Parmeshwar Devkota

THE landmark verdict of the Supreme Court (SC) against the dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR) carries far-reaching implications for the Nepali constitutional and political spheres.
The present constitution has adopted the multiparty federal democratic system. Its strength and weaknesses are yet to be tested. The national charter is also the outcome of the balance of power involving various interest groups. Therefore, some knowledgeable people used to compare Articles of the constitution with ‘the walls of a newly-built dam of a canal’. If the walls of the dam are weak, it may collapse anytime, becoming a constant source of terror for the downstream settlements.
Similar was a guess with the constitution. Its vulnerability is anticipated in Article concerning the ‘formation of cabinet’ and ‘vacation of the Office of Prime Minister and Ministers’. Despite being based on the Westminster system, our constitution does not clearly define the prerogatives of the prime minister.
There is no doubt that the verdict is historic because it has clarified that the ‘premier with majority lawmakers cannot dissolve the HoR’, and ‘does not hold the special and residual power’. The court has clearly stated: though the constitution is of Westminster model, it has its own unique features. This decision reminds one of a statement made by astronaut Neil Armstrong while stepping on the surface of the Moon. He had said, ‘That’s one small step for man. One giant leap for mankind’.
Another important aspect of the verdict is that it has bound the PM to constitutional provisions regarding the tenure of government. For example, politicians have inclination to stick to power even if they are under moral pressure to quit the posts. They derive power to govern the country from elections. In the election campaign, political leaders seek a mandate to form a majority government. If a party forms a majority government, it will stay at least two years in office expediting development works because stability is the prerequisite for the overall progress of the country.
The most important aspect of every verdict is that it stresses the ethical side, but silently. Ethics is a package of ‘moral principles that controls person’s behaviours’. A politician is not a weak person of a society. Unlike business persons, politicians occupy a significant position in the society and follow certain norms unequivocally.
The persons recognised by all and respected by all segments of people must pay heed to ethical side of life. It means that a member of HoR should not be involved in horse trading in the time of formation of a new government. S/he must maintain the dignity they have been bestowed upon by the society. This integrity is beyond the loss and win in the polls.
We revere statesmen like BP Koirala, Manamohan Adhikari, Ganesh Man Singh, Madan Bhandari and Nirmal Lama for their high ethical standards they displayed in politics. But today, there is the dearth of such figures whom we have a high opinion of. Let’s hope that a new breed of leaders demonstrate moral fibre while on the driving seat of power.