advocate Narahari Acharya said that the dissolution step was against the constitution. "The move to dissolve the House was ill-intended," he added.

The hearing will continue on Sunday.

How do you feel after reading this news?