'Unconstitutional', 'arbitrary': Nepal parties, lawyers slam Parliament dissolution move
Kathmandu (PTI): Nepal's major political parties and apex lawyers' body have strongly criticised the president's decision to dissolve parliament, describing the move as "unconstitutional", "arbitrary" and a serious blow to democracy.
The criticism followed Friday’s recommendation by the first cabinet meeting chaired by interim Prime Minister Sushila Karki to dissolve the House of Representatives, a proposal that President Ram Chandra Paudel promptly approved.
The house was dissolved with effect from 11 pm on September 12, 2025, according to a notice issued by the President’s Office. The president also fixed March 21, 2026, as the date for holding fresh parliamentary elections, it said.
Political parties across the spectrum slammed the dissolution move.
Disapproving of the move, Nepali Congress (NC), the largest political party of the country, warned that any action violating the Constitution would be unacceptable.
The Central Executive Committee meeting of the Nepali Congress held on Saturday concluded that the dissolution of the Parliament has "jeopardised the democratic achievements" of the country, MyRepublica news portal reported.
"This move to dissolve parliament is against the spirit of our Constitution and the interpretation of the Supreme Court. It is absolutely unconstitutional,” the NC said in a statement.
NC General Secretary Bishwa Prakash Sharma said any breach of the Constitution raises serious questions.
CPN-UML General Secretary Shankar Pokharel described the move as “ironically concerning”.
“In the past, the majority of governments’ attempts to dissolve Parliament were challenged as unconstitutional. Ironically, those same voices are now supporting dissolution. We must remain vigilant,” the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) leader was quoted as saying by the news portal.
The CPN (Maoist Centre) also expressed serious disagreement with the decision to dissolve the House of Representatives.
Party spokesperson and Vice Chairman Agni Prasad Sapkota said the decision went against the country’s constitutional framework.
Issuing a late-night statement, the Nepal Bar Association (NBA) said the "arbitrary" dissolution undermines constitutional supremacy and “strikes at the core of constitutionalism”.
The umbrella body of legal professionals warned that the step weakens Nepal’s hard-won democracy and dilutes the achievements of federalism.
"The President’s decision to dissolve the House of Representatives also contradicts the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling on the reinstatement of Parliament,” the NBA said.
It further cautioned that dissolving the House before the completion of its term erodes public trust in democratic institutions and threatens the very foundation of the constitutional order.
NBA president Vijay Prasad Mishra and general secretary Kedar Prasad Koirala jointly signed the statement, urging all sectors of society to resist “any regressive steps” and support their protest and actions against the dissolution.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Ordinance issued to increase number of Supreme Court judges from 34 to 38
New Delhi (PTI): The government has promulgated an ordinance to increase the strength of the Supreme Court from the present 34 judges to 38, including the Chief Justice of India.
The law ministry notified the ordinance on Saturday, which amended the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956, to increase the sanctioned strength of the top court.
So far, the sanctioned strength of the top court was 34, including the Chief Justice of India (CJI). Now, the number of judges has been increased by four, taking the sanctioned strength to 38.
The top court will now have 37 judges, other than the CJI.
With the apex court having two vacancies at present, and the ordinance coming into force immediately, the Supreme Court Collegium will now have to recommend six names for appointment as judges in the top court.
A bill will be brought in the Monsoon Session of Parliament to convert the ordinance – an executive order – into a law passed by Parliament.
The Union Cabinet had cleared a draft bill on May 5 to increase the number of apex court judges.
The strength of the Supreme Court was last increased from 30 to 33 (excluding the CJI) in 2019.
The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, as originally enacted in 1956, put the maximum number of judges (excluding the CJI) at 10.
This number was increased to 13 by the Supreme Court (Number of Judges), Amendment Act, 1960, and to 17 by another amendment to the law.
The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 1986, augmented the strength of judges from 17 to 25, excluding the CJI.
A fresh amendment in 2009 further increased the strength from 25 to 30.
Article 124(3) of the Constitution lists the qualifications required to become a Supreme Court judge.
An Indian citizen who has either served as a high court judge for at least five years, or as an advocate for 10 years, or is a distinguished jurist, can be appointed to the top court.
The strength of the Supreme Court is increased based on the recommendations of the CJI, who writes to the Union law minister. After consulting the finance ministry, the Department of Justice under the law ministry moves the Cabinet with a draft bill.
