Former Chief Justices Share Views on Appointment Recommendation of Chief Justice

April 7, Kathmandu. The Constitutional Council has decided to recommend Dr. Manojkumar Sharma, a Supreme Court justice, for the position of Chief Justice. Among the six candidates eligible for the role, Sharma ranked fourth in seniority. Judges Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Regmi, and Hari Phuyal are senior to Sharma. We have sought the perspectives of three former Chief Justices regarding this recommendation.

According to former Supreme Court Chief Justice Gauri Dhakal, the council’s decision sends a negative message to the public. She states, “It is not just about serving justice; it conveys a message of serving injustice. This will have an adverse impact on the administration of justice.” Another former Chief Justice, Balram KC, believes the government has made a decision that affects the judiciary. He holds the view that acting Chief Justice Sapana Pradhan Malla is fully qualified and capable in every respect.

Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Girishchandra Lal suggests the decision should be seen in a positive light. He comments, “This decision might have been made to avoid political interference. It could also be due to the absence of political affiliation. Although it differs from previous decisions, it should not be wholly criticized. I wouldn’t call it excellent either.”

Gauri Dhakal (former Chief Justice, Supreme Court) said, “When recommendations are made bypassing seniority, those aspiring to become judges are compelled to reconsider three times. I myself have experienced this. When I was in the High Court, a junior judge was appointed as Chief Justice instead of me. I was mentally unwell during that time. I fully understand the mental state in such circumstances.” Balram KC (former Chief Justice, Supreme Court) said, “I have supported this government’s work, but I cannot support this decision. The government should not have interfered in the judiciary at this time.”

Girishchandra Lal (former Chief Justice, Supreme Court) said, “Generally, the Chief Justice is recommended based on seniority. However, there is no constitutional obligation that it must be only based on seniority. The council can decide according to the circumstances.”