The Election Commission also recognized the working committee led by Gagan Thapa. The Deuba faction had also approached the Supreme Court against that decision. However, today the Supreme Court has recognized the Thapa faction as the official one.
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.
After the term of the working committee elected from the 14th general convention in the Nepali Congress ended in December last year, two factions emerged within the party. On one side was the then President Sher Bahadur Deuba, on the other side was General Secretary Gagan Thapa.
There was a dispute in the party over whether to hold the general convention before or after the election? Without getting an answer to this question, the Thapa faction held a special general convention, and Thapa was elected president. The Deuba faction called it 'illegal'. The Election Commission also recognized the working committee led by Gagan Thapa. The Deuba faction had also approached the Supreme Court against the said decision. However, today the Supreme Court has declared the Thapa faction as the official one. Let's understand why the Gagan Thapa faction gained legitimacy in three questions and answers. Where did the Thapa faction get the right to hold a special general convention?
Article 17(2) of the Nepali Congress statute provides for a special general convention to be called if 40 percent of the delegates demand it. According to the Thapa faction, 40 percent of the delegates had formally demanded a special general convention on October 29, 2082 in accordance with this provision. However, the then President Deuba did not fulfill that demand.
The Supreme Court considered this point decisive. According to the court, the petitioners (Deuba faction) themselves remained indifferent to fulfilling the obligations prescribed by the statute. That is, the responsibility of calling a special general convention was the President's, he did not call it, and then the Thapa faction held the general convention on its own initiative. The Supreme Court has said that this is not 'illegal' but rather that Deuba has not fulfilled his obligation.
Was there any mistake by the Election Commission in granting official recognition to the Thapa faction?
The main argument of the Deuba side was this - the Election Commission hastily recognized the Thapa side. However, the court did not accept this argument.
According to Section 51 of the Political Parties Act, 2073, the Election Commission can update the details if there is a change in the party's office bearers. The Commission updated the details of the change in office bearers after the special general convention held under Thapa's leadership under this provision.
According to the court, the Commission made this decision after conducting the necessary study and investigation, and there is no legal or procedural error in the process. According to Section 46(2) of the Act, there is a provision that such a decision of the Election Commission is final. The court has said that it should not interfere in it.
Why did the Deuba side's claim become 'unreasonable' after the election?
It seems that the Supreme Court has also taken notice of the issue of Gagan Thapa's support in the last 21 Falgun elections. In the general election held on 21 Falgun, the candidates of the Nepali Congress stood with two signatures. In the proportional representation, Deuba's signature, and in the direct representation, Thapa's signature. In other words, the election itself was held with Thapa as the president, and the results were also announced.
In this context, the court has mentioned what happens when the old committee is now considered legitimate when the candidacy is registered with the signatures of new office bearers and the election has already been held. The court has said that 'the justification has been exhausted and...' has said.'
