Amicus Curie divided on HoR dissolution

६ फाल्गुन २०७७, बिहीबार ०६:४७

On Wednesday’s hearing on parliament dissolution, the amicus curiae had divided argument at the Supreme Court.
Senior advocate Bijay Kant Mainali argued that Nepal’s constitution has given right to the Prime Minister to dissolve parliament. “Article 76 (7) of the constitution has mentioned well the provision on dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR),” he argued.

According to him, sovereignty is vested on Nepali citizens and it is exercised by political parties via citizens. He however said both constitution and parliamentary practices should be looked after on it.

Another senior advocate on behalf of amicus curiae Satish Krishna Kharel asserted that PM has not special right to dissolve the HoR. HoR dissolution is a political issue and constitutionally, PM has not rights on it. “Although HoR dissolution is purely a political issues, it does not mean that is not constitutional. Court needs to accept it though it is political issue,” he added.

The hearing is taking place before the Constitution Bench of the apex court, under the leadership of Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.