Rights groups skip Nepal parliamentary talks on alleged pressure on Supreme Court justices

A parliamentary committee in Nepal convened to discuss allegations of government pressure on Supreme Court justices, but three prominent international human rights organizations failed to appear despite being invited. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), who had previously issued a joint statement expressing concern over threats to judicial independence, were expected to present their findings.

The Law, Justice and Human Rights Committee of the House of Representatives began its meeting at 9:30 am, with attendees including Law Minister Sobita Gautam, Supreme Court Chief Registrar Bimal Paudel, and constitutional experts. However, representatives from the three rights groups were notably absent. Committee chair Samikshya Baskota confirmed that while Amnesty International and the ICJ had initially agreed to participate, none of the organizations ultimately sent representatives.

In late July, the three organizations issued a joint statement highlighting what they described as increasing political interference in Nepal's judiciary. They specifically criticized the amendment of the Constitutional Council Act via an ordinance, arguing that changes to quorum and voting provisions could enhance political influence over appointments to key judicial positions, including the chief justice. The groups also questioned the appointment of Manoj Kumar Sharma as chief justice, noting it deviated from the convention of appointing the most senior justice.

Furthermore, the organizations reported receiving credible information that three senior Supreme Court justices, Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Regmi, and Hari Phuyal, faced pressure to resign under threat of impeachment. They stated they were unaware of any publicly disclosed allegations against these judges that met the constitutional threshold for impeachment. The groups warned that using impeachment threats without clear constitutional grounds could foster a perception of political manipulation aimed at influencing court composition and affecting ongoing constitutional cases. They urged the Nepalese government to uphold judicial independence and ensure that appointments and reforms adhere to transparent, merit-based processes.