Lawyers have argued at the Supreme Court during the hearing on the writ petitions filed against the dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR) that a prime minister who has lost the vote of confidence in the House cannot lay claim to form the government again.
While placing their arguments at the Supreme Court today, advocates Khamma Bahadur Khati and Govinda Bandi mentioned that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli who had already lost the vote of confidence in the Parliament did not have the right to make a claim to form a government again.
Khati said that the notice issued by President Bidhya Devi Bhandari on May 21 had made a reference to Article 76 (5) of the Constitution of Nepal. However, the claim that PM Oli made by furnishing the signatures of 153 lawmakers is based on parliamentary system but Article 76 (5) does not follow it, he said.
Moreover, Khati also stated that the president’s position in Nepal is just a ceremonial one and President Bhandari did not have the right to define the constitution in the wrong manner.
Meanwhile, Bandi mentioned that PM Oli did not win the vote of confidence as per Article 76 (3) of the Constitution. He added that the prime minister did not want to move forward as per Article 76 (4) citing that the situation was the same. So, when the prime minister had already lost the vote of confidence did he have the right to claim to form the government, he questioned.
During the argument, Bandi also mentioned that the prime minister and president had wrongly defined the constitution. He also said that it was not good for the country for the president to enter politics.
There have been 30 writ petitions filed at the Supreme Court against the dissolution of the House of Representatives. The first writ being heard is the one filed by 146 erstwhile lawmakers of the House.
