Dr. Bhim Rawal Criticizes Government Ordinance Use

Kathmandu. Former Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Nepali Communist Party, Dr. Bhim Rawal, has stated that attempting to govern through ordinances by flouting the law is contrary to the existing parliamentary system.

Expressing dissatisfaction with the government's recommendation of six ordinances to the President after postponing the parliamentary session it had itself convened, Rawal protested the government's actions. On Friday, through the social media platform Facebook, he stated that in the name of speed, violating established laws, methods, systems, and procedures would be counterproductive in the long run.

'Bringing laws rapidly through ordinances and attempting to govern is contrary to the fundamental principles established during the constitution-making period and the existing parliamentary system. Violating methods, systems, procedures, and principles in the name of speed will be counterproductive in the long run,' Rawal wrote.

Rawal recalled all the high-level discussions, meetings, and debates from the time the constitution was being drafted by the Constituent Assembly.

Rawal's Statement is as follows:

I am recalling all the high-level meetings, discussions, and debates from the time the constitution was being drafted by the Constituent Assembly. The main objective of the provision related to the Constitutional Council was to prevent partisanship, unilateral interests, and manipulation from working in appointments to constitutional bodies. When the parliament session was not in session, provisions were made to bring ordinances in situations where it was absolutely necessary for the country and the people. Contrary to this objective, in the past, when K.P. Oli was the Prime Minister, attempts were made to amend certain laws, including the provision related to the Constitutional Council, through ordinances. This was opposed within the party and universally. The government, which has a nearly two-thirds majority in the parliament, has now followed the same course of action. The government's argument that ordinances were brought to expedite work does not align with the principle of abruptly closing the convened parliamentary session. If laws are to be made through ordinances, what is the meaning of spending a large sum of money to elect representatives through elections? When laws are made by people's representatives in parliament through discussion, deliberation, and public debate in a mature manner, if laws that are contrary to the interests of the country and the people or motivated by other interests are about to be made, the public gets an opportunity to point them out. Eliminating this possibility and attempting to govern by bringing laws rapidly through ordinances is contrary to the fundamental principles established during the constitution-making period and the existing parliamentary system. Violating methods, systems, procedures, and principles in the name of speed will be counterproductive in the long run.