The Constitutional Council’s recommendation of Supreme Court Justice Manojkumar Sharma for the position of future Chief Justice has sparked widespread public debate. While some have criticized the decision to recommend Sharma, bypassing the senior-most Justice Sapana Pradhan Malla, others argue that selecting one qualified individual from among the eligible candidates is natural. Several former Supreme Court justices have noted that although this recommendation breaks tradition, it does not violate the constitution or any laws. However, legal experts have also expressed concerns that this move could enable the government to appoint a preferred candidate as Chief Justice, potentially exerting influence over the Supreme Court.
The six-member Constitutional Council made the recommendation for Sharma’s appointment on Thursday, amid disagreement between National Assembly Chair Narayan Prasad Dahal and the leader of the main opposition Bhisma Raj Angdembe. Here, we discuss the questions raised by this recommendation and their answers. Legal experts have maintained that the recommendation of Manojkumar Sharma aligns with existing laws and the constitution. Former Justice Balram KC stated, “It is traditional to appoint the most senior person. Even if the tradition is broken, it does not constitute a violation of the constitution or law.”
Former Justice Girish Chandra Lal also confirmed there were no legal errors in the recommendation. He remarked, “Appointments of different individuals at different times, bypassing the senior-most at the scheduled time to become Chief Justice, have occurred previously.” Some fear this government’s move may have long-term impacts on the leadership of the Supreme Court. Professor Bipin Adhikari of Kathmandu University’s Law Department commented, “This recommendation increases the possibility for the government to appoint a favored candidate as Chief Justice and thereby establish its influence over the Supreme Court.”
Former Justice Balram KC has suggested the current recommendation practice needs improvement. The government, led by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, recently amended arrangements related to the Constitutional Council, allowing decisions to be made by majority vote when four members are present at meetings. After the former President returned an ordinance, the government resubmitted the original ordinance, which was then reissued by the President in accordance with constitutional provisions.
