Why did the Supreme Court block the ‘easier’ route to constitutional amendment?
Summary
Nepal’s Supreme Court has temporarily blocked two provisions of the House of Representatives Rules 2026, including one that could have eased constitutional amendments by combining votes from both chambers. The court said the rules appeared inconsistent with the constitution and kept them in abeyance until a final verdict.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court ordered Rule 140(11) and Rule 259 of the House of Representatives Rules 2026 to remain in abeyance.
- Rule 140(11) would have allowed constitutional amendments to advance using combined votes from both chambers, instead of separate two-thirds majorities in each chamber.
- Rule 259 sought to give House rules the status of special legislation, raising concerns about unequal treatment of lawmakers under existing law.
- The interim order was issued by a five-member constitutional bench led by Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Sharma.
