|
Making of a Constitution
Report of the two day program organised
by Administrative Court of Nepal (ACN)
28-29 November 2008,
Kathmandu
by Yubaraj Ghimire, Chief Editor, Newsfront
Weekly
There is an element of uncertainty, if
not skepticism, over the stipulated time frame being maintained
for writing the new constitution in Nepal. The interim constitution
which was prepared by representatives and nominees of the seven
political parties makes it mandatory that the country must have
a new constitution within two years from the date the constituent
assembly was formed. The constituent assembly-a 601-member hung
legislature with no party having an absolute majority and with
the Communist Party of Nepal Maoists (CPN-M) as the single largest
party-came into existence in April 2008, but is yet to begin the
task seriously yet.
There are however, some exercises going
on outside the legislature which may provide rich input to the
future constitution. One such exercise, mainly on the kind of
judiciary that the new constitution should adopt, took place
on November 28 and 29 in Kathmandu at the initiative of Administrative
Court of Nepal with the assistance from Friedrich-Ebert -Stiftung
(FES). While The views expressed were varied, and some of them
radical, there were also some meeting of minds.
According to Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal
Dahal Prachanda, this was the first and a very welcome exercise
that he was participating in with judicial reform in its focus.
"The ongoing peace process, constitution making process
and country's prosperity are interlinked and the government
is determined to finish the task within the stipulated two years
period", he said but Judiciary's reform posed a major challenge
in the process. "The feudal political system and its machinery
during the past two years had their roots deeply spread in judiciary
as well. Removing them will be much more difficult than our
launching the people's movement for ten years or political parties
taking to the street agitation now". Prime Minister's frank
admission exhibited his fear that the judicial reform may not
take place in the desired degree , but at the same time the
message that he is aware of the enormous challenge that the
constitution making process faces. He said the judiciary is
like a cobweb of manipulators and liars, and they fleece the
people who want justice. In fact, access to judiciary is still
a far cry in this country. He also revealed that the Maoist
cadres used to dispose cases in their kangaroo courts during
days of insurgency . "People used to feel happy about quick
disposal of cases on the basis of available evidences".
"The lesson I have learnt is you can involve people in
the justice delivery system in a lawful manner".
The Prime Minister said that 'formal
democracy' across the world has not been able to address people's
aspiration , and one way of ensuring that is by giving access
to judiciary, people's last hope for justice, and for that it
must have people's participation, control and monitoring right
ensured. That alone will institutionalize and ensure rule of
law. "If we do not introduce reforms to suit the aspiration
of time, revolts can not be prevented anywhere", he said,
adding " judiciary and entire judicial sector should be
more devoted to the people so that people have a sense of ownership'.
Touching briefly on the other aspect
of constitution making, the prime minister said there are always
chances of revival of the traditional forces . "History's
rule suggest if the changes can not be institutionalized, counter
revolutionaries may take the advantage'. "We also have
to be cautious that our commitment for decentralization and
formation autonomous provinces, if applied wrongly, may also
lead to disintegration of the nation'. "However, the best
way to avert any accident or disaster is for the people to make
their own constitution and own it, and that is the exercise
we are engaged in".
Prachanda, as leader of a political
party that does not have majority of its own in the constitution
may not dictate the content and type of constitution future
Nepal will have, but as leader of the organization that launched
the armed insurgency , arguable is the single biggest factor,
that caused the election to the constituent assembly. That way
his thoughts and political line will have much bigger impact
on the constitution making process. Almost exactly echoing Prachanda's
line was Law Minister Deb Gurung who also happens to the member
of the central committee of the Maoist Party. He stressed the
need for both short term and long term initiatives for judicial
reforms as the judicial sector needs to be thoroughly democratized
. "For 250 years of monarchy, it was totally centralized
and feudal and now people must have easy and simple way of getting
access to justice", he said adding, money plays a big role
on justice dispensation system. He said with the change in political
system, judges must be -reappointed'. There is equal need to
decentralize, democratize and modernize the judiciary.
