Arguing before a bench of Justices Sharanga Subedi and Nripadhwaj Niraula, they claimed that the gathering of any group at Bhrikuti Mandap cannot be considered a general convention and is not recognized by law.
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.
In a case related to the dispute over the legitimacy of the Congress, lawyers representing the outgoing president Sher Bahadur Deuba have argued that the special general convention cannot be legitimate.
Arguing before the bench of Justices Sharanga Subedi and Nripadhwaj Niraula, they claimed that the gathering of any group at Bhrikutimandap cannot be considered a general convention and is not accepted by law. The lawyers made this argument after the hearing of two petitions filed by the outgoing president Sher Bahadur Deuba began on Thursday.
Advocate Pankaj Karna had started the argument on behalf of Deuba today. He also claimed that the special general convention was against the constitution of the Congress. He also demanded that the decision made by the Election Commission be nullified.
Senior advocate Egaraj Pokharel came to the debate after him. He questioned whether the special general convention can elect a new leadership and claimed that it was illegal because those who held the convention did not call for a new leadership but for policy.
Questioning the granting of authority to Gagan Thapa in the name of the special general convention, senior advocate Pokharel accused the commission of making the decision without considering the law. ‘The commission has no right to unilaterally decide without resolving a complaint,’ he said. ‘The decision should have been made after considering the issues of both parties and the party’s law.’
Advocate Pokharel argued that the party’s authority given to Thapa’s side by the Election Commission should be null and void since the general secretary does not have the sole authority to hold a special general convention or make any decision. He claimed that the post of president was not vacant at all. ‘The post of president is vacant only in the event of a two-thirds vote of no confidence. If he resigns from the post or dies,’ he said, ‘There is no legal basis for the special convention to fill the vacant post of president.’
Stating that the special general convention not only changed the president but also the entire new working committee, Pokharel himself claimed that the reason for the special general convention of the party had ended and that the general secretaries who signed the minutes should not take the leadership of the special general convention again. After him, senior advocate Govinda Bandi argued.
Bandi claimed that the leadership could not be selected on the basis of the special general convention, arguing that there was no decision by the Election Commission as per the statute of the Nepali Congress and the law on political parties. He claimed that the legality of the general convention should be explained by the bench first and only then can the decision to select the leadership be clarified. After him, senior advocate Sher Bahadur KC and others argued. Deputy Attorney General Sanjeev Raj Regmi argued on behalf of the government on Thursday. Defending the decision of the Election Commission, he argued that the decision made by the commission should be upheld. After their arguments, the Supreme Court has kept the writ under review.
Now, on Friday, President Gagan Thapa's side will argue. After the Thapa side's argument, the Deuba side will make a counter-argument and decide on this dispute. The decision to be delivered by the Supreme Court will go towards resolving the ongoing dispute of the Congress. The Deuba side has filed a supplementary petition demanding to stop the regular general convention schedule, so the Supreme Court will have to speak on this as well.
On 26 Chaitra, the Sher Bahadur Deuba side had filed a supplementary petition demanding to stop the regular general convention schedule. The Deuba side's demand was that the previously registered writ should also be considered. The Supreme Court had called both sides for discussion on 27 Chaitra, saying that an interim order would not be issued unilaterally.
A writ was filed on 4 Magh 2082 against the decision to grant party official status to Gagan Thapa. The latest writ has demanded that the new schedule of the 15th general convention not be implemented until the dispute regarding the party's official status is resolved.
After the preparations for the general convention began, the Deuba faction had demanded that it be stopped. In the previous writ petition, the then general secretaries Gagan Thapa and Bishwaprakash Sharma had claimed that the leadership was unconstitutionally selected by holding a special general convention despite the disagreement of President Deuba, and demanded that the new working committee should not be recognized and the decision of the Election Commission should be nullified. However, the Supreme Court refused to issue an interim order and called only for discussion.
On 6th Magh, a bench of Justice Sunil Kumar Pokharel had issued a show cause order and granted priority. Then, the presentation scheduled for 1 Chaitra was postponed as it could not be seen, and then it was postponed by the court itself on 22 Chaitra.
