Rights groups stand by impeachment allegations. Government pushes back

Allegations of impending impeachment motions against Supreme Court justices in Nepal have escalated into a high-stakes international confrontation, stemming from an internal judicial dispute. Three prominent global human rights organizations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the International Commission of Jurists, issued a joint statement claiming they received credible information that justices were being pressured to resign under threat of impeachment.

“

We do not have any report provided by anyone. However, we issued this statement on the basis of information we received from credible and highly reliable sources.

However, these organizations have not publicly released the reports or evidence supporting their claims. A representative from one of the groups stated the information was based on credible sources but declined to disclose specifics. Nirajan Thapaliya, Director of Amnesty International Nepal, confirmed the statement was based on information from reliable sources, not a written report, and that they stand by their position.

“

As a student of law, I am exceptionally clear about the limits of government power and the delicate sensitivity required when dealing with the judiciary.

The Nepali government and the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) have strongly rejected these allegations. Minister for Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Sobita Gautam dismissed the claims, asserting the executive branch respects constitutional boundaries and challenged the international groups to substantiate their accusations. RSP General Secretary Bipin Acharya echoed these sentiments, labeling the charges as baseless and stating the party had not considered impeachment.

“

Those who issued the statement must verify their claims. Making mere accusations is insufficient.

Despite official denials, the international involvement has heightened scrutiny of Nepal's Supreme Court dynamics. Observers point to increased friction within the judiciary following the Constitutional Council's recommendation of Justice Manoj Sharma for Chief Justice, bypassing the traditional seniority order. This move was publicly opposed by the senior-most Justice Sapana Pradhan Malla, and Justice Sharma subsequently took a leave of absence. Legal experts express concern that the public hostility between international watchdogs and the government could endanger the judicial system.

“

The charges are baseless.