The Nepali Judiciary - Supreme Court Of Nepal

constructed. There has been sufficient increase in vehicles and accesses to computers
have been enhanced.
• With the implementation of the Plan, adjudication process to some extent has become
speedy and there has been some improvement in the working proceedings and there has
been effort to improve managerial activities. Trained manpower to some extent has been
generated, relations has been established through interactions and resolution of disputes
have been made through the mediation process and as such these issues can be accepted
as the achievements of the Plan.
• Time for deciding a case consumes a long period and even where a decision has been
rendered such decisions are not prepared in time wherein parties to a case are compelled
to wait for months to obtain a copy of the decision. This creates lots of problems for the
parties to a case. This problem is persistent in the Supreme Court and other courts within
the Kathmandu valley. Immediate changes should be made in this regard. Evaluation of
judges and employees should be done on the basis of target and progress.
• Another aspect that needs reform in the administration of justice is execution of decision.
Where a party is involved in a case for years and where the decision is not executed
immediately, the party winning the case is subjected to more miseries. Likewise, where the
process of execution of decision is initiated, procedures like execution of summons make
this process more cumbersome. Therefore, uncontrolled application of Section 61 under
the Chapter of Punishment of the Muluki Ain (Country Code) and Section 17 under the
Chapter of Court Proceedings of the Muluki Ain (Country Code) and the tendency of filing
case after case makes execution of judgment process more complex. Therefore, reform
has to be initiated in this area and activities relating to execution of judgment should be
regularly monitored and supervised.
• Court proceedings are slow and cumbersome. Many subject matters do not have any laws.
Where law exists, the law is either cumbersome or the law is not consistent with the time.
Therefore, the overall legal infrastructure needs to be reviewed. The Bench and the Bar
should give priority towards issuance of the criminal code, