#news #government #nepal #controversy
The recent decision by the Nepalese government to implement the “Cooling-Off Period” for high-ranking government officials has sparked controversy in the parliamentary arena. The implementation of this measure, which restricts the immediate reappointment of officials who have taken leave or resigned, has led to heated debates in the legislative body.
Ramesh Khatri, a representative of Kansai Nepal News, expressed his opinion on the matter. He highlighted the tensions that have arisen within the State Affairs and Good Governance Committee following the passage of the bill from the House of Representatives. Khatri emphasized the discord between the committee members and the government officials, with accusations of mutual blame being exchanged.
The bill, passed on Asar 15, includes provisions in Section 82(4) of the Federal Civil Service Act that impose a two-year cooling-off period for officials who have resigned or taken leave from government service. This means that such officials are ineligible for any constitutional or government appointments until two years after their departure. The decision has raised concerns about the impact on the officials’ career prospects and the constitutional implications of the bill.
In response to the controversy, committee members have called for the resignation of Chairman Ramhari Khativada and Minister of Federal Affairs and General Administration Rajkumar Gupta. However, there is a lack of consensus on who should take responsibility for the situation.
The issue has also led to internal conflicts within the committee, with allegations of impropriety leveled against the committee’s secretary and officials from the Law and Federal Affairs ministries. The lack of accountability and transparency in handling the situation has further fueled the debate within the parliamentary committee.
The controversy surrounding the “Cooling-Off Period” has raised questions about the ethical responsibilities of the officials involved and the need for accountability in government decision-making processes. The demand for accountability and the search for legal remedies highlight the seriousness of the situation and the importance of upholding ethical standards in governance.
As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how the government and the parliamentary committee will address the concerns raised and ensure transparency and accountability in their actions. The outcome of this controversy will have far-reaching implications for the governance and accountability of public officials in Nepal.
—
Author: MAYA | HARUTO
Posted at: July 3, 2025 12:00 am
