Advocate Prem Silwal argued that the constitutional article that prohibits a person who has already become the Chief Justice from being appointed to another position has been violated.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court has begun hearing the writ petitions filed against the dissolution of the House of Representatives. The hearing began on Wednesday morning on 16 writ petitions filed seeking injunctions and mandamus orders against the appointment of the Prime Minister, the annulment of the dissolution of Parliament, and the restoration of Parliament.
Advocate Prem Silwal and senior advocate Tikaram Bhattarai, who are also writ petitioners, are currently arguing. Advocate Silwal started the argument and argued that the government led by Sushila Karki is unconstitutional. During the argument, he said, 'The government led by Sushila Karki is unconstitutional. She has not been able to maintain peace and security. There is no justification for holding elections like this. We cannot form a government on the strength of the streets.'
Advocate Silwal argued that the constitutional article that prohibits appointing a person who has become the Chief Justice to another position has been violated. He said, 'Article 74 has also been violated. Articles 74, 75 and 132 have been violated.'
He said that it is unconstitutional because the House of Representatives was dissolved immediately after the formation of the government. 'Dissolution is also unconstitutional. Dissolution can only be obtained according to Article 77. But this did not happen according to that process. The President's Office did not mention any article of the Constitution in the dissolution,' he said.
Legal practitioners have demanded an interim order from the bench asking the Sushila Karki-led government not to do anything other than preparing for the election. They have demanded an interim order saying that the government has started doing things like recalling the ambassador and that other things will be wrong. They have also demanded a written response to the writ petition and a date for the final hearing. They have demanded a written response within seven days and continuous hearing. It has been demanded in the debate that an interim order should not be issued on the election issue.
In the debate, the judges have asked the debaters whether an interim order should be issued in this writ petition or not. In the meantime, Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut asked whether the country would not end up without a government if he told this government not to work. His question was, 'Wouldn't it be without a government if he told this government not to do anything?'
Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut has appointed the bench in order of seniority. Along with Raut, Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Regmi, Hari Prasad Phuyal and Manoj Kumar Sharma have been appointed as the constitutional bench.
