The contempt case was filed on the grounds that the Supreme Court had twice ruled to provide for the right to reject in elections, but it was not implemented.
A contempt of court case has been filed alleging that the Supreme Court's two orders to provide a 'right to reject' for candidates in elections have not been implemented.
Advocate Shreena Nepal and others have filed a contempt petition in the Supreme Court. The petition has named the Government of Nepal and the Election Commission as defendants. The first hearing of the writ petition was held on Tuesday. A bench of Justices Til Prasad Shrestha and Meghraj Pokharel has issued a show cause order.
The contempt case was filed saying that the Supreme Court has twice ruled to provide for the right to reject in elections but it has not been implemented. The Supreme Court had issued the same advice on this issue in 2070 and 2073 BS.
However, the government and the Election Commission have been pushing back, saying that a separate legal provision is needed to implement the order. The Election Commission had also drafted a bill some time ago.
On February 13, 2073 BS, Advocate Swagat Nepal had filed a second case in the Supreme Court demanding action for the non-implementation of the Supreme Court's verdict. Even before the local elections on April 15, 2079 BS, Advocate Nepal had filed a contempt case, saying that the law had not been made as per the court's verdict. The Election Commission is printing ballot papers for the upcoming elections, but Nepal and other countries have filed contempt cases, saying that the ballot papers do not have the option to reject candidates.
Why was it not implemented?
The provision of the 'right to reject' has not been implemented as a law could not be made as per the Supreme Court's directive. There was a discussion in the State Affairs Committee of the Parliament in 2074 BS regarding the provision of the right to reject. In that discussion, major political parties, including the CPN-UML, Nepali Congress and the CPN (Maoist Center), stood against the provision of rejecting candidates.
It seems that in addition to the indifference of political parties regarding the non-implementation of the court order regarding the right to reject, civil society has also not been able to raise its voice sufficiently. The contempt petition states that the Election Commission is equally responsible for the non-implementation of the Supreme Court's decision, along with the major political parties.
Bikash Lakai, Bhairaja Rai and Swagat Nepal had filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court on Kartik 10, 2070 BS, demanding that voters should be allowed to reject the candidates contesting the second Constituent Assembly election on Mangsir 4, 2070 BS. In its ruling on the writ petition on Poush 12, the Supreme Court had issued a directive order in the name of the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, the Ministry of Law and the Election Commission to implement the provision by making constitutional or legal provisions in the upcoming elections.
According to the judgment, while accepting the sovereignty of the people in democratic practice, it was said that the right of voters to reject the given options and point out the need for new options should not be forced.
