E-Kantipur

KATHMANDU, FEB 05 - Amid growing confusion about retroactivity of the seventh amendment to the Interim Constitution, inactive Vice President Paramananda Jha has made up his mind not to take oath in the Nepali language, giving rise to possible continuation of legal controversies.

Jha, who refused to take oath in Nepali even after a Supreme Court order some five months ago, had publicly said on Sept. 2 that he could ‘consider” implementing the court order after the House amends the constitution.

“The vice president will never take oath in Nepali, rather he will go for Sanskrit or any other language,” said Jha’s legal aide Mithilesh Kumar Singh, who had pleaded on behalf of Jha at the apex court. “He will probably take oath in Hindi to support the cause of One Madhes One Province.”

Minister for Law and Justice Prem Bahadur Singh, however, claims that despite the amendment, Jha must take oath in Nepali. As for taking oath in other languages such as Maithali or Hindi, he can do so after taking oath in Nepali. In line with Singh, Senior Advocate Harihar Dahal argues that since the seventh amendment is not retroactive, it will be “unconstitutional” and against the Aug. 23 apex court judgement to reinstate Jha without making him take oath in Nepali. The amendment, he says, applies to future (vice) presidents only.  “Since the resolution motion cannot overrule the constitution, the way the government is reactivating the vice president is sure to invite another legal question all over again,” said Dahal.

Jha, on the other hand, is determined not to move an inch from his stand. According to Jha’ legal advisers, he would choose to completely give up the position rather than take oath in Nepali. “He is least bothered about the position,” said Jha’s legal adviser. “If the seventh amendment fails to reactivate the vice president, there will be an eighth amendment. It’s not a big deal.”

Former Chairman of Nepal Bar Association and Senior Advocate Bishwo Kant Mainali says Jha’s refusal to take oath in Nepali is more a moral issue than a legal one. “Jha’s refusal to take oath in Nepali should not be a problem as the issue now is not under the jurisdiction of the court but the Constituent Assembly (CA),” says Mainali. “This is a moral question but it does not make sense to the parties and the CA that have no moral values. If the reactivation of the vice president without making him take an oath in Nepali resolves the controversy, that is fine. But if this is part of a grand design, then it won’t be acceptable.”

Posted on: 2010-02-05 09:43

Post Your Comment

Please note that all the fields marked * are mandatory.
* Full Name
* Address
* Email Address
* Comment
* Captcha	Get another CAPTCHA code
Note:	Comments containing abusive words or slander shall not be published.