A total of 15 advocates took part in the hearing today, representing the government, the defendant in the writ petition against the dissolution of the House of Representatives at the Supreme Court.
Senior advocates Surendra Bhandari, Bal Krishna Neupane, Madhav Baskota among others argued that the Prime Minister dissolved the lower house as per constitutional provisions, and thus reinstatement of HoR was not possible.
Claiming that the decision was just and constitutional, they cited precedence of the parliament being dissolved in the past by PMs holding majority in the parliament. "Article 76(1) of the Constitution does not prohibit the PM from dissolving the HoR while Article 76 (7) along with Article 75 could be used to dissolve the house," they said.
The HoR cannot be reinstated because the motion of no confidence against the Prime Minister was registered late. Furthermore, unlike the previous constitutions, the new Constitution gives the PM and the cabinet the right to dissolve the lower house.
Advocates also argued that it is the government that holds the election in a parliamentary system and it cannot be stopped by saying that elections cannot be held. "Even if the Court reinstates the House, the government cannot be stable."
The hearing will continue tomorrow before the Constitutional Bench led by Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana.
1672397318_80X80.jpg)
1672397318_680.jpg)
