 |
Kathmandu Wednesday October 03, 2001 Ashwin 17, 2058.
|
CIAA bill
The debate on the bill that empowers the
Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) has taken a serious turn
after the Chief Justice sharply criticised it. Some members of Parliament from the ruling
party have come up with suggestions that the government withdraw the bill as it undermines
the judiciary system of this country. The bill clearly enables the CIAA to probe and
prosecute corrupt judges. The Chief Justice questioned the bill that directly undermines
the "independence" of legal system. Any measure to prevent corrupt practices or
prosecute corrupt judges should come from within the judicial system. This comment about
the bill made by the Chief Justice has generated some controversy, especially in the
political and legal circles. However, the government, or in that case, any political party
cannot push a bill that limits the independence of judiciary of any democratic country.
Neither can the Chief Justice of a democratic country justify what is not truly practised
in public meeting.
The bill, waiting for a final push in
Parliament, took a new turn the other day when some NC parliamentarians dubbed it a move
against the pluralistic values. The Supreme Court (SC) judges must be given due respect as
they hold the highest public office of this country, and hence the bill
should be withdrawn, said the parliamentarians . Until a few provisions that empower the
CIAA are reconsidered, the government cannot enact the bill. Besides, parliamentarians
must hold constructive debates before the bill is enacted into law. There are many
democratic countries which have introduced laws to prosecute corrupt judges. And one
cannot ignore them, saying that judges are always honest and thus no actions are needed to
put them on the right track. However, one thing is clear that the government tabled the
bill without the knowledge of its flaws. Now it has attempted to withdraw it citing
conflicts with the Constitution.
Last week, the Chief Justice in a public meeting
accused the ruling political party of empowering a body to investigate the judges of the
SC. A few days later, a similar accusation was hurled by a justice of the SC. Here, what
both legal eagles intended to indicate was that the CIAA would be deemed above the SC once
the bill got enacted. If the SC is brought within the jurisdiction of CIAA, then the SC
will lose its judicial supremacy. The way the two legal eagles viewed the bill shows that
the SC is constitutionally a public office which is supreme in itself. It should remain as
an independent entity so long as the judges believe in it. Certainly, the judiciary of any
democratic country has always been considered an independent entity. However, there are
certain constitutional provisions where corrupt judges can be prosecuted. Back home, we
can also amend the present Constitution with such provisions.
Other Stories
|