Along with this major political inputs,
other high level stake holders and experts also contributed
in the focused dialogue. Chief Justice Kedar Prasad Giri emphasized
on ensuring people's partnership in the judiciary's reform process.
"A good, pro-people and effective as well as Independent
judicial system alone could contribute to political stability".
In his brief intervention in the program, he said the ongoing
political process for preparing the new constitution must ensure
that qualified, efficient, honest and independent people could
get berth in the benches.
Justice Min Bahadur Raymajhi who is
in the line of succession for the post of Chief Justice when
Giri retires in a couple of months, was however, more forthright,
precise and frank in opposing a controlled judiciary, a fear
that sweeps across the country, given the visible servility
that the apex court has shown in some disposing some cases of
political importance in recent days. "The controlled and
weak judiciary can not protect the rights of the people. Their
safety, security, property and the issues related with their
rights and interest can only be protected by an independent
judiciary', he said while presenting the key note address "Justice
dispensation: credibility, responsibility and transparency'.
Some one who has been able to call a
spade a spade publicly, he reiterated that "greed , interference,
influence, fear and threats are the biggest enemies of free,
fair and independent judiciary system and ' a judiciary free
from all these vices is what the people want to be our justice
system. ' "While executive has arms under it and powerful
and legislature has control over financial mechanism and therefore
more powerful compared to judiciary, yet people have more faith
in independent judiciary. Judiciary's strength is people's faith.
Therefore, judiciary can not afford to ignore the people's right
and wish to secure justice through an independent and efficient
court.'
In a note of caution for those involved
in the constitution making process, he said independent judiciary
is the essential component of judiciary administration in a
democratic system. In absence of independence, courts can not
dispense justice system fairly. "Law alone is not enough
to guarantee such freedom, but it should be exhibited in practice
also," he said asserting that the principle of separation
of power-executive, legislative and judiciary-must be maintained.
Giving a brief history of evolution
of justice system in Nepal, he however, said there have been
attempts to snatch its independence at times. "There are
many things that are included in the interim constitution which
adversely affect the independent judiciary in Nepal. A 14-point
suggestion given by the supreme court to the government were
not taken into account. "Not to hold even casual discussion
on suggestions given by one of the three important organs of
the state is definitely not a happy situation", he said
hoping this will not be repeated in future.
Almost joining issue with politicians,
especially the Prime Minister and the law minister, Justice
Raymajhi said the best way to protect the principle of independent
judiciary is to ensure that judges are appointed through an
independent procedure, with no interference from the government
or the political parties. His other prescriptions for independent
judiciary included: review of judicial verdicts only through
judicial bodies, security of judges through out their tenure
with the guarantee that any action against the judges have to
be only the on the basis of established constitutional norms
and standard and periodic training opportunities to enhance
quality of judges. He also suggested that implementation of
judicial verdicts and decisions add up to the effectiveness
of the judiciary. Any compromise on any of these prescriptions,
he said, will result in the erosion of the quality of justice.
Judiciary, at the same time, must act in a responsible and transparent
manner so that it enjoys public faith. Judiciary is not above
the system of accountability towards the sovereign people, but
the way to demonstrate that is through display of fair conduct
with a high moral content, impartiality and openness in dispensing
cases an ability to ward off any influence.
He said a democracy without independent
judiciary is something that can not be imagined. Getting qualified
judges was becoming increasingly difficult everywhere, and attractive
salaries and incentives are necessary for that. Appointment
in the judicial system for various posts must be done through
judicial bodies instead of getting outside agencies to do the
job. He felt that the government should not indulge in assigning
the chief justice or other judges into any other job as that
may amount to interference in the judiciary. Kashiraj Dahal,
Chairman of the Administrative Court, in his paper" Constitution
making and Justice system: challenge and reforms', said, generally
the democratic system are either Consociational based on power
sharing , consensus based and majority rule based. But as Nepal
is going through the constitution making process, it will be
helpful if a consensus is formed on issues the state's legislative
power, executive power, judicial power, electoral power, citizen's
power , framework of the state, model of democracy and that
of inclusion, electoral system and that of representation, issue
of national integration and tolerance much before the constituent
assembly gets down to prepare the draft for the new constitution.
