Senior Advocate Karki argues lawmakers cannot withdraw signatures

KATHMANDU: Senior Advocate Badri Bahadur Karki has said that lawmakers could not withdraw their signatures from the writ petition filed against the dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR).

Countering the arguments presented by defendants — on behalf of writ petitioners — in the Supreme Court session Monday, Karki said lawmakers who supported opposition leader Sher Bahadur Deuba could not withdraw their signatures until a government is formed.

“The court should tell those who have signed here that you will not be able to take back signatures until a government is formed. The court cannot allow them to make a joke out of judiciary,” he told the Constitutional Bench comprising five senior-most Justices.

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli has given an ultimatum to UML lawmakers to withdraw their signatures from the petition.

However, senior advocate Karki said the court should order that lawmakers who supported Deuba as the prime minister under Article 76 (5) could not withdraw their signatures until a the PM formed by 76 (5) takes a vote of confidence in the HoR. “There will be free voting in the parliament in coming days and that is why Article 76 (5) is here – the court must say this,” he said.

Senior advocate Karki also said that the writ petition filed by 146 lawmakers in the court confirmed that an alternative government can be formed from the parliament. “The petition itself is the ground for forming a government. Article 76 (5) recognizes free voting. And, now the court should say party whip is not applicable in Article 76 (5) and lawmakers can vote freely until the PM of 76 (5) takes a vote of confidence. After that only, the parties will have their say,” he said.

He went further, “The provision of Section 76 (5) is not for KP Sharma Oli. PM Oli could not make any claim after failing to get a vote of confidence.”

He concluded that the President erred by not recognizing Deuba’s claim in face of Oli’s. “But it was not for Oli to apply pursuant to Article 76 (5). Therefore, an order should be issued to rectify the error.”