Nepal PM Oli recommended house dissolution without mentioning constitutional clauses, reveal leaked papers

A paper leaked from the Nepal Supreme Court on Friday showed that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli had not mentioned any constitutional clauses while recommending dissolution of the lower house to President Bidya Devi Bhandari.

A paper leaked from the Nepal Supreme Court on Friday showed that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli had not mentioned any constitutional clauses while recommending dissolution of the lower house to President Bidya Devi Bhandari. The leaked paper was submitted to Supreme Court by Oli's Office, following judicial order in December, 2020, which shows that PM Oli didn't mention any constitutional and legal provisions while recommending House dissolution.

Eighth points of leaked paper stated that, "There is necessity of two-third majority Government. According to basic essence and values of Nepal's Constitution and Parliamentary system and practice of our own and various countries with parliamentary system, it is to be recommended to President to dissolve House of Representatives of incumbent Federal Assembly and head for polls on April 30 for first phase and May 10 for second phase." None of the 4 pages of the document which enacts as evidence of recommendation sent to Office of President mentions any constitutional basis or clauses on which Oli enacted to dissolve the parliament.

During the full bench discussion over the petition filed against Oli's move to dissolve the parliament, only the copy of letter of recommendation to President was presented. Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana on Friday also confessed that original copy of thus submitted document has been withdrawn by PM Office leaving only a copy of it. Oli in his reply to the Court on January 3 claimed that he made the recommendation on article 76 and article 85. He has also claimed that his party enjoyed two-third majority in parliament and formed a government as per article 76 (1) of constitution where he was elected as Prime Minister for being leader of majority owning parliamentary party and can dissolve the parliament as per his whims.

Though Oli made claims in court, he didn't mention under which constitutional provision or clause he took the decision. Contrary to recommendation and claims of Oli, Office of President on 20th December while announcing dates for election by ratifying parliament dissolution recommendation stated that the move comes in line with Article 76, Sub-Article 1 and 7 and Article 85. As original copies of submitted documents has been withdrawn by PM Office, petitioner challenging Oli's move, advocate Ramankumar Shrestha demanded for sealing of entire documents claiming that evidence was tampered.

Hearing over the petitions filed challenging Oli's decision is scheduled for next week. A total of 13 petitions are lodged at Supreme Court against the move of December 20. (ANI)

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)