SC delays hearings as judicial vacancies persist amid bar protests

KATHMANDU: The Supreme Court has been facing delays in hearing cases due to vacant positions for four judges for a long time.

As a result, cases scheduled for hearing often get postponed and are removed from the list without being heard.

On average, a case is removed from the hearing list four to five times before it finally comes up for consideration.

Supreme Court spokesperson Achyut Kuintkel states, “We are working on a strategy to expedite case resolutions, but due to the incomplete bench, cases cannot be heard in a single session.” According to him, due to the backlog of cases, once a case is removed from the list, it may take five to six months to be rescheduled.

Before his retirement, former Chief Justice Bishwambhar Prasad Shrestha had attempted to appoint judges to fill the vacant positions. However, after the Nepal Bar Association opposed the appointments, he withdrew his effort.

The Bar had demanded the reversal of a provision in the Judicial Council’s regulations, which appointed the Chief Registrar and Registrar of the Supreme Court as senior judges in higher courts. The Bar also staged a sit-in, refusing to allow any judicial appointments until their demand was met.

Amid the protests, on the 11th of Ashoj, the Chief Justices of the High Courts in Patan, Nripadhwaj Niroula, and in Tulsipur, Nityanand Pandey, were appointed to the Supreme Court.

The Bar Association’s President, Gopal Krishna Ghimire, opposed these appointments, alleging that they were made based on negotiations. Following this, a contempt of court case was filed against him, which is currently under review.

The Bar Association’s stance remains firm: they will not allow judicial appointments until the amendments to the Judicial Council’s regulations made in Ashoj 2080 are revoked.

Meanwhile, the Bar also called back its representative, Ram Prasad Shrestha, from the Council after alleging he did not support the Bar’s position. After Shrestha’s retirement in Mangsir, the Bar did not send a new representative to the Council for two months.

Eventually, the Council formally requested the Bar to send a representative, and Damodar Khadka was recommended by the Bar. Khadka was appointed by President Ramchandra Paudel on the 16th of Magh.

However, more than a month has passed since his appointment, yet the Council has not been able to convene a meeting.

An official from the Council stated, “Initially, the Council could not meet because of the Bar’s opposition, and later, due to the Bar’s delay in sending a representative, no meeting was possible.

Even now, due to the Bar’s continued position, a meeting cannot be held, as one or more of the Council members are often abroad or outside Kathmandu.”

The Bar reiterated that it does not object to judicial appointments as long as the amendments to the regulations are reversed.

Bar Chair Ghimire commented, “We have never said that judicial appointments should not be made in the Supreme Court. We only insist that the unconstitutional amendments to the regulations should be revoked; otherwise, we cannot accept them.”

Ghimire also accused the Council of disregarding legitimate demands and blaming the Bar for the failure to make judicial appointments.

With the Bar’s elections approaching in two weeks, the Council is reportedly waiting for the new leadership, anticipating a shift in circumstances, according to an official from the Supreme Court.