The House of Representatives Rules Drafting Committee has proposed a provision that conflicts with the constitution in the procedure to be adopted for amending the constitution. The proposal put forward states that the constitution can be amended even if the number of members of both the Houses of Representatives and the National Assembly is combined and two-thirds of it can be achieved only through the House of Representatives. The proposal conflicts with the provisions of the constitution. The previous two constitutional amendments were possible only after passing two-thirds majority votes from both houses separately. 

The ruling Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has zero representation in the National Assembly, while it is close to two-thirds in the House of Representatives. Against this backdrop, even if the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which led the government for amending the constitution, can take the initiative in the House of Representatives to reach two-thirds, it is not possible for it to reach two-thirds in the National Assembly on its own. Without passage from the National Assembly, the constitution cannot be amended even if the government or the RSS wants to. Therefore, the provision has been proposed in the regulations to make it easier for the RSP to amend the constitution if it wishes, so that the number of members who do not reach two-thirds in one of the houses of the federal parliament can be filled by the other house. 

The constitution provides that the constitution can be amended only if it is passed by at least two-thirds of the total number of members currently in both the houses of the federal parliament, the House of Representatives and the National Assembly, separately. However, if it is passed by two-thirds of the total number of members of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly, the Speaker shall consider the constitution amendment bill as passed and send it to the President for certification. The provision has been proposed in Rule 140 (11) of the draft regulations of the House of Representatives. ‘After receiving the bill related to the amendment of the constitution passed by the House of Representatives and sent to the National Assembly with a message, if the total number of votes in favor of the proposal reaches at least two-thirds of the total number of members currently in both houses, the Speaker shall certify the bill and send it to the President for certification,’ the draft regulations state.

According to the provisions of the constitution, the constitutional amendment bill should be passed by two-thirds majority in both houses separately. - Bhimarjun Acharya, constitutional scholar Constitutional scholar and senior advocate Bhimarjun Acharya said that the constitutional amendment should be passed by two-thirds majority in separate meetings of both houses of the federal parliament. ‘According to the provisions of the constitution, the constitutional amendment bill should be passed by two-thirds majority in both houses separately,’ Acharya said. Article 274 (8) of the constitution lays down the provisions on how the constitutional amendment bill is passed. ‘A bill that does not require the consent of the provincial assembly or has been approved by a majority of the provincial assemblies in accordance with clause (5) shall be passed by at least a two-thirds majority of the total number of members then present in both houses of the federal parliament,’ the constitution has provided.

Chairman of the Rules Drafting Committee Ganesh Parajuli argued that going beyond the constitution would not work. "The amendment of the Constitution is done as per the provisions of the Constitution. The language of Article 274, Clause 8 of the Constitution is written in the Rules. We have also adjusted the language in other points of the Rules as per the provisions of the Constitution," Parajuli said. "Earlier, the amendment of the Constitution was done in accordance with the Constitution. This time, we have tried to make that clear in the Rules. If you say that the amendment of the language in the Rules has such a meaning because of the inclusion of such and such a word, we are ready to adjust it in accordance with the Constitution."

The National Assembly Rules also have a provision that the Constitution Amendment Bill must be passed by a two-thirds majority in the meeting. Rule 129 of the National Assembly Rules mentions the procedure for the Constitution Amendment Bill. Rule 129 (9) of the National Assembly Rules provides that, "If the motion to pass the Constitution Amendment Bill is approved by a majority of at least two-thirds of the total number of members then present in the Assembly, the Bill shall be deemed passed." 

The draft regulations were passed by a majority vote by the Rules Drafting Committee, chaired by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (currently deputy leader of the parliamentary party) Ganesh Parajuli, amid opposition from opposition parties. There was no provision in the House of Representatives Rules 2079 BS that a two-thirds majority of both houses would be sufficient to amend the constitution.

Constitutional expert Bipin Adhikari says that the provisions of the constitution have been interpreted in the rules according to their convenience so that the current ruling party can easily pass the parliamentary arithmetic for amending the constitution. ‘The constitution has clearly provided that the constitution can be amended by a two-thirds majority of both houses, amending the constitution is an important and sovereign process, what is not stated in the constitution should not be interpreted according to one’s convenience by including it in the rules,’ said senior advocate Adhikari. ‘The provisions made for amending the constitution in the draft rules of the House of Representatives seem to be going against the clear provisions of the constitution. According to the spirit of the constitution, there is a provision that the constitution amendment bill should be passed independently by each house. This provision seems to be an attempt to make things easier for the government by sidelining the original provision.’

NCP Chief Whip Yubaraj Dulal said that the draft regulations contain provisions that go against the provisions written in the constitution. ‘The proposal has been made in the regulations that the amendment bill can be passed by a two-thirds majority of both the National Assembly and the House of Representatives, not by any one house. This seems to be written intentionally,’ he said, ‘The drafters of the regulations should know the meaning of the language of the constitution.’

The constitution amendments that have been made twice in the past were passed by two-thirds majorities separately by the two houses. In Falgun 2072, the amendment was made for the principle of proportional inclusion, and in Asad 2077, the constitution was amended to keep the Chukche map in the Nisan seal. 

If the rules prepared by the regulations drafting committee are to be implemented, the Speaker can certify them and send them to the President for certification if two-thirds of the total 334 members of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly reach the mark. There is a 334-member federal parliament, consisting of a 275-member House of Representatives and a 59-member National Assembly. Two-thirds of this is 223. The constitution stipulates that a two-thirds majority of both houses of the federal parliament is required to pass a constitution amendment bill in the National Assembly. According to this, 40 MPs are required to pass a constitution amendment bill for two-thirds in the National Assembly. The ruling party, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has zero representation in the National Assembly.

The draft rules of the House of Representatives have been passed by the committee and submitted to the House of Representatives. It has been discussed in principle and is under consideration in the House of Representatives. Committee member UML Chief Whip Ain Bahadur Mahar said that the provisions are made against the constitution to address party interests. “The rules have tried to underestimate the prevailing laws of the constitution. They have tried to fulfill their personal and party interests through the rules of the House of Representatives,” Mahar said. “This is an undemocratic and unconstitutional act.” The rules of the House of Representatives are supposed to be for the operation of the House, but here they have been prepared for self-interest.’

RSP member and advocate Yagyamani Neupane in the drafting committee said that there is no provision different from the constitution. ‘In the context of constitutional amendment, Rule 140 (11) has been made in the new rules for the implementation of Article 274, Clause 8 of the Constitution. It is not different from the provisions of the Constitution. Work will be done in the same spirit. There will be no rules other than the Constitution,’ Neupane said.

Senior advocate Adhikari says that since the National Assembly represents the provinces and local levels, it has the sovereign right to amend the Constitution. He argues that the National Assembly has the same role as the House of Representatives in the matter of constitutional amendment. ‘We have the upper house, not the House of Lords and the Raj Sabha of yesterday. Out of 59 members, only 3 members will be nominated by the Government of Nepal. Even when nominated, it should be brought in a way that fulfills the mandate of the National Assembly. We cannot say that we do not want the upper house until we abolish it through constitutional amendment,' the official said, 'The National Assembly has been given equal status only in matters of constitutional amendment. The House of Representatives dominates in lawmaking.' The constitution provides for a joint meeting of the National Assembly and the House of Representatives on matters such as budget, policy and program, but two-thirds of both houses are required separately for constitutional amendment, the official said. 

The chairman of the Rules Drafting Committee was Parajuli, deputy leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) parliamentary party. The committee included Dr. Ojaswi Sherchan, Khagendra Sunar, Gazla Samim Mikrani, Tapeshwor Yadav, Nisha Dangi, Madhu Kumar Chaulagain, Sulabh Kharel and Yagyamani Neupane from the RSS. Niskal Rai and Rekha Kumari Yadav from the Congress, Ain Mahar from the UML, Balawati Sharma from the NCP, Dhruvraj Rai from the Shram Sanskriti and Khusbu Oli from the RPP. The committee's member secretary was Ekram Giri, head of the House of Representatives' Business Affairs Division. The lawmakers have already registered amendments to the draft rules of the House of Representatives. Preparations are underway to integrate these amendments and send them to the House of Representatives. The rules will come into effect after the House passes them after discussing the draft and amendments.