PARLIAMENT'S NEW REGULATIONS FURTHER CURB KING'S

C O N F I D E N T I A L KATHMANDU 001494 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/12/2016 TAGS: PGOV PTER PHUM NP SUBJECT: PARLIAMENT'S NEW REGULATIONS FURTHER CURB KING'S POWER REF: KATHMANDU 1268 Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Larry Schwartz, Reasons, 1.4 (b/d). Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) The House of Representatives on June 10 passed "the House of Representatives Regulations 2006" further limiting the King's powers. While hailed by the seven-party alliance as a "landmark for democracy" and meant to move toward implementing the Parliament's May 18 Proclamation (reftel), confusion remains about some of the provisions. The alliance also decided that, within a matter of days, Parliament will stop meeting for about three weeks to enable the government to focus on the peace process. End Summary. Parliament's New Regulations Limit King's Powers ... -------------- -------------- ¶2. (SBU) The regulations announced June 10 ensure that the King has purely a ceremonial role. It authorizes the Speaker of the House, rather than the King, to certify the passing of any Bill. The new bill also ends the tradition of the King presenting the government's annual programs and policies -- instead, the Prime Minister will do so. Parliament will enact a separate law to provide for the process of proclaiming an heir to the throne. The new Bill requires the Prime Minister, ministers, senior security forces officials, and a long list of other officials to take their oath of office again before a Special Committee of MPs headed by the Speaker. ... Expand Its Ability To Amend The Constitution -------------- --- ¶3. (C) Citing the spirit of the May 18 House of Representatives Proclamation, the new regulations have made it much easier to amend the Constitution. Instead of needing the Upper House -- which is not functioning -- to take action, the House alone can make any amendment to the Constitution for "resolution of the conflict and establishing lasting peace." Members of the Special Committee of the Parliament that worked on the regulations gave us differing explanations regarding this provision. Mahendra Pandey, CPN-UML, told us that Parliament would not amend the 1990 Constitution because it was dead, instead the House would come up with an interim Constitution to provide for constituent assembly elections. However, Ananda Prasad Dhungana, Nepali Congress, explained that the regulations included this provision to allow for amendments to certain constitutional articles that were incompatible with the May 18 Proclamation. ... Touches on Judiciary -------------- ¶4. (C) Following a protest by the Supreme Court, the House amended a provision that would have required Supreme Court judges to take their oath of office in Parliament. The Court had unanimously decided that such a provision would compromise judicial independence. Informing the House about the amendment to this provision, a member of Parliament said that the House had "accepted the principle of 'separation of power,' which is vital for democracy." Some Supreme Court judges and Parliamentarians met and scrapped that requirement, instead the new regulation provides that the Special Committee for Implementing the House Proclamation will decide on administering the oath of office for judges. In subsequent discussions with MPs and civil society, it appears that the House has postponed a decision on where and to whom the Supreme Court judges will swear their oath; some still argue in favor of the supremacy of Parliament and insist that the judges will take their oath of office in front of some parliamentary body, while others believe that it will be done internally at the Supreme Court. ... And Recesses For Three Weeks -------------- ¶5. (C) While not meeting the Maoist demand that the House be dissolved, the leaders of the seven-party alliance decided that Parliament will not meet for up to three weeks to give time to government and lawmakers "to contribute to the peace process." The House should act on the decision early this week. A June 10 Maoist radio program reported that People's Army commander Prabhakar had warned there would be "bloodshed in the country again" if the Parliament were not dissolved within seven days. Subodh Pyakurel, head of local human rights NGO INSEC, welcomed the decision for Parliament to recess, explaining that the move should help the government to initiate dialogue with the Maoists. Comment -------------- ¶6. (C) The new regulations go far to codify the May 18 Proclamation's intent to circumscribe the King's political powers and to assert the people's power and the supremacy of the parliament. While the government appears to have succeeded in this, the amount of disconnect that surfaced when we sought details from members of parliament is disconcerting. In their haste to take action, the seven-party alliance could sacrifice important democratic principles like separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. SCHWARTZ