Manoj Kumar Sharma: Parliamentary Hearing Concludes Swiftly, Unanimous Appointment as Chief Justice
Image Source, RSS
The Parliamentary Joint Committee has approved the name of Manoj Kumar Sharma as Chief Justice after his responses to members’ questions.
Following the Constitutional Council’s recommendation of Manoj Kumar Sharma as the next Chief Justice amid intense debate, the Federal Parliament has given its approval.
The Council had recommended Sharma, who ranks fourth in seniority, surpassing three other senior judges.
According to Anand Prasad Dhungana, member of the Parliamentary Joint Committee, the decision was unanimous.
“Members from UML and NCP were present as well, and since no one opposed the endorsement, the decision was unanimous,” said Dhungana, a member of Nepali Congress. “We are now forwarding it to the President’s Office.”
When Will the Appointment and Oath-Taking Occur?
Since the Committee has approved the name, it is anticipated that President Ramchandra Paudel will appoint Sharma as Chief Justice on Tuesday, with the oath-taking likely to happen the same day.
“According to the information we have received, the oath-taking will take place today,” said RASWPA member Madhukumar Chaulagain.
Supreme Court spokesperson Pande added, “The swearing-in and formal assumption of office could happen today as well.”
Despite being appointed alongside other judges, Sharma was recommended as Chief Justice ahead of senior judges Hari Phuyal, Sapana Pradhan Malla, and Kumar Regmi, all appointed before him.
Members’ Questions and Sharma’s Responses
Image Source, RSS
Members of the Parliamentary Hearing Committee questioned Sharma on various issues related to his appointment as Chief Justice.
Among the queries were allegations of having taken NRs 7 million from a service recipient and later returning it, and about not registering a petition filed against his recommendation as Chief Justice, which had been rejected.
Sharma denied the NRs 7 million allegation, characterizing the rejection of the petition as an administrative decision.
The controversy intensified when a former Chief Justice Sapana Pradhan Malla, who was the acting administrative head of the court, issued an order on Monday stating that the registrar had refused to register the petition on Sharma’s instruction.
However, Sharma responded, “The court administration is responsible for this matter; it acts independently and I believe discretion was exercised by the administration. I prefer not to elaborate further on this.”
Hearings in the Supreme Court Amid Lawyers’ Protests
Image Source, RSS
Former acting administrative head Malla had issued an order on Monday to register pending petitions by 1 PM and schedule them for hearing on Tuesday.
Assistant spokesperson Nirajan Pande informed that petitions unregistered by Monday remained unregistered as of Tuesday afternoon. “No registration was done yesterday, and there is no update for today,” he said.
However, the Nepal Bar Association, the umbrella organization of lawyers, has protested citing obstruction of justice. Lawyers, including bar officials, staged a symbolic candlelight demonstration at the Association’s office adjacent to the Supreme Court.
While lawyers protested, members of parliament were occupied with the Chief Justice’s hearing.
Senior judges, who are senior to Sharma, were engaged in case hearings during the parliamentary questioning of the proposed Chief Justice.
Officials reported that despite Monday’s controversy, normal Supreme Court operations continued.
Assistant spokesperson Pande said, “Various parties are filing cases, hearings are ongoing, and routine work is continuing normally.”
Hearing Conducted on a ‘Fast Track’
The Parliamentary Committee had given a 10-day window for complaints against the proposed judge, calling those who submitted complaints to provide explanations on Tuesday morning.
Opposition parliamentarians requested an additional day to review complaints, urging against rushing the process.
However, the Committee Chair and ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RASWPA) members proposed proceeding with initial examination of complaints and discussing additional time if necessary, which led to progress in the decision-making process.
Lawmakers from the UML and Nepali Communist Party had demanded a hearing by Wednesday.
With the hearing completed on Tuesday itself, these parties also extended their support for the appointment.
Who is Manoj Kumar Sharma?
Sixty-six-year-old Sharma was appointed as a judge from being a lawyer at the then Appellate Court.
However, following the 2015 Constitution which ended the provision of temporary judges, Sharma was not appointed to the High Court but later in 2019 was appointed simultaneously as a Supreme Court judge.
Based on his age, Sharma is projected to serve as Chief Justice for six years.
Sharma entered the Supreme Court together with Hari Phuyal, who had served as Attorney General during KP Sharma Oli’s premiership.
Although there was strong opposition against appointing legal professionals who had not yet achieved the status of senior advocate as Supreme Court judges, advocates argued that Phuyal was already an Attorney General.
According to insiders, former Prime Minister Oli insisted on Phuyal’s appointment, and then Chief Justice Cholendra Shamsher Rana proposed Sharma’s name to facilitate that process.
Sharma holds a BL degree from Nepal Law Campus, Kathmandu, and an LLM from Pune University in India, as detailed on the Supreme Court’s website.