He however, emphasized that an independent
judiciary is the corner-stone of the democratic state system
in which the right to give last decision on life , freedom and
rights of the citizens along with that on property , rests solely
on the judiciary. And the freedom of the judiciary must be guaranteed
through constitution. Dahal concurred with Justice Raymajhi
on what constitutes independence of judiciary, with added emphasis
on 'corporate independence ' as well. To infer, he cited a statement
that 'any democracy worth the name must provide for adequate
and effective means of conflict-resolution at a reasonable cost:
otherwise, the rule of law becomes of platitude and people may
take law into their own hands, disrupting peace, order and good
government
". Obviously, the underlying suggestion
was the need for an effective judiciary with its independence
guaranteed and its principles clearly laid out.
But there were lot of skepticism about
the political system the future constitution should be adopting.
Former Speaker of the House of Representatives and a votary
of 'Liberal Democracy', Damannath Dhungana said 'parliamentary
democracy' has failed in Nepal and it should not be revived.
He advocated that Nepal should go for electing an Executive
President who could truly act as a symbol of hope and identity
of the people of diverse cultural, religion and geographical
backgrounds. He also felt that the 'proportional representation
system' -a component of the mixed electoral system that Nepal
adopted during the April election-was misused by the leaders
to choose their loyalists as members of the constituent assembly.
Political leaders behaved more like 'bosses' and dispensed with
minimum transparency needed.
He was , however, supportive of the
way monarchy was abolished by the first meeting of the constituent
assembly without following due process. 'Let's thank the king
for having given up, and close the chapter'. However, Dhungana's
statement faced probing questions. Senior journalist and columnist
Dhruba Hari Adhikary asked him if due process can be de-linked
from democracy, almost representing many votaries of liberal
democracy in the country. Dhungana who is also a senior advocate
said the new constitution must guarantee independence of judiciary
and the current system of justice and judiciary must not be
disturbed. "After all a judiciary is a conservative institution,
and let it remain so'. Bishwakanta Mainali, Chairman of the
Nepal Bar Association (NBA) said the justice system must encompass
in it all the universal values and principles of judiciary.
The state must provide justice to those who are helpless and
unable to afford for the justice. He however felt that there
should much more stringent measures to contain corruption in
the judiciary. 'The provision of impeachment by the legislature
is not enough'. Mainali's suggestion triggers a fear that this
is a way of somehow creating a mechanism 'above judges' in the
name of policing them. In what appeared like an expansion of
what King Mahendra said way back in sixties, Mainail also said
that the list of fundamental rights should be appended with
the fundamental duties of citizens, with the provision that
its violation should be a punishable act under law.
In his brief presentation, Dr. Surya Dhungel, a constitutional
lawyer and advisor to President, said the process of constitution
making needs to guarantee people's participation which will
lead to their owning it. It also must uphold the principle of
the supremacy of law and rule of law. 'Given the context of
conflict, the process also must ensure that there armed insurgents
come to agree on the need to eradicate culture of impunity'.
One only hopes that similar exercises are followed so that the
constitution making process gets a rich input. Madhav Ghimire,
Secretary of the Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction in his
paper explained multiple transitions, initiatives of the government
and challenges in establishing post-conflict stabilization measures.
The reporter of the seminar, Joint Secretary
of CA prepared the main points discussed, such as ownership
in the constitution, institutionalization of federal democratic
republic, independent, transparent and accountable judiciary,
state restructuring along inclusive lines, coordinating mechanism
between federal states and peace building measures, etc. 150
high level government secretaries, lawyers, civil society members
and journalists participated the meeting. Participants demanded
to give continuity to the constitutional talk like this one
in various parts of the country. The elaborated finding will
be disseminated among CA members.
|