Nepal’s legislature is the body responsible for making laws, ensuring checks and balances, and representing the people’s interests in the governance of the country. It is structured as a bicameral parliamentary system, meaning it consists of two separate houses: the House of Representatives (HoR) and the National Assembly (NA). This dual-chamber system is part of Nepal’s Constitution of 2015, which established the country as a federal democratic republic. The federal system is designed to give both federal and provincial governance equal importance, ensuring a broad representation of diverse interests from across the country.
The legislature is a central pillar of Nepal’s democracy, alongside the executive and the judiciary, ensuring the democratic principle of separation of powers. The legislative process in Nepal allows elected representatives from different regions and political backgrounds to participate in national decision-making. Through this process, the people of Nepal are able to influence the creation and modification of laws. The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 has created a framework in which Nepal’s legislature holds significant powers, particularly in lawmaking, holding the government accountable, and ensuring that the executive does not exceed its constitutional limits.
Before the establishment of this modern democratic structure, Nepal’s legislature underwent several transformations. For much of its history, Nepal had a unitary monarchy that centralized power in the hands of the King, and legislative functions were severely limited under systems like the Panchayat system. However, after the restoration of multiparty democracy in 1990 and the abolition of the monarchy in 2008, Nepal adopted the republican constitution, setting the stage for the current legislative framework. The Parliament now plays a vital role in ensuring democratic governance, representing diverse political ideologies, and serving as a forum for debate and policy discussion.
In its modern form, the legislature is tasked with enacting laws on various issues, such as national defense, foreign policy, fiscal policies, and key aspects of Nepal’s economy. It also plays a critical role in ensuring the government’s accountability by questioning executive actions and debating national policies. This body, composed of elected representatives, ensures that decisions affecting the country are made in an open, democratic process. In this way, the legislature holds significant power in maintaining Nepal’s political system and functioning as the backbone of democratic governance.
Structure of Nepal’s Federal Parliament
Nepal’s Federal Parliament consists of two houses: the House of Representatives (HoR) and the National Assembly (NA). The bicameral structure of Nepal’s Parliament reflects the country’s commitment to ensuring broad-based representation, providing space for regional and national interests to be addressed. This two-house system was introduced under the Constitution of Nepal, 2015, and it seeks to balance the interests of the central government and provincial bodies.
The House of Representatives is the lower house of the Federal Parliament, consisting of 275 members. Of these members, 165 are elected through the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system, while the remaining 110 are elected through the Proportional Representation (PR) system. The purpose of the mixed electoral system is to ensure that the House of Representatives adequately reflects the diverse political preferences and regional representation of the Nepali population. The House of Representatives is the primary legislative chamber where most laws are debated, proposed, and passed. Members of this house are directly elected by the people, giving them the mandate to represent their constituencies.
The National Assembly, on the other hand, is the upper house of Nepal’s Federal Parliament. The National Assembly consists of 59 members who serve six-year terms. For the first election, however, one-third of the members were elected for a two-year term, another third for four years, and the remaining third for six years. This was done to ensure that the National Assembly, known as the permanent house, would not remain vacant.
These members are not directly elected by the public but are instead chosen through a system of indirect elections. Fifty-six members are elected by the members of the Provincial Assemblies, along with the Chairs and Vice Chairs of Rural Municipalities, and the Mayors and Deputy Mayors of municipalities, with each group having a different weightage for their electoral votes. Each province selects eight representatives.
The remaining three members are appointed by the President of Nepal, which allows for the inclusion of individuals with expertise in different fields. The National Assembly’s role is primarily to act as a revising chamber, reviewing and making recommendations on the laws passed by the House of Representatives. While the National Assembly holds a crucial position in the legislative process, it has relatively less legislative power compared to the House of Representatives.
This structure of the Federal Parliament was designed to represent both the population and the provinces of Nepal. By giving provinces, a larger voice in the National Assembly, Nepal’s constitution seeks to ensure that the interests of different regions are considered in the national legislative process. Additionally, the division between the two houses allows for a more thorough review of legislative proposals, with the House of Representatives focusing on direct representation and lawmaking, while the National Assembly plays a significant role in revising and refining legislation before it is passed into law.
