RCCC formation unconstitutional- legal experts

Kathmandu, Sept 14-Legal experts have opined that Article 127 of the 1990 Constitution does not allow the King to form a body like the Royal Commission for Corruption Control (RCCC). The experts on tuesday asked the Supreme Court to clarify whether the King can exercise Article 127 at will or not. Asking the court to clarify what powers the King enjoys as per the constitutions of 1963 and 1990, they asked it to make clear whether the formation of the Royal Commission for Corruption Control (on February 15) and its extension on April 29 was legal or not. A five-member special bench, comprising justices Kedar Prasad Giri, Min BahadurRa Rayamajhi, Ram Nagina Singh, Anup Raj Sharma, and Ram Prasad Shrestha, is examining the constitutionality of the RCCC.

Challenging the constitutionality of the RCCC, Santosh Kumar Mahato, an advocate, had filed a public interest litigation at the apex court. Similarly, seeking the release of Rajiv Parajuli, a former minister, Sanjeev Parajuli had filed a habeas corpus petition. After a hearing on the case, the bench released Parajuli today, on the condition that Parajuli will present himself before the bench for next hearing, which has been scheduled for Thursday. Pleading before the bench, Subash Chandra Nembang, an advocate, said: “Unlike the claims made by the RCCC, Article 127 does not give any special power to the King.” Pointing at the extension of the RCCC, he said: “Article 127 does not give the King the right to form such a body,” he added.

“Article 90 (a) of the 1963 Panchayati constitution had given the King such a prerogative.”

“Since the sovereignty rests with the people, the King cannot invoke Article 127 under the 1990 constitution.” The NBA president, Shambhu Thapa, said the present constitution does not give any prerogative powers to the King which upset the balance of power. “Since the statute and other Acts do not recognise the RCCC, it should be dissolved,” he said. “Neither the RCCC is a court of law under the Article 84 and 85 of 1990 Constitution nor its members have qualifications as judges to pass any verdict on any case.”