'Next parliament can continue investigation on suspended CJ Rana'
The Former Justices' Forum Nepal has said the parliament to be formed after the coming elections can continue investigation into the impeachment motion against suspended Chief Justice, Cholendra Shumsher Rana
A sense of distrust has begun to afflict the partners of ruling alliance just 41 days after it was formed. The alliance between the CPN-UML and CPN-Maoist Centre was not only dramatic but also abrupt. It was made at the eleventh hour of the deadline that the President had given to the political parties to claim for the government with a majority vote of the federal parliament. Maoist Centre chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda rushed to the residence of UML chair KP Sharma Oli at Balkot to create a new alliance after the Nepali Congress backtracked from its promise to let him lead the government first. But the UML-Maoist Centre’s marriage of convenience is now experiencing a bumpy ride with some nasty political developments of late. The citizenship scam involving president of Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and former deputy prime minister and home minister Rabi Lamichhane sent shockwaves in the political spectrum. A Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court has stripped Lamichhane’s status as lawmaker and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home for holding an illegal citizenship certificate. After reacquiring the citizenship through due process, Lamichhane was restored to the party’s president and he is determined to be reappointed as the Home Minster at all cost, which has become a sticking point for Prime Minister Prachanda, who is not in a mood to grant this portfolio to Rabi until the full text of SC’s verdict is made public. New twist The row over the home ministry has taken a new twist. The RSP has made it a bottom line of its participation in the government. The other day, its joint meeting of party central committee and parliamentary wing has given a two-day ultimatum to PM Prachanda and Oli, who is the coordinator of high level political mechanism, to decide on whether they are ready to give the home portfolio to it. As the media reports go, the RSP was on the verge of quitting the government after it was denied the powerful ministry. PM Prachanda and Oli had talked with Rabi over the phone, requesting him not to pull out of the government. Although Rabi’s exit from the government does not cause immediate collapse of the government, it can put the national politics on a slippery slope. Rabi is still under investigation over his Nepali passport that he obtained in 2015 on the basis of his scrapped citizenship. As per Section 21 (a) of the Passport Act 2076 BS, a person is subject to a fine ranging from Rs. 200,000 to Rs. 500,000 or an imprisonment of one to three years or both if s/he obtains a passport or travel permit by furnishing false information to the concerned offices. Rabi has come under fire from different quarters over his irrational claim for the home ministry portfolio, which has weakened his moral ground. This has tarnished his image as a change agent intent on rooting out all anomalies attributed to misrule and corruption over the years. Rabi is no longer a lawmaker but wants to head the home ministry so as to influence or abort the investigation process on his passport, claim his detractors. This, of course, invites a conflict of interest and mocks our legal and investigation system. As a popular youth leader, he should not join the government until the investigation into his passport is over. Rather he should support the probe committee to come to its findings. It is the duty of all citizens to respect the rule of law, the basis of a democratic society. Rabi’s party has the right to stake claim to the home ministry portfolio as per consensus reached among the ruling allies prior to the formation of this government but it should rather send another lawmaker, not Rabi, to lead this ministry. However, voice is louder within the Maoist Centre that it should retain the home ministry for the PM’s party does not have powerful ministries such as home, finance, foreign affairs and law. Without the vital ministries, the Maoist Centre is unlikely to successfully execute pro-people programmes. Nonetheless, given the nature of coalition government, Prachanda is not in a position to decide on his own. Oli, who leads the largest constituent of the alliance, has pressed Prachanda to appoint Rabi as home minister. Prior to the formation of the government, the allies had agreed to allot the home ministry to the Maoist Centre but it had to give its claim on it after the RSP stuck to it with Oli’s backing. The Maoist Centre thinks Oli wants to flex his political muscle by bringing RSP and Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) into his fold. RSP and RPP are said to be ‘satellite’ forces of UML that it uses to keep a firm grip on Prachanda’s activities. Manoeuvring In the party’s Standing Committee meeting, Prachanda has lamented that he was fed up with Oli’s continuous manoeuvring to ‘encircle’ his government and obstacles on its way to effective delivery from the day it was formed. This is a reason why he approached Nepali Congress to secure its support during the vote of confidence. Buoyed by the NC’s backing to his government, Prachanda and his colleagues began to emphasise on electing new president on the basis of national consensus. They have claimed that there was no deal on giving the presidential post to the UML. Now Oli has reasons to harbour suspicion whether the Maoist Centre will back down from its verbal agreement on awarding the post of president to his party. On the other hand, main opposition NC is elated by the widening distance among the ruling allies. It is fancying the breakdown of the current coalition and victory of its candidate in the presidential post. The NC’s wishful thinking may turn into a reality if the UML and Maoist Centre suffer from mutual suspicion and non-cooperation. The coalition government can sail smoothly if its partners rise above the parochial interests and demonstrate a true coalition culture. Internecine feud for post and power, monopoly and domination shall lead them to eventual downfall. (The author is Deputy Executive Editor of this daily.)
