KATHMANDU: Senior Advocate Badri Bahadur Karki, one of the members of the amicus curiae, has claimed that the Constitutional Bench should consider the ‘words’ written in the constitution while giving the verdict on the ongoing case of dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR) in the Supreme Court.
Taking part in the pleading on the case, Karki said, “Those who wrote the statute are in the streets claiming that the Constitution has been derailed.”
He added that the Constitutional Bench should, therefore, give its verdict considering “what is written in the constitution and nothing else”.
Senior Advocate Karki further argued that it is up to the justices to interpret the Constitution, “but what should be not be forgotten is that there are the bases for interpretation.”
He told the bench that others might study whether the interpretation is as per the constitution or not.
According to Karki, the intention of the legislature and the spirit of the constitution can help in interpreting the words written in the constitution.
In fact, Karki’s argument gave a sense that the dissolution of HoR was unconstitutional.
Comment