This bicameral structure was adopted to reflect Nepal’s transition into a federal state, wherein provincial autonomy is recognized alongside the national government’s authority. This system of representation allows for the political inclusion of Nepal’s diverse communities, ethnic groups, and regional interests, ensuring that all voices are heard in the lawmaking process. The Federal Parliament, as outlined in the Constitution of Nepal, 2015, is essential to the democratic framework of the country, ensuring that laws are made with broad consultation and representation from both the center and the regions.
History of Nepal’s legislature
The history of Nepal’s legislature is one of significant change, shaped by the country’s political evolution from a monarchy to a federal democratic republic. Nepal’s legislative history began in the late 1950s. The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1959 established a parliamentary system, creating a bicameral legislature consisting of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly. This period marked the first time that Nepal’s monarchy allowed for the establishment of a democratic government with elected representatives. However, this early period of democracy was short-lived. On December 15, 1960, King Mahendra dissolved the Parliament, suspended the Constitution, and introduced the Panchayat system, a party-less political system where all power was centralized in the hands of the King.
The Panchayat era (1961-1990) was a dark period in Nepal’s political history, as the legislature became nothing more than a rubber-stamp body that rubber-stamped decisions made by the King. The King controlled the Rastriya Panchayat, which was the only legislative body during this time. The Panchayat system severely limited political freedoms, banned political parties, and suppressed democratic dissent. The legislature was effectively reduced to a tool for the King to implement his policies without any meaningful opposition or representation from the people.
However, in 1990, the People’s Movement (Jana Andolan) resulted in the restoration of multiparty democracy. The monarchy was forced to accept a new Constitution of 1990, which re-established a parliamentary democracy, created a bicameral legislature, and allowed for the formation of political parties. The House of Representatives and National Assembly were reintroduced, and elections were held for the first time in 1991. This period also marked a shift towards the decentralization of power, although Nepal still retained a constitutional monarchy.
The political landscape of Nepal underwent another transformation after the Maoist insurgency (1996-2006), which led to the Comprehensive Peace Accord in 2006. This accord resulted in the formal abolition of the monarchy in 2008 and the declaration of Nepal as a republic. The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 established the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, with a new bicameral federal legislature. This was the culmination of years of political struggle, where the legislature evolved to reflect the country’s transition from an absolute monarchy to a federal republic with democratic principles enshrined in the constitution.
What was the role of the Rashtriya Panchayat during the Panchayat era?
The Rashtriya Panchayat played a key role during Nepal’s Panchayat era, a period of autocratic monarchy that lasted from 1961 to 1990. The Panchayat system was established by King Mahendra after the dissolution of Nepal’s first Parliament and the dismissal of Prime Minister Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala. It was a party-less political system, where all political parties were banned, and the King held absolute power over the state.
The Rashtriya Panchayat was essentially a rubber-stamp legislature under the King’s control. Under the Constitution of Nepal 1962, there were indirect elections to the Rastriya Panchayat. The 1980 referendum voted in favor of a reformed Rastriya Panchayat and consequently, members were directly elected. The King had complete control over the legislative body, rendering it largely ineffective in terms of democratic representation and law-making.
The primary role of the Rastriya Panchayat was to approve decisions made by the King. The King had the absolute power to dissolve the Panchayat, call elections, and amend the constitution without any significant opposition. Political freedoms were severely restricted during this time, and dissent was suppressed through the centralized control of the monarchy.
First Constituent Assembly
The first Nepalese Constituent Assembly (CA) was a unicameral body of 601 members, active from May 28, 2008, to May 28, 2012. It was formed after the first election on April 10, 2008, with the goal of writing a new constitution and acting as an interim legislature for two years.
The assembly included 240 elected members from single-seat constituencies, 335 elected through proportional representation, and 26 nominated members. The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) was the largest party. The CA declared Nepal a republic on May 28, 2008, ending the monarchy.
