Deuba, leading a five-party alliance of 146 MPs — from his own Nepali Congress, the Maoist Centre, as well dissident factions of the JSP and the UML — had filed a writ petition on 24 May after President Bidya Bhandari thwarted claims of a House majority to form the next government.
The Supreme Court verdict by Chief Justice Cholendra JB Rana and his bench was the apotheosis of Oli’s years-long attempt to hold on to power, characterised by bitter infighting within the erstwhile NCP, ultimately leading to his estrangement from the party co-chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal as well as from comrades within his own UML.
Ahead of his appointment, Deuba welcomed the Supreme Court’s order in a press release put out on Tuesday morning, which stated that the decision had put the constitution—which had veered off-course— back on track, and reinstated the faith and trust of the people in an independent judiciary.
“Rather than taking the court’s decision as a matter of personal win or loss, the decision must be used for the betterment of our democracy, constitution, and our country and its people,” it read.
Meanwhile, UML lawmaker Bijay Subba in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling said the right to appoint the Prime Minister lies only within parliament and blamed lawmakers for taking politics to the court.
“The constitution clearly states the rights of the legislative, executive, and the judiciary. The court does not have the right to select the Prime Minister. It is against the principle of separation of powers,” he said.
Subba also deemed the court’s ruling to stop any action against the UML dissidents unconstitutional, saying, “In a party system, per the spirit of the constitution, parliamentarians must align with the party whip.”
Responding to the accusation, the Supreme Court said that it was the president’s responsibility to appoint the prime minister. But in case of an unconstitutional action, it will take steps to rectify them.