Some time back in a different context I wrote: "What is the rationale of asking the question of accountability in a country [Nepal] plagued by impunity?" While writing this blog, I exactly feel the same. This post does not mean anything other than venting my frustration as an ordinary Nepali citizen.
This week showed us how things can go wrong one after another in a short span of time. First, the motion to impeach a Chief Justice who in plain sight was far away from facing such allegation was filed before the Constituent Assembly. The motion, without a doubt, was a blatant attack on the Independence of Judiciary. It also showed to what extent our political leadership can sink for their anticipated gain. Secondly, the Interim Order issued by the court today (5th May 2017) to reinstate the suspended Chief Justice. The decision came as unexpected as the motion of impeachment, at least for me.
I am in no way supporting the motion of impeachment but the decision today nearly raised some eyebrows and has presented more complex issues that need answers in days to come. Some of which I feel pertinent are:
i) The question of separation of power and adherence to the rule of law. The interim decision may have yielded a result most of the people wanted, but the question is what the underlying cost is? Have we compromised the notion of separation of power twice in the same week? The motion of impeachment and the grounds did violate the most sanguine principle and a cornerstone of the democratic system that demands the separation and balance of power. Hasn't today's decision done the same?
ii) How will this week affect in long run in the context of independence of judiciary, separation of power and the use of impeachment? Is the motion of impeachment a new tool in the arsenal of those with seat in parliament to use it against justices and other office holders when they want to? Has the motion of impeachment lost its feature as rare but available means of scrutiny in exceptional circumstances to mere scrutiny mechanism?
iii) How will the "conflict of interest" shape up in coming weeks in judiciary as the CJ against whom the impeachment is motioned will have direct/indirect say on the hearing of the case that determines the legality of impeachment itself? The situation in face appears to be an extraordinary situation of conflict of interest. How will all this be unveiled in days to come?
iv) The most important question for me is the question of accountability? In an ideal world, how would those who presented and signed the motion of impeachment respond to this? As the court decided the motion was not founded on the legitimate ground are those primarily involved in the motion have answers to give.
v) Other dynamics of the entire episode is how the information is polarized. With many online portals and different opinions and information flooding, how can an ordinary person form an opinion? The news coverage and the surficial information is confusing the common people regarding the entire thing.
vi) With the local election in hand, what on earth is going on in this country and who is accountable for the turmoil? Does the context even bother our leaders? Who are our leaders accountable towards? Is the accountability aspect missing entirely?
vii) Heart versus Head: While decided the cases do Justices follow the language of Law or follow their feelings? The legal profession has its unique features which barely gives room for emotion or feeling of judges concerning the judgment. In this case, the text of the interim order of Supreme Court has left enough rooms and questions to ponder about. Was it necessary for the judge to reflect his feeling while deciding the case? Does it even have any significance? What does order demand, detailed reasoning on why the order was made or the background context reflecting feelings and emotions? What precedent the text of the interim order establishes is yet to be seen.
There are many other questions the events of past few days will eclipse the future with, fundamental among which being separation and balance of power, use of impeachment, accountability, the credibility of journalists, etc.
It is unsure how these events will unfold but one this is certain this week. Separation of power was defeated twice by two different players, and this will come back and haunt Nepali state organs time and again. [I pray that my understanding has failed me and no such thing will ever occur].
In closing, means can never justify its ends; means needs its own justification and legitimacy.
Disclaimer:
i) The post does not intend to disrespect any state organs.
No comments:
Post a Comment