The 26 nominated seats were shared among nine parties, with the Maoists, Nepali Congress, and CPN (UML) receiving the majority. Despite efforts, the CA failed to draft a new constitution and was dissolved after four years on May 28, 2012.
Second Constituent Assembly
The Second Constituent Assembly of Nepal, later transformed into the Legislature Parliament, was a unicameral legislature. It was elected in 2013 after the first assembly failed to draft a new constitution. The Assembly became the Legislature Parliament after the constitution was enacted in 2015 and served until October 14, 2017.
The first meeting took place on January 21, 2014, with former Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa, the oldest member, presiding. Over 80% of the members were new, and leaders of major parties, including the NC, CPN-UML, and UCPN (Maoist), committed to finalizing the new constitution within a year.
Current parliamentary setup
The Constitution of 2015 created a bicameral legislative system with two houses: the House of Representatives and the National Assembly, both of which serve to represent the people’s interests. The shift to a federal structure also meant that the provinces had a more significant role in governance, and the legislative system was reformed to reflect the ethnic, regional, and political diversity of the country. The legislature’s role was thus expanded, and its power to make and review laws was significantly strengthened. The Federal Parliament now stands as one of the most powerful democratic institutions in Nepal, overseeing the national government’s functioning, enacting laws, and holding the executive accountable.
What powers does the Federal Parliament have?
Nepal’s Federal Parliament is vested with significant powers and responsibilities, as outlined in the Constitution of Nepal, 2015. These powers enable Parliament to play a central role in shaping the country’s governance, enacting laws, ensuring checks on executive power, and maintaining democratic principles. The Federal Parliament is tasked with ensuring that Nepal’s government operates transparently and is accountable to the people.
The primary function of Nepal’s Federal Parliament is lawmaking. As the central body in the legislative process, Parliament has the authority to propose, debate, amend, and pass laws that affect a range of national and federal matters. The House of Representatives holds the main responsibility for lawmaking, while the National Assembly plays a revising role. The laws passed by Parliament cover issues such as national defense, foreign policy, education, healthcare, environmental protection, and economic policy. By passing these laws, Parliament helps to regulate the functioning of the government and ensure that the country moves forward according to a legal framework that reflects the values of the people.
Parliament also has the power to approve the national budget. The government presents its budget proposal to the House of Representatives, which then has the power to approve or amend the budget. This is one of Parliament’s most significant powers because it directly influences how the government allocates public funds to various sectors, including social welfare, infrastructure, and development programs. The House of Representatives plays a critical role in overseeing how public money is spent and ensuring that government priorities align with national needs.
Moreover, the Federal Parliament holds oversight powers over the executive branch. The Parliament can question ministers, debate their actions, and hold them accountable for their policies. It can also investigate government activities through parliamentary committees, which have the authority to summon officials for testimony and produce reports on government performance. Through this oversight, Parliament ensures that the executive operates within the limits of the law and remains accountable to the people.
In addition to lawmaking and oversight, the Federal Parliament of Nepal has the authority to elect the Prime Minister from among the members of the House of Representatives. The Prime Minister is the head of government, and his or her election is a key function of the legislature. Parliament also has the power to sack the Prime Minister and impeach the President in cases of constitutional violations, further ensuring that the executive is held to account.
The amendment process also lies within the jurisdiction of the Federal Parliament. Amendments to the Constitution require the approval of a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the National Assembly. This gives Parliament the authority to modify the Constitution in response to changing political, social, or economic conditions, thus ensuring that the legal framework of the country remains flexible and responsive to the needs of the people.
What are the major political parties in Nepal’s current legislature?
Nepal’s legislature is composed of several major political parties, each representing different ideologies, communities, and regional interests. These parties form the backbone of the country’s vibrant and complex political landscape, influencing policies, shaping public debates, and controlling governance at different times.
