Kathmandu, Nepal, November 15, 2021: The ongoing protests of Supreme Court (SC) justices and Nepal Bar Association (NBA) demanding resignation of the Chief Justice (CJ) Cholendra Shumsher Rana likely to defuse after justices divided on their struggle and some of them have decided to return in the bench ending the alliance with the agitating justices.
Withstanding the widespread concerns over the unprecedented turbulence over the last three weeks at the SC, five SC justices, who had also not heard a single case except for a few habeas corpus petitions, decided to return in the bench on Monday. 19 justices had on October 25 decided to boycott the hearing leveling serious allegations against CJ Rana and demanding his resignation on the name of saving the judiciary from falling into further crisis.
As SC judges Tej Bahadur KC, Bam Kumar Shrestha, Kumar Regmi, Manoj Kumar Sharma and Kumar Chudal decided to resume their duties leaving the alliance of the agitating justices stating that they would not continue the struggle by abandoning the benches on the name of compelling the CJ Rana, the remaining 14 judges have also felt pressure to return in the bench. It is claimed that more justices would follow the footsteps of the five justices and return back in the bench soon.
The development occurred after CJ Rana called on agitating legal professionals, who are also protesting against him, to sit for dialogue on Monday morning. Though the NBA promptly decided to reject the CJ Rana’s appeal for talks stating that their bottom line is his resignation, they have also felt moral pressure for prolonging the strike by rejecting the call for dialogue.
The five judges, who decided to resume their duty, also boycotted the meeting of the agitating judges stating that they would not join any meetings of judges except for a full court. As the ongoing protests failed to yield any results in the past 20 days, there is no meaning to continue the strike, a justice, who decided to resume their duty, said preferring anonymity.
As CJ Rana has already made clear that he would not resign as demanded by the agitating justice and NBA, there is no option except impeachment to expel him from the post. CJ Rana has been arguing that since he was appointed through a constitutional process, he could be removed only through a constitutional means. Though the constitutional means is impeachment, no political parties seem in favor of impeaching CJ Rana.
In the press statement issued to appeal the agitating NBA to come for dialogue, CJ Rana has mentioned that dialogue is the most appropriate way to resolve any deadlock. ‘I would like to appeal to everyone to opt for the path of dialogue to settle the problems that have emerged in a family of the judiciary, CJ Rana has stated in the statement.
The BAR and the bench are two wheels of the same chariot and they have a history of complementing each other and moving forward hand in hand whenever questions were raised in the course of discharging duties, CJ Rana has stated in the statement ‘I am ready to begin from where dialogue and discussions were disrupted. In the statement CJ Rana has made commitment to implement the report presented by Supreme Court Justice Hari Krishna Karki for judicial reforms.
