Kathmandu, September 29
Members of the House of Representatives have questioned a bill seeking to restore provisions of 85 laws that were rendered inactive by an ordinance issued by the government.
During the discussion on the bill, lawmakers questioned why the ordinance was introduced to remove public officeholders if the previous legal provisions were to be restored later.
CPN-UML lawmaker Pushpa Raj Kandel questioned the necessity of the bill, saying it was unnecessary because the Supreme Court had already interpreted that the previous legal provisions would automatically come into effect once an ordinance became inactive.
He also questioned the government’s commitment to stability, good governance and establishing a system of governance. Kandel said the government had removed provisions from laws for a specific purpose three months earlier and was now restoring them for its own interests.
The Special Provision Ordinance on the Removal of Public Officeholders was issued. It amended 110 existing laws and resulted in the removal of 1,534 public officeholders.
No new appointments have been made to the vacant positions. The government has now introduced the bill to restore the previous provisions in 85 of the 110 laws amended by the ordinance.
Nepali Congress Whip Nishkal Rai also questioned the move, asking why the previous provisions were scrapped if they were appropriate.
Nepali Communist Party lawmaker Balawati Sharma said the government had removed officeholders without justification.