Nepali Congress (NC): The Nepali Congress (NC) is the largest political party in Nepal, traditionally associated with the pro-democracy movement. Founded in 1947, the NC has played a crucial role in the democratization of Nepal, particularly during the 1990 People’s Movement that ended the Panchayat regime. Sher Bahadur Deuba, a five-time Prime Minister, is the current leader of the NC. The party advocates for liberal democracy, the protection of human rights, and the welfare of all citizens, especially marginalized groups. The NC has historically been a dominant force in Nepal’s political scene, although it has faced challenges from both leftist parties and newer political formations in recent years.
Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist): Another major political party in Nepal’s legislature is the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) or CPN-UML. As a center-left party, CPN-UML advocates for socialism, social justice, and the empowerment of the working class. It has consistently been one of the dominant forces in Nepalese politics, often forming coalition governments. The party’s leader, Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli (KP Oli), is currently serving as the Prime Minister of Nepal. CPN-UML has had significant influence over the political, economic, and social direction of Nepal, especially during the years following the monarchy’s abolition in 2008.
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre): The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre), once a rebel group involved in a decade-long insurgency against the monarchy, is now a major political party in Nepal. Led by Prachanda, who is also a former Prime Minister, this party’s transformation from an armed revolutionary movement to a legitimate political entity has been one of the most dramatic in Nepal’s modern history. The Maoist Centre advocates for a strong central government, the protection of national sovereignty, and pro-poor economic policies. The party was pivotal in the peace process that ended the Maoist insurgency and in the establishment of Nepal as a republic in 2008.
Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP): The Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) is a right-wing party that advocates for the restoration of Nepal’s constitutional monarchy and the establishment of Hinduism as the state religion. It is led by Rajendra Lingden and represents a segment of the population that is nostalgic for the monarchy and seeks a return to the system before the monarchy’s abolition in 2008. The RPP is also vocal about nationalism and the preservation of Nepal’s cultural heritage, promoting policies that emphasize Nepal’s distinct Hindu identity.
Rashtriya Swatantra Party (RSP): A newer player on the political scene, the Rashtriya Swatantra Party gained significant traction in the 2022 general elections. Led by Rabi Lamichhane, the party focuses on issues such as governance reform, anti-corruption, and the empowerment of youth. Its success in the 2022 elections marked a shift in Nepali politics, as it drew considerable support from voters disillusioned with traditional political parties. This party aims to challenge the status quo and bring about meaningful change in Nepal’s political and economic systems.
Together, these parties form the main political spectrum in Nepal, with each contributing to the formation and functioning of the legislature and playing a key role in the country’s policy-making and governance.
How was Nepal’s first parliament dissolved?
Nepal’s first parliament, established under the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1959, marked the beginning of a democratic process in the country. The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1959, was Nepal’s first attempt at enshrining democratic principles and creating a parliamentary system. However, Nepal’s first Parliament was short-lived, and its dissolution in 1960 set the stage for a period of autocratic rule under King Mahendra.
The Nepali Congress (NC), led by Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala, won the first democratic elections in 1959, and Koirala became the first elected Prime Minister of Nepal. The new government sought to implement policies aimed at democratizing the country and promoting economic development. However, King Mahendra, who was initially expected to play a ceremonial role, grew increasingly dissatisfied with the government. Tensions escalated between the monarchy and the government over various political issues, including control of the military, economic policies, and the implementation of democratic reforms.
In 1960, King Mahendra dissolved the House of Representatives and dismissed Prime Minister Koirala. The King justified this move by invoking Article 55 of the 1959 Constitution, which gave him the power to dissolve Parliament and call for new elections under certain circumstances. This decision effectively ended the first experiment with democracy in Nepal and marked the beginning of authoritarian rule. The King assumed direct control of the country, dismissed the democratic constitution, and replaced the parliamentary system with the Panchayat system in 1961. This new political system, created by King Mahendra, was a party-less, centralized monarchy that remained in power for the next three decades until the 1990 People’s Movement.
What is the history of the dissolution of Nepal’s Parliament?
