A right balance is required for the judicial reforms of Nepal

Nepal’s judiciary finds itself at an inflection point. Allegations of political meddling in judicial affairs have tarnished the image of this vital pillar of democracy. In response, the Nepal Bar Association (NBA) has proposed sweeping constitutional reforms aimed at insulating the judiciary from external interference. However, these proposals themselves raise important questions about overcorrecting by concentrating excessive power within the NBA. As the nation charts a path forward, it must critically analyze the pros and cons to strike the right balance between judicial independence and accountability. The pillars of Nepal’s democracy are being stress-tested. Serious allegations have emerged about political interference corroding the independence of the nation’s judiciary. From judges making commitments to party leaders to gain appointments to verdicts being swayed by external influences – the accusations cut to the core of basic rule of law principles.

Diagnosed but overprescribed?