It was a prolonged exercise that finally gave Nepal an interim constitution. But the document, sadly, makes Nepal’s vision of democracy incomplete and ignores the principle of separation of powers. In fact, during the interim phase of governance that will end in June, if elections to the constituent assembly are held as scheduled, the prime minister will enjoy the powers of an ‘absolute dictator’. Worse, the constitution not only takes away all the immunity the king as head of state had enjoyed and transfers it to the PM, it also empowers the council of ministers to grant amnesty to convicts, regardless of the nature of their crime.

India’s minister of external affairs, Pranab Mukherjee, on his recent visit to Kathmandu, skipped making comments on the interim constitution, which had been finalised a day before his arrival here. It is difficult to say whether he did this out of wisdom or because the constitution was so faulty in itself. In any case he was wise to withhold comments.

Let’s examine the process of appointing the chief justice, judges of the supreme court and other constitutional posts set down by the interim constitution. The appointment of a constitutional council is provided for the purpose, with the PM as its head. The chief justice and the speaker of the interim parliament, besides three ministers nominated by the PM, will be members of this council. And the PM, given the power of the head of state vested in him, will approve the nomination. In the case of appointing the chief justice, the law minister will act as member of the council. In short, the chief justice will be a helpless minority voice in the advocacy of an independent judiciary.

... contd.