The dissolution of Nepal’s Parliament has been a recurring theme in the country’s political history, often driven by political instability, monarchical interference, and struggles over democratic governance. The first major dissolution occurred in 1960, when King Mahendra dissolved Nepal’s first Parliament after a conflict with Prime Minister Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala. This led to the establishment of the Panchayat system (a party-less monarchy) in 1961, marking the beginning of a long period of autocratic rule. The dissolution of Parliament effectively ended the experiment with democracy that had begun in 1959.
After the restoration of democracy in 1990, the Parliament was formed, and multi-party democracy was reinstated. However, political instability continued. In November 1994, the then Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala from the Nepali Congress called for a dissolution of parliament and general elections after a procedural defeat on the floor of the House when 36 members of parliament (MPs) of his party went against a government-sponsored vote of confidence. In 2002, the then Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba from the Nepali Congress dissolved Parliament, declared a state of emergency and was eventually sacked by King Gyanendra who in a televised address called his prime minister “incompetent”. King Gyanendra staged a royal-military coup on 1 February 2005, citing political deadlock and the inability of the elected government to form a cohesive administration. This move was widely criticized as an attempt to centralize power in the monarchy, and it led to widespread protests and unrest.
The People’s Movement of 2006 forced King Gyanendra to relinquish control, and Nepal was declared a republic in 2008, officially ending the monarchy. Since then, Nepal has seen several political transitions. After the promulgation of new Constitution in 2015, one of the most high-profile instances of this provision being tested occurred in 2020 when Prime Minister KP Oli recommended the dissolution of Parliament, which led to a significant constitutional crisis. The move was challenged in the Supreme Court, which ultimately declared the dissolution unconstitutional, reaffirming the importance of parliamentary democracy and the rule of law.
What constitutional provisions govern the dissolution of Parliament in Nepal?
The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 lays down clear provisions regarding the dissolution of Parliament. These provisions were designed to ensure a balance of power and prevent arbitrary actions by the executive branch. Article 76 of the Constitution specifies the conditions under which the Prime Minister can recommend the dissolution of Parliament.
The different clauses of this article relate to the situation when the prime minister appointed to lead a government in a hung parliament cannot get the required majority vote with support from another party or other parties.
Article 76 (7) states, “In cases where the Prime Minister appointed under clause (5) fails to obtain a vote of confidence or the Prime Minister cannot be appointed, the President shall, on recommendation of the Prime Minister, dissolve the House of Representatives and appoint a date of election so that the election to another House of Representatives is completed within six months.”
Clause 5 relates to a member of the House of Representative claiming that he or she can get the required majority vote.
However, this provision is meant to be safeguards against the premature or arbitrary dissolution of Parliament, ensuring that such actions only occur under clearly defined circumstances.
What is the role and structure of the Provincial Assemblies?
Nepal’s transition to a federal system under the Constitution of Nepal, 2015 introduced a significant restructuring of governance. The country is divided into seven provinces, each with its own Provincial Assembly. This federal structure was designed to decentralize power from the central government to the provinces, allowing for greater local governance and autonomy.
Structure of Provincial Assemblies: Each provincial assembly has two types of members: those elected directly by the people and those elected through proportional representation. The number of members in each Provincial Assembly is determined by the population size of the province. For example:
Koshi Province has 93 members of whom 56 are elected through first-past-the-post voting and 37 are elected through proportional representation.
Madhesh Province has 107 members, 64 of whom are elected through first-past-the-post voting and 43 of whom are elected through proportional representation.
Directly elected members are chosen through the first-past-the-post system, where the candidate with the most votes in a given electoral district wins a seat. The proportional representation members are elected through a party-list system, which ensures that political parties are represented in the assembly according to their proportion of the total votes in the province.
The Provincial Assemblies are tasked with making laws on matters under their jurisdiction. These areas of governance include health, education, agriculture, and local infrastructure development. The provincial government, through the assembly, is also responsible for implementing national policies at the regional level and managing resources allocated to the province.