KATHMANDU, Sept 15: The Former Justices' Forum Nepal has said that the parliament to be formed after the upcoming elections can continue investigation into the impeachment motion against suspended Chief Justice Cholendra SJB Rana.
KATHMANDU, March 7: The government has begun processes for moving the impeachment motion registered against the Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana.
The House of Representatives (HoR) on Sunday formed an 11-member impeachment recommendation committee.
The 11-member committee includes four lawmakers of UML, two each of Nepali congress and CPN (Maoist Center), and one each of CPN (Unified Socialist), Janata Samajbadi Party and Loktantrik Samajbadi Party.
The committee will now elect a Chairman and prepare a procedure for investigation and other processes, according to Dr Rojnath Pandey, spokesperson at the secretariat of the federal parliament.
As per the provisions, the committee will have to present its report within three months.
"The committee will firstly conduct an investigation. The committee can also record statements of both CJ Rana and those who registered the motion," said Ram Narayan Bidari, senior advocate and former member of the National Assembly.
“After the committee presents their report, the parliamentarians can present their views about the motion and report. Then the motion will be put to a vote” he added.
“It will require a two-third majority to pass the impeachment. If it fails then Rana will be reappointed in the post if his tenure has not expired by then.”
Article 101 (2) of the Constitution of Nepal states that a person who is relieved of office on the passage of a motion of impeachment shall not be entitled to obtain any facility accruing from such office and to be appointed or nominated to any public office in the future.
JERUSALEM, May 4: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced a midnight deadline on Tuesday to put together a new coalition government — or be looking at the possibility of leading his Likud party into the opposition for the first time in 12 years.
Netanyahu has struggled to secure a parliamentary majority since March 23 — when elections ended in deadlock for the fourth consecutive time in the past two years.
Despite repeated meetings with many of his rivals and unprecedented outreach to the leader of a small Islamist Arab party, Netanyahu has not been able to close a deal during a four-week window.
That window was to expire at midnight, at which point the matter returns to President Reuven Rivlin in the absence of an agreement.
A failure to reach a deal would not immediately push Netanyahu out of office.
Rivlin could give him an additional two weeks to form a coalition. He could give one of Netanyahu’s opponents an opportunity to form a government, or in a final move of desperation, send the matter straight to parliament.
That would give lawmakers a chance to choose one of their own as a prime minister. If all options fail, the country would face another election this fall, meaning months of continued political paralysis.
In the March 23 election, Netanyahu’s Likud emerged as the largest single party, with 30 seats in the 120-member parliament. But to form a government, he needs to have the support of a 61-seat majority.
That task has been complicated in large part by members of his own religious and nationalist base.
The New Hope party, led by a former Netanyahu aide, refuses to serve under the prime minister because of deep personal differences. Religious Zionism, a far-right party that espouses an openly racist platform, supports Netanyahu but has ruled out serving in a government with the Arab partners he has courted. Yamina, another right-wing party led by a former Netanyahu aide, has refused to commit to either him or his opponents.
On Monday, Netanyahu said he had offered the head of Yamina, Naftali Bennett, the chance to share the job of prime minister in a rotation, with Bennett holding the post for the first year.
Bennett responded: “I never asked Netanyahu to be prime minister. I asked to form a government. Unfortunately, he does not have that.”
Looming over Netanyahu has been his ongoing corruption trial. Netanyahu has been charged with fraud, breach of trust and bribery in a series of scandals. The trial has moved into the witness phase, with embarrassing testimony accusing him of trading favors with a powerful media mogul. Netanyahu denies the charges.
In recent days, he has appeared increasingly frustrated, coddling potential partners one day and then lashing out at them with vitriol the next. Last week’s deadly stampede at a religious festival, in which 45 ultra-Orthodox Jews were killed, has only complicated his task by creating an unwelcome diversion and calls for an official investigation into possible negligence on his watch.
Netanyahu’s opponents, meanwhile, have been holding meetings of their own in an effort to cobble together a possible alternative government.
Netanyahu has also suffered a series of embarrassing — and uncharacteristic — defeats in parliament.
Earlier this month his opponents gained control of the powerful Arrangements Committee, which controls the legislative agenda until a new government is formed. Last week, he
was forced to abandon his appointment of a crony as the interim justice minister, just before the Supreme Court appeared set to strike down the move.
Despite all of Netanyahu’s vulnerabilities, it remains unclear whether his opponents can form an alternative government. The opposition includes a vast spectrum of parties that have little in common except for their animosity toward Netanyahu.
If Netanyahu fails to put together a coalition by midnight, he will do his utmost to prevent his opponents from reaching an agreement in the coming weeks.
That would keep him in office until the next election, allowing him to battle his
corruption charges from the perch of the prime minister’s office and giving him yet another chance to win a new term, along with possible immunity from prosecution
