The incident in which then Madhesh Chief Sumitra Subedi Bhandari administered the oath of office to UML leader Saroj Yadav as Chief Minister early on Monday at a hotel in Bardibas has been criticized as politically, constitutionally, and morally wrong.

JSP Nepal Chairman Upendra Yadav said that both those who administered the oath and those who took it have lost their morals. ‘There is a responsibility of office and morality, morality also has a value. That has not been seen anywhere,’ he said, ‘Leaving the provincial chief’s residence at 4 am saying that he is sick. On the way, sitting at a hotel bar, appointing the Chief Minister, administering the oath and taking the oath in a shameful manner in hiding. It is a very shameful incident.’ 

He accused the UML of causing such an incident to keep power in its hands. ‘UML’s behavior has made a mockery of democracy, it has flouted the law,’ he told Kantipur, ‘It has been constitutionally, politically and morally wrong from every perspective.’ He alleged that both the provincial chief and the provincial assembly speaker used their responsibilities in the interests of the UML despite the option of forming a majority government. ‘Wrongful actions cannot be accepted,’ he said, ‘This must be corrected.’ 

Janmat Chairman CK Raut says that there is a large-scale political conspiracy. ‘Incidents that spread discontent among the general public towards federalism and the province are happening again and again, and have happened in other provinces as well,’ he said, ‘The incident that has taken place in Madhesh now is also a continuation of that, this is a conspiracy against federalism and the province.’ 

Democratic Socialist leader Jitendra Prasad Sonar (Sonal) commented that the constitution has been violated. ‘The province’s politics have become tarnished because of the provincial chief, he is responsible for this, it is due to his unconstitutional, unbridled, and immoral behavior,’ Sonar told Kantipur, ‘The provincial chief should have called for the formation of the government according to Article 168(2) of the Constitution. By not doing that, the provincial chief has shown a low level of behavior by secretly appointing and swearing in the Chief Minister at night.'

 Congress General Secretary Bishwaprakash Sharma has called the incident in Madhesh 'apolitical'. He said that the farce staged while there was a possibility of forming a majority government from a coalition as per Article 168(2) of the Constitution should be corrected. He commented that the incident that helps increase further discontent towards federalism among the citizens is condemnable. 

Maoist Madhesh in-charge Matrika Yadav said that the act was against the constitution. She commented that the forces carrying the cover of federalism were involved in destabilizing the Madhesh government. 'KP Sharma Oli himself says that the constitution should be protected, but it is not protected by going the opposite way. Those who reject federalism are entering federalism and defaming federalism,' he said, 'Some elements are running such a business for their own interests. We need to explain this to the people. Even if the Maoists have weaknesses, we must take responsibility for them.' He admitted that this situation has arisen because two MPs from his own party did not accept the party's decision. 

No single party has a majority in the 107-member Madhesh Provincial Assembly. A coalition government has been forming. In the second term of the Provincial Assembly, Saroj Kumar Yadav from JSP Nepal and then Satish Kumar Singh from Janmat Party had become the Chief Minister. After Singh resigned due to internal disputes, Sonar became the Chief Minister with the support of JSP Nepal, Janmat, Maoists, LSP and Unified Socialists. However, Sonar resigned after seeing that he would fail the vote of confidence test. 

Article 168(3) of the Constitution states that if there is no condition to be appointed as per clause (2) or if the Chief Minister so appointed fails to receive the vote of confidence, the Provincial Chief shall appoint the leader of the parliamentary party with the largest number of members in the Provincial Assembly as the Chief Minister. The then Provincial Chief Bhandari used the same article to appoint the leader of the UML with the largest number of members in the Provincial Assembly as the Chief Minister. 

Senior advocate and constitutional law expert Chandrakant Gyawali said that the process of Article 168 of the Constitution, which requires the provincial chief to practice in the provincial assembly and call for the formation of the government in consultation with the parties, is unconstitutional, and that appointment is being made secretly on the streets. 

‘According to the article of the Constitution, the process should have been done within the provincial assembly. Appointing the Chief Minister in a hotel or unauthorized place is forming a government from the streets. No article of the Constitution envisages such a thing,’ Gyawali said, ‘Under Article 3 of Article 168, a new Chief Minister could have been appointed, the process should have been done in the provincial assembly. This was done on the streets, that is why the question has arisen. This has become an unparliamentary act.’ Advocate Dipendra Jha, an expert on the constitution, said that the appointment of the Chief Minister from the provincial assembly or his office and the process of making him swear in a hotel without taking the oath is unconstitutional. He claims that the cycle of government formation according to the Constitution has not been completed. ‘According to 168(2), if there is a possibility of calling the government not only once but also repeatedly, the Supreme Court has explained,’ he said, ‘In the case of Jitendra Sonal in Madhesh, that use was not attempted.’