Role of Provincial Assemblies: The main function of the Provincial Assemblies is to legislate on matters that fall within provincial jurisdiction, as outlined in the Constitution of Nepal. These include issues such as local development, natural resource management, healthcare, and education. Provincial Assemblies also play a significant role in electing members to the National Assembly and ensuring that the federal government respects the autonomy granted to provinces.
The Provincial Assemblies can also overrule federal decisions on certain matters, provided the decision does not conflict with the Constitution. This system of checks and balances ensures that provincial interests are not overlooked by the central government. However, the role of the provinces remains a subject of ongoing discussion and development, as many provinces continue to face challenges in fully implementing the federal structure.
How does the legislature impact Nepal’s federal system?
The impact of the legislature on Nepal’s federal system is profound, as it governs how power is shared between the central government and the provincial assemblies. The Constitution of Nepal, 2015, divides powers and responsibilities between three levels of government: the federal government, the provincial governments and the local governments. This division is designed to enhance regional governance, promote democracy, and ensure that local issues are addressed in a way that is more relevant to the needs of the population.
The Federal Parliament, consisting of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly, is responsible for handling national issues such as defense, foreign policy, foreign trade, taxation, and currency regulation. These are issues that require a unified national approach, ensuring national security, economic stability, and foreign relations are managed cohesively.
On the other hand, the Provincial Assemblies handle matters of local governance, such as education, health, infrastructure, and resource management. These decisions are critical for the local development of the provinces, and they allow regions to address the unique needs of their populations.
This federal system ensures that the two levels of government can cooperate to implement effective governance. For example, federal laws that directly affect provincial interests must be implemented by the provincial governments, but they also have the power to propose changes or to pass their own laws within their designated areas of jurisdiction.
One of the key challenges in Nepal’s federal system is the slow implementation of federalism. As provinces gradually assume more authority, the process of decentralizing power has faced hurdles such as resource allocation, coordination between the two levels of government, and the development of local institutions capable of handling the newly transferred responsibilities.
Female representation in Nepal’s legislature
Nepal has made significant strides toward improving gender equality in its political system, driven largely by the Constitution of Nepal, 2015, which mandates that at least one-third of the members in the House of Representatives and Provincial Assemblies must be women. This provision is part of Nepal’s broader efforts to ensure gender equity and social justice in the country’s political and legal frameworks.
In terms of proportional representation, political parties are required to nominate women as part of their lists to meet the constitutional threshold. This has significantly increased the participation of women in the political process, including in decision-making positions. For example, the House of Representatives currently exceeds the one-third female representation requirement. Of the total 334 members in the current Federal Parliament, there are 112 (i.e. 33.53%) women members.
Women’s participation in Nepal’s legislature is also supported by the gender equality provisions in the electoral system, which demand that political parties give priority to women in the nomination process. These steps are part of a broader effort to empower women and ensure that they have equal access to political power, leadership roles, and decision-making processes.
Although significant progress has been made, women in Nepal still face challenges, such as gender-based violence, unequal access to resources, and limited opportunities for leadership. However, the constitutional provisions, coupled with the efforts of civil society organizations and political parties, are gradually working toward a more inclusive democracy in which women can play an active role in shaping the country’s future.
How does the legislative process work in Nepal?
The legislative process in Nepal follows a structured sequence designed to ensure comprehensive scrutiny and debate of proposed laws. This process creates a system of checks and balances, incorporating input from various stakeholders before a bill is passed into law. It begins with the proposal of a bill and culminates in the President’s assent, which formalizes the bill as law.
A bill can be proposed by government ministers, members of Parliament, or through private members’ bills, offering a broader spectrum of legislative ideas. Following its introduction, the bill is read for the first time in either the House of Representatives or the National Assembly. This first reading serves to formally present the bill, but no debate occurs at this stage.
Afterward, the bill is referred to the relevant parliamentary committee for detailed scrutiny. In committee, members conduct in-depth discussions, review the bill, and may propose amendments. Once the committee completes its review, the bill returns to the house where it was first introduced for a second reading. This is where debates occur, and members can discuss the merits, flaws, and possible amendments to the bill.
