Kathmandu, August 20
Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) chair Rabi Lamichhane has said a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives alone is not sufficient to amend Nepal’s Constitution.
Speaking at the House State Affairs and Good Governance Committee meeting on Thursday, Lamichhane urged RSP lawmakers to exercise caution when raising the issue of constitutional amendment.
“Some colleagues have said that we will amend the Constitution. Securing a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives is not, by itself, enough for a constitutional amendment,” Lamichhane said.
He said lawmakers must consider the sensitivity of the issue and pay attention to the constitutional and legal provisions governing amendments.
Lamichhane said he welcomed the position that the RSP would support the government, provided it was consistent with the facts, law and Constitution.
“The spirit is right. But we have to keep the facts, law and Constitution in mind,” he said.
He stressed that political parties should work within the existing constitutional framework and focus on fulfilling the mandate given by the people as fully as possible.
Lamichhane also cautioned lawmakers against making sweeping allegations against constitutional bodies and their officials.
“We cannot simply say that the courts belong to one party and this institution belongs to another,” he said, arguing that officials of constitutional bodies are appointed under the provisions of the Constitution to perform responsibilities assigned to them.
He said excessive allegations against institutions and their leaders could undermine their dignity and credibility.
Lamichhane said he was not defending individuals but was concerned about protecting the integrity of institutions.
“My realisation is that if we keep weakening institutions, it will ultimately weaken democracy,” he said.
He warned that attempts to undermine democratic institutions out of personal grievances could gradually erode their strength and eventually reduce public trust in them to zero.
“That will ultimately take democracy and the system to a point of collapse,” he said.
Lamichhane said he did not want a society in which no one respects or trusts anyone else.
He argued that any constitutional amendment should seek to strengthen the democratic system rather than weaken it.
“If possible, an amendment should add one or two bricks to the system; if not, we should at least find a way to prevent its erosion while resolving the problems,” Lamichhane said.
