Nepal's Government Faces Criticism Over Ordinances and Parliament Suspension

Kathmandu. 'The dissolution of parliament and the issuance of ordinances are the most protested issues by the public in Nepal's parliamentary history,' said CPN-UML Deputy General Secretary Yogesh Bhattarai on Wednesday, posting on social media. 'The perpetrators have not achieved good results either! Let's understand the matter.'

As stated by UML leader Bhattarai, there is significant public interest in the context of ordinances and the dissolution of parliament. However, these issues have been repeatedly occurring.

Bhattarai, who is also a former minister, has indicated political ups and downs by stating that those who brought ordinances and dissolved parliament have not achieved good results.

Previously, when KP Sharma Oli was prime minister, he dissolved parliament twice. There was strong opposition from political parties and the public against it. After the dissolution of parliament, the then CPN and UML itself split. Similarly, the ordinance brought by the Oli-led government, formed based on the alliance between the two largest parties in parliament, Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, before the Janji rebellion, also faced strong opposition.

The then Oli-led government had issued ordinances to amend some Nepal Acts related to cooperatives, some Nepal Acts related to promoting good governance and public service delivery, the first amendment to the ordinance on financial procedures and fiscal responsibility, the first amendment to the privatization ordinance, and some Nepal Acts related to improving the economic and business environment and promoting investment in 2081 BS. All those ordinances were passed by parliament amidst opposition.

Now, with the government led by Rastriya Swatantra Party senior leader Balendra (Balen) Shah, who has a clear majority in parliament through the elections of February 21, recommending President Ram Chandra Paudel to issue five ordinances, including one for the Constitutional Council, the series of ordinances and controversies continues. The government is being criticized for trying to run the country through ordinances by suspending the already convened parliamentary session.

Opposition parties have called the hasty use of ordinances for matters that could be handled through the normal parliamentary process an undemocratic practice and an insult to parliament. A meeting of four opposition parties, including the main opposition Nepali Congress, held on Wednesday, demanded that the government withdraw the ordinances and immediately convene the suspended parliamentary session.

They have also urged the President not to approve the recommended ordinances.

Why do governments resort to ordinances and dissolution of parliament?

Former Chief Secretary Dr. Bimal Koirala shares his experience that any government resorts to ordinances and dissolution of parliament because they act hastily and out of self-interest. Koirala states that any government, when it finds it difficult to make decisions in its favor through regular means, opts for this path, as seen in past practices.

'Governments always try to make hasty decisions rather than following due process. When they do so, those decisions become controversial and criticized,' Koirala told RatoPati. 'They do not seem to pay attention to the fact that decisions made through due process, although lengthy, are sustainable.'

Koirala said that the tendency to rush into bad things rather than good ones has been prevalent in Nepali politics since the past. 'Since the past, any government has been seen to rush into matters that are favorable to them. Rushing like this carries the risk of accidents,' he said.

Koirala suggested that even in matters where there are legal shortcomings or obstacles, the government should focus on finding sustainable solutions.

Former Chairman of the Administrative Court and Coordinator of the Administrative Reform Committee, Kashi Raj Dahal, says that the tendency to bypass the law still persists. 'Power and authority naturally tend to bypass the law. This is a past tendency,' he said. 'That tendency has not changed even now.'

However, Dahal clarified that the constitution itself provides for the government to issue ordinances if there are essential matters, so it is not that ordinances cannot be issued.

'Ordinances can be issued, but their justification must be proven,' Dahal told RatoPati. 'If it is proven that an ordinance needs to be issued for specific reasons, it is justified.'

He said that in the past, many ordinances were issued even in normal circumstances, and past governments brought ordinances and dissolved parliament for their own convenience. 'Ordinances were brought in this manner in the past as well. Perhaps the advisors are giving similar advice now, and the government is about to bring ordinances, but if the government proves its justification, there is no point in opposition,' Dahal said.

RSP Defends Ordinances

The ruling party, Rastriya Swatantra Party, has clarified that the ordinances brought by the government are not to benefit or harm anyone but are necessary for reforms.

Party President Rabi Lamichhane gave this clarification at an informal meeting of the RSP parliamentary party held at Singha Durbar on Wednesday, while the opposition was protesting the ordinances.

'Previously, ordinances were brought to split parties or to imprison the opposition,' Lamichhane said. 'The current practice is not to harm anyone or benefit anyone. This is for necessary reforms. This step is an exercise being done within the legal framework.'

President Lamichhane stated that the Rastriya Swatantra Party is serious about law, political behavior, and democratic practices, and giving the chairmanship of the parliamentary committee to the main opposition is an indicator of this.