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