No review of ruling on CA term, SC tells govt

Kathmandu, Dec 27, The Supreme Court (SC) Tuesday refused to register the petition of the government and legislature-parliament, seeking a review of its ruling on the deadline of Constituent Assembly (CA). The SC rejected the writ petition, citing that it lacked legal grounds and evidences. SC joint-registrar Nahakul Subedi put a postscript on the writ. Attorney General Mukti Pradhan, on behalf of Prime Minister Dr. Baburam Bhattarai and CA chairman Subash Nembang, filed the writ, demanding the review of SC verdict that the CA’s term could be extended only for six months for the last time and it would automatically cease to exist after six months. In the writ, they had claimed that the verdict had infringed upon the jurisdiction of the parliament Before refusing the writ, the SC administration held a discussion whether to register it or not. The writ was rejected based on the SC’s previous precedents. The SC’s assistant spokesman Hemant Rawal said that the final ruling, made by the special bench, could not be reviewed as per the Judicial Administration Act. "The writ was rejected by putting it on postscript as it lacks legal evidence," Rawal said. He, however, said that the petitioner could appeal against the postscript if one was not satisfied with the decision. The SC also refused the writ petition filed by advocate Bijayraj Shakya, seeking the review of its ruling made in November last year The SC said that it set a precedent while rejecting Shakya’s writ. It listed the past precedents that include legal case against Ram Krishna Nirala by CIAA and the writ filed by Prakash Mani Sharma against Guthi Santhan. In its November 25 verdict, the Apex Court said that the CA’s term could be extended for up to six months one last time. The verdict created uproar in the legal and political spectrum. Oli stands against SC verdict criticism CPN-UML leader K. P. Sharma Oli Tuesday said that criticism of the Supreme Court verdict to promulgate the constitution within six months has no meaning. "The SC gave the verdict in a compulsive circumstance," he said while speaking at a press meet organized by Jhapa branch of Press Chautari here. Claiming that the SC verdict was in accordance with the spirit of the interim constitution, Oli said it was shameful and ridiculous to claim that the SC interfered the jurisdiction of the Constituent Assembly. "The task of the CA is to draft the constitution, not only to extend its own term," he added. He said that there was no alternative to engaging in constitution drafting and concluding the task within the extended period. Expressing his confidence that the constitution could be drafted within the stipulated timeframe, he accused the UCPN-Maoist of delaying to conclude the peace process. He also criticized the government and said that the country would continue to face difficulty until this government remains in power and stressed the need of a national consensus government. Meanwhile, vice chairperson of the party Bidhya Devi Bhandari said that she was still sticking her stand that the Maoist combatants should not be integrated in the Nepal Army. Talking to journalists in Damak, she said the integration of the Maoist combatants into NA would result in the disintegration of the army.