If the bill passes the second reading in the House of Representatives, it moves to the National Assembly, where a similar process of review and debate is conducted. The National Assembly plays a crucial role in ensuring that the bill represents the broader interests of the public.
Finally, after both houses have passed the bill, it is sent to the President for assent. The President’s approval is required for the bill to become law. In practice, the President typically assents to bills that have passed both chambers of Parliament. Once the President grants assent, the bill is officially law and is enforced by the government.
What is the role of the Prime Minister in Nepal’s legislature?
The Prime Minister of Nepal holds a central role in the legislature, serving as the head of government and leader of the executive branch. The Prime Minister is tasked with overseeing the executive functions of government, proposing laws, and managing the national budget. The Prime Minister’s actions are closely tied to the legislature, as they are responsible for maintaining the confidence of the House of Representatives. If the Prime Minister loses this support, they must resign, and new elections are held. The Prime Minister’s role in the legislature is crucial to the functioning of government and the implementation of policies.
What is the role of the President in the legislative process?
The President of Nepal has a ceremonial role in the legislative process. While the President’s powers are limited, they play a crucial part in assenting to bills passed by the legislature. The President also plays a role in summoning and proroguing sessions of Parliament based on the Prime Minister’s advice. Additionally, the President has the power to dissolve Parliament and call for new elections, again on the advice of the Prime Minister.
What is the role of the opposition in Nepal’s legislature?
The opposition plays a critical role in ensuring accountability within Nepal’s legislature. Opposition parties are responsible for critiquing government policies, proposing alternative legislation, and scrutinizing the actions of the ruling party. They also ensure that the executive branch remains transparent and accountable by questioning decisions and demanding clarifications on key issues. The opposition plays a vital role in the legislative process by providing checks on the ruling government and representing the interests of those who are not in power.
Thematic Committees in Nepal’s Parliament
The Parliament of Nepal is composed of two houses: the House of Representatives and the National Assembly. Together, they are supported by a total of 16 thematic committees, each tasked with scrutinizing bills, policies, and government actions within their respective domains. These committees play a critical role in ensuring that the legislative process is thorough, transparent, and responsive to the needs of the people.
In the House of Representatives (HoR), the committees include the Finance Committee, which oversees national financial matters such as budgeting and expenditures; the Committee on International Relations and Tourism, which deals with foreign affairs and tourism-related issues; and the Committee on Industry, Commerce, Labour, and Consumer Welfare, which focuses on industrial, commercial, labor, and consumer interests.
Other important committees include the Committee on Law, Justice, and Human Rights, responsible for legal affairs, the Committee on Agriculture, Cooperative, and Natural Resources, which oversees agricultural development and resource management, and the Parliamentary Hearing Committee, which conducts hearings for appointments to various government positions. Additionally, the Committee on State Affairs and Good Governance monitors state affairs and promotes good governance, while the Committee on Infrastructure Development handles infrastructure projects and development initiatives. The Committee on Education, Health, and Information Technology covers matters related to education, health services, and IT, and the Public Accounts Committee examines government financial records to ensure accountability.
The National Assembly houses several committees as well. The Federalism Enablement and National Concerns Committee addresses issues related to federalism and national interests, while the Development, Economic Affairs and Good Governance Committee focuses on governance and transparency. The Committee for Legislation Management oversees legislative procedures, and the Public Policy and Delegated Legislation Committee reviews public policies and delegated legislative matters. The Parliamentary Hearing Committee in the National Assembly, like its counterpart in the HoR, conducts hearings for officials appointed to government positions. Lastly, the Monitoring and Evaluation of the Implementation of the Directive Principles, Policies, and Obligation of the State Committee ensures that constitutional principles and state obligations are being properly implemented.
These committees are essential in ensuring that the legislative and governance processes in Nepal are both efficient and in line with the public’s needs and expectations. Through their detailed scrutiny and oversight, they help foster a more accountable and responsive government.
What challenges does Nepal’s legislature face?
Despite the progress made in establishing a democratic framework, Nepal’s legislature faces several significant challenges that hinder its full effectiveness. Political instability has been a constant issue, with frequent changes in government, coalition politics, and leadership struggles. This instability often results in delays in the legislative process and prevents the passage of meaningful reforms.
The implementation of federalism has also been slow and complicated. While powers have been decentralized to the provinces, several regions struggle with effectively managing federal laws and local resources. This slow progress continues to affect the delivery of essential public services and hampers the overall development of the country.
Corruption remains another major challenge within the legislature. Bribery, nepotism, and favoritism are frequent issues, leading to public distrust in political institutions. This corruption undermines the quality of lawmaking and governance, further eroding faith in the democratic process.
Additionally, Nepal’s ethnic diversity has led to disputes over representation. Various ethnic groups often demand a more significant voice in the political process, creating tensions. The 2015 Constitution, for example, faced significant opposition from various ethnic and political groups, and the lack of consensus in Parliament delayed its implementation. Protests, such as those by the Madhesi community over border issues and representation, have frequently disrupted parliamentary proceedings. These political deadlocks diminish the efficiency of the parliamentary system and contribute to the declining public trust in the legislature.
Remedies to Make Parliamentary Proceedings More Effective
To address the challenges faced by Nepal’s parliamentary proceedings and make them more effective, several key steps need to be taken. First, strengthening political dialogue and consensus-building mechanisms is essential. One of the major issues is the polarization and lack of dialogue between political parties, particularly between the ruling party and the opposition. Establishing a formal mechanism for dialogue among major political parties, including opposition representatives, would provide a platform to discuss contentious issues before they reach the parliamentary floor. Creating cross-party committees to engage in these discussions early on can help garner bipartisan support for important laws and foster constructive debate, which could, in turn, reduce frequent disruptions caused by partisan conflicts.
Another crucial aspect is improving the discipline and adherence to parliamentary rules of procedure. The lack of order and respect for rules has led to disruptions in the past, such as blocking the floor, walkouts, or physical confrontations. To tackle this, the Speaker of Parliament should be given more authority to enforce discipline. Introducing penalties for disruptive behavior—such as fines, temporary suspensions, or even expulsion in extreme cases—could incentivize more responsible behavior from lawmakers. Additionally, digitalizing parliamentary proceedings and making them more transparent would enable public scrutiny and increase the accountability of lawmakers to their constituents.
Streamlining the legislative process is also necessary. Nepal’s legislative process can be slow and cumbersome, with bills often getting stuck in committee reviews or delayed due to political disagreements. One way to improve this is by setting fixed deadlines for committee reviews to ensure bills are not held up unnecessarily. A well-defined schedule for debates and votes would also allow parliament’s time to be used more effectively. Furthermore, integrating technology for e-voting and online consultations could speed up the legislative process and reduce the chances of system manipulation while encouraging greater transparency.
Enhancing the role of parliamentary committees is also a priority. Many committees in Nepal are either overburdened or lack proper oversight, limiting their effectiveness. To improve this, committees should be provided with adequate resources, expert staff, and greater autonomy. These committees should be empowered to review bills in detail, conduct hearings, and take a more proactive role in scrutinizing government actions. Additionally, improving the cross-party composition of committees would help ensure more balanced perspectives and minimize partisan bias. Engaging with civil society through public consultations would also promote more inclusive policymaking.
Finally, capacity building for parliamentarians is vital to enhance the quality of legislative work. Many lawmakers lack the technical expertise to fully engage in complex legislative matters, such as those related to economics, environmental policy, or technology. To address this, capacity-building programs, including workshops, study tours, and training seminars, should be introduced to equip lawmakers with the necessary skills. Hiring expert advisors in specific fields would further ensure that parliamentarians make informed decisions, reduce dependence on party-based agendas, and improve the overall quality of debate and lawmaking in Nepal’s legislature.
