The Tamesis
May 15, 2026
kathmandu – Nepal’s opposition has moved to block all eight ordinances proposed by the government, escalating legal and political pressure on the ruling party after sending notices to both houses of federal parliament seeking vetoes.
The opposition’s strategy focuses on preventing decrees from being passed by the National Assembly, where the ruling National People’s Party has no representation despite having an absolute majority in the lower house.
On Wednesday, legislators of the Nepal Communist Party-Unified Marxist-Leninist Party issued notices seeking rejection of all eight ordinances, while the Nepal Congress opposed two and the Nepal Communist Party opposed four.
According to Article 114(2)(a) of the Nepalese Constitution, decrees promulgated by the government must be approved by both houses of the Federal Parliament. Rejection by either house automatically invalidates the statute.
The constitutional provision stipulates: “After promulgation, the decree shall be submitted to the meeting of the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Federal Parliament for consideration. If it is not passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate, the decree shall in fact no longer be valid.”
Legal experts said that if the decree fails in the National Assembly, all legal amendments proposed through it will revert to the previous law. However, actions already completed under the Act, including the recommendation of the Chief Justice and the cancellation of political appointments, are unlikely to be automatically revoked.
Only decrees approved by the National Assembly can be replaced by a formal replacement bill within 60 days. If the government wishes to retain the same provisions for a statute that has been rejected by the House of Lords, entirely new legislation must be introduced.
Legal precedent established by the Supreme Court indicates that if replacement legislation is not introduced, the previous law will automatically revert.
Unlike statutes, ordinary bills do not need to be approved by the House and Senate in the same way. Even if Congress rejects an amendment, the House of Representatives can pass it again and submit it to the President for certification.
Opposition divided on whether to reject all decrees
Despite the coordination challenge, opposition parties have yet to agree on whether to collectively oppose all eight decrees or selectively target some of them.
The Nepali Congress has registered a notification opposing only the ordinance related to the Constitutional Council and another notification amending several existing laws. The notice was signed by all MPs present in the National Assembly.
However, UML legislators issued notices on all eight ordinances, arguing that the government had committed a serious breach of procedure by suspending an already convened parliamentary session and then introducing ordinances.
The government issued decrees amending laws related to the Constitutional Council, the removal of public officials, public procurement, cooperatives, universities, the Academy of Health Sciences, money laundering and several other laws.
Prem Prasad Dangal, leader of the UML parliamentary party in the National Assembly, said the party can maintain flexibility on ordinances related to cooperatives, public procurement and money laundering. But he said the UML’s broader position was that all decrees should be rejected because the process itself was flawed.
“We will try to establish a common position with other parties,” Dangar said. “If this does not happen, some decrees can still be considered individually. But we will reject all decrees of a serious nature. The three major parties can unite in this regard.”
National Congress leader of the Nepal Communist Party Jhakku Prasad Subedi said the party has registered notices against acts related to the Constitutional Commission, amendments to various laws, removal of public officials and universities, among others.
Congress parliamentary leader Kamala Devi Pant said discussions were continuing on whether to support the broader UML position and reject all ordinances.
“We may reject everything now. They can still pass the bill they want,” Pant said. “The chief justice has recommended it. Political appointments have been cancelled.”
Opposition parties are also trying to get smaller parties in the National Assembly, including the Rastriya Janamorcha, Nepali People’s Party and Loktantrik Samajbadi Party, to agree on a common position, she said.
If smaller opposition parties also support the move, the decree could be voted down unanimously.
National Assembly Chairman Narayan Prasad Dahal said discussions on the rejection notification are tentatively scheduled for May 21. If the House of Representatives rejects the proposal by a majority vote, the regulation will expire from that day.
“May 21 is only a tentative date,” Dahal said. “Under the constitutional framework, a decree is valid for 60 days. Before that, Parliament must also discuss budget principles, priorities and other pre-budget matters. Discussions may be held on the same day, and if these are completed, they may be postponed by a day or two.”
Constitutional Council decree becomes the focus of controversy
The opposition’s first target is a decree amending the Constitutional Council Act.
The government revised the provisions on quorum and decision-making procedures of the Council, recommending appointments to constitutional bodies.
Under the revised rules, the council can hold meetings in the presence of four members, including the chairman. Decisions can then be taken by majority vote of those present, meaning a minimum of three members can approve the appointment.
Opposition parties strongly objected to the decree’s definition of majority. They argue that the amendment actually enables the prime minister’s position to prevail even in a split meeting with three members supporting and three members opposing a proposal.
Critics say the arrangement violates the democratic principle of majority rule.
After the promulgation of the ordinance, Prime Minister Balendra Shah, who chairs the Constitutional Committee, convened a meeting and recommended the appointment of Supreme Court Justice Manoj Sharma, the fourth most senior justice, as chief justice.
The government also initiated the appointment process in universities, colleges of health sciences, tourism and cultural institutions under the decree.
Through another decree on the removal of public officials and amendments to various laws, the government canceled more than 1,500 political appointments made by the previous government.
Legal experts say completed lawsuits may still be valid
Senior advocate Satish Krishna Kharel said if the National Assembly rejects the ordinances, the government will no longer be able to act under the revised legal framework.
“Any completed actions will continue unless overturned by a court or other legal mechanism,” Harrell said. “But all pending and ongoing processes will cease immediately.”
He said that if the appointment process is not completed after the decree expires, then the appointment process will be stopped no matter what stage it reaches.
“Thereafter, the government will either need to introduce a new bill or proceed under the previous law,” he added.
Karel said political appointments canceled under the decree will not be automatically reinstated simply because the decree has expired.
He believes the government’s main goal is to eliminate political appointments rather than make new ones.
“Even if the decree lapses, the removal will still be valid. The government can still make future appointments under the old law,” he said. “Unless the Supreme Court rules that the statute itself was introduced in bad faith and orders its reinstatement, the government may not face significant practical difficulties.”
Advocate Pratap Paudel said new legislation needs to be introduced if the government wants to keep the provisions introduced through the ordinance intact.
He said the lapse of the Constitutional Council Act would not hamper the ongoing appointment process of the Chief Justice but would make future constitutional appointments more difficult.
Under previous law, the council required a quorum of the president and four other members, and if consensus could not be reached, decisions had to be taken by a majority of all council members.
Currently, 17 posts in 13 constitutional committees remain vacant, including leadership positions of the National Natural Resources and Finance Commission, Muslim Commission, Tharu Commission, Madhesi Commission and Ethnic Inclusion Commission.
Legal experts say it will be difficult for the prime minister to secure a decision by the Constitutional Council on the appointments without support from opposition parties.
Union terms spark more criticism
One of the decrees amending various laws also abolished trade unions in the civil service by amending the Civil Service Act.
The Nepali Congress opposed the move, saying it went against the spirit of the constitution.
However, opposition to the decree would also invalidate amendments to 20 separate laws, including those related to land management, education, technical training, social security, health services, medical education, forests and civil service management.
Legal and political issues also extend to land-related amendments. Opposition leaders said the decree’s lapse could derail efforts to resolve issues involving landless squatters.
By amending the Land Act, the government disbanded the previous government’s Land Commission and canceled more than 450 political appointments related to these bodies.
The previous government established central land issue settlement committees and committees in 77 districts across the country and appointed more than 450 officials across the country.
