The Supreme Court has asked the federal government led by Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli why it should not be declared a caretaker government.
On Friday, a single bench of Justice Sunil Kumar Pokharel issued a show-cause order to PM Oli and other respondents, asking them to address four specific points.
A writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court on August 21, claiming that the government had fallen into a minority because Oli failed to seek a vote of confidence within 30 days after the Nagarik Unmukti Party (NUP) withdrew its support for the government on July 6.
After the preliminary hearing on the petition on Sunday, Justice Pokharel's bench issued a show-cause order to the respondents. Both parties have been summoned for a discussion on August 27 to determine whether an interim order should be issued.
The Supreme Court's first question is why an interim order should not be issued to declare the current government a caretaker government.
“Given that the prime minister has not sought a vote of confidence in the House of Representatives, raising questions about the legitimacy of the government, should an interim order be issued to declare such a government a caretaker government or not?” the court asks.
According to Article 100 (2) of the Constitution, if a party participating in the government withdraws its support, the prime minister must seek a vote of confidence within 30 days.
The petitioner, advocate Birendra KC, has cited that the Janata Samajwadi Party Nepal, led by Upendra Yadav, also withdrew its support. The party withdrew its support on July 15.
The second question focuses on this issue and asks whether an interim order can be issued or not.
"Can an interim order be issued or not, given that even after the Janata Samajwadi Party (JSP), which was not part of the government but supported it, withdrew its support, which attracts the constitutional provision under Article 100 (2) of the Constitution, but has not been complied with?" states the second question.
After this petition was filed, Senior Advocate Ishwari Bhattarai and Advocate Rajendra Ghimire, representing NUP Chair Ranjita Shrestha, argued at the Supreme Court on Friday.
They presented a letter written by the NUP to House of Representatives Speaker Devraj Ghimire. The letter, dated August 15 and addressed to Speaker Ghimire, requested the annulment of the letter dated July 6 that had stated the withdrawal of the party’s support.
The third question raised is whether the constitutional provision is attracted since the letter was written after the 30-day period had expired.
Finally, the Supreme Court questions whether the provision in Article 100 (2) of the Constitution is mandatory.
The respondents have been ordered to submit written answers to these four questions within 15 days, excluding the time for transit, through the Office of the Attorney General.
The petition was filed naming PM Oli, the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, Speaker Devraj Ghimire, the Federal Parliament Secretariat, and the President’s Office as respondents.
The petition was filed with the claim that since Oli did not seek a vote of confidence within 30 days after a party participating in the government withdrew its support, as per constitutional provisions, the government has been reduced to a minority.
It argued that, given the caretaker status of the current government, the president should call for the formation of a new government under Article 76 of the Constitution.
The petition sought orders, including prohibition and mandamus, to facilitate the formation of a new government under Article 76.
Also, it demanded an interim order, claiming that an "unconstitutional government" is continuing to operate.
The petition demanded that the current government led by PM Oli be declared a caretaker government with necessary constitutional interpretation, and that the Oli-led government be prohibited from making far-reaching or policy-related decisions beyond routine operations.
