Mahesh Bertaula, the chief whip of the UML, which is leading the government, has made a serious allegation that the judges of the court are not on the basis of facts and evidence but are guided by the misguided crowd.

During the hearing of the recommendation of Damodar Khadka as a member of the Judicial Council in the meeting of the parliamentary hearing committee on Sunday, Bertaula, who is also the chief whip of the UML, raised serious questions about the decision of the judiciary.

Bertaula accused judges of not relying on facts and evidence when deciding, going beyond the spirit of the constitution, going against the principle of separation of powers, making wrong decisions on issues related to development and prosperity. Bertaula, who did not clearly mention which level of court is making such decisions, said that the decisions of the High Court and the Supreme Court are weaker than the District Court.

Bertaula said that the people's distrust towards the court is increasing due to the judge's decision. "What happened in the court now, the judges did not judge the case from the bench based on the facts and evidence, not from the basis of it, looking out of the window to see what the atmosphere is like, to see if there is any color on my skin. Decisions were made based on the available facts and evidence, and were guided by the crowd,'' asked Bertaula, 'and how the administration of justice is effective. Will ? How to increase the trust of citizens towards the court?'

Bertaula said that citizens approach the court saying that life, liberty and property will be protected, but the judges are starting to question whether that is being done. He said that because of the court, people's perception towards the court has decreased.

'Now the trust in the judiciary is very shaken, this is a serious matter . Today, life, liberty and property should be protected especially by the judiciary, here is the question. Here is the question of the common citizen,' he asked Khadka, 'how can you make sure that the court takes serious decisions in the protection of life, liberty and property from this place, and that the judicial council plays its role?'

Bertaula also said that the judiciary has been ruling by forgetting the principle of separation of powers. There is a principle of separation of powers where the parliament creates laws, the government implements them and the courts decide on legal questions. However, Bertaula said that the court was revoking the law created by the legislature against the spirit of the constitution. "The Legislature makes laws, the Judiciary decides legal questions, but today it is the power of the Legislature to dictate that 'you can/can't make it' and invalidate the laws that have been made, that too by going beyond the spirit of the Constitution," said Bertaula. 'The Supreme Court is rejecting, canceling, removing and stopping legal arrangements one after the other on important issues related to development and prosperity.'

Bertaula said that such actions being taken by the court are creating a negative perception in the public mind. "Stopping the legal arrangements made for prosperity is contrary to Article 5 of the Constitution." How should the issues of this type of judgment be seen in the context of the judges?,' he asked. He said that the decision to challenge the provisions of the constitution was made by the court.

'Nepal's independence, sovereignty, geographical integrity, nationalism, independence, self-respect, protection of the rights and interests of Nepalese, border security, economic development and prosperity will be the basic issues of Nepal's national interest,' Article 5 of the Constitution provides, Conduct and action will be punishable under federal law.' Stating that the action of the court to cancel the laws for prosperity is against the national interest, Bertaula asked the member of the Justice Council for an answer to the recommendation Khadka.

Bertaula said that the Constitution has provided for the Justice Council to prevent similar actions from the court, and said that the people appointed there should be serious to prevent such actions. He requested Khadka to assure the court that such acts will not happen in the future and will not be allowed to happen.

Similarly, Bertaula also raised questions about the appointment of judges. He said that people who have no ability are appointed as judges even if someone wants them. He said that in order to become a competent court, only competent people should be selected as judges. "Effective justice cannot be rendered just by saying that a certain person would have become a judge by someone's wish." In order to become a competent court, that type of judge should also be appointed,' he said.

Bertaula said that there is going to be a discussion whether the most competent judge is from the Supreme, High and District Courts. It is heard that district level judges are more responsible and more competent. At that level, questions have started to be asked that there is no High and Supreme Court,' said Bertaula, 'If we look at the number of cases in the Supreme Court, the number of cases registered has started to increase more than the number of cases dismissed. This matter is serious. A person is stuck in a case all his life, even for the rest of his life. After the death, the related case is decided . And who should be responsible for this?'

Bertaula said what should the justice council do to solve all these problems seen in the court? And asked Khadka how he plans to play an effective role after being appointed as a member of the Justice Council. In response, Khadka said initiatives and facilitation as a member of the council for quick and easy justice.