KATHMANDU: A written petition has been filed at the Parliamentary Hearing Committee of the Federal Parliament demanding the rejection of the appointment of Chief Justice nominee Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma.
The petition, registered by Jasmine Ojha of Maitidevi, Kathmandu, raises serious concerns over constitutional eligibility, ethics, impartiality and institutional integrity in relation to Sharma’s nomination.
The petition outlines multiple objections, including questions over constitutional qualification, alleged influence in judicial appointments, and concerns about impartiality and bias.
It also cites controversies surrounding judicial decisions, including rulings involving individuals convicted in corruption cases and their return to public office.
Further concerns include alleged proximity to former Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana, disputes over appointment processes, and wider public debates on bench fixing and influence in the judiciary.
The petition also refers to questions raised regarding constitutional eligibility of former Law Minister Anil Kumar Sinha during meetings of the Judicial Council, as well as concerns over the timing of the recommendation during a transitional political period.
Ojha argues that Sharma may not be able to uphold the dignity of the Chief Justice’s office, stating that the position represents the constitutional soul of the nation and the highest symbol of judicial integrity.
She further states that appointing a controversial figure could undermine public trust in the judiciary and constitutional governance.
Ojha also claims that attempts to secure high constitutional positions without fulfilling required qualifications reflect bad intent from the outset.
She has demanded that the appointment be rejected and, if necessary, impeachment proceedings be initiated.
The petition has already been registered at the Parliament Secretariat, while the hearing committee is expected to review objections before finalising its decision on the nomination.
The Parliamentary Hearing Committee is scheduled to decide whether to approve or reject Sharma’s appointment after reviewing the submissions and complaints filed against him.
Comment