The crisis in Nepal’s Supreme Court, over the demand of the resignation of Chief Justice Cholender Shumsher Rana, continued for the third week as the top judge, who has been facing serious allegations of compromising the institutional integrity, has reportedly been refusing to resign. 

Lawyers, in the last week, have intensified their protest against Justice Rana, demanding his resignation. The Nepal Bar Association has made it clear that they will accept nothing less than his ouster. Meanwhile, Supreme court judges, who have been holding talks with the chief justice, are trying to find a way out of the deadlock.

The entire controversy started with the allegation that he had allegedly demanded - according to Nepalese media reports - “his share” of power in the current cabinet of the government-led Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. The media report claimed Justice Rana demanded at least two posts for his relatives. 

Importantly, Deuba came to power through an order in July passed by a Supreme Court bench led by Justice Rana. The suspicion grew after the ruling coalition led by Nepali Congress appointed Gajendra Hamal as the Minister for Industries in its recent cabinet expansion. Hamal, a relative of Justice Rana, was just a district-level leader in the party. 

When the controversy grew, Hamal resigned from his post three days after his appointment, which further fueled the suspicion. In a statement last week, the Supreme Court refuted these allegations, terming them all “baseless.” 

Earlier, Supreme Court judges had boycotted meetings with Justice Rana and decided to stay away from daily hearings. However, they too came under public pressure as the work of the court can’t be boycotted for too long, given the importance of the institution, often the last place for people to seek justice.  

Initially, Rana hinted that he would seek a graceful exit and decided to stay away from allotting cases to benches, except in a few cases. However, since this week, his actions were completely opposite. A report in The Kathmandu Post said Rana resumed his work of allotting cases, and he intended to stay on in the position. 

However, the whole controversy only put the spotlight on the possibility of the compromised integrity of the country’s top judicial institution.  From former judges to legal and constitutional experts demanded clarity on the issue. 

Furthermore, other judges are also in a fix with their limited options. Political parties and parliament which have the right to remove the top judge have so maintained a deafening silence despite the growing uproar. 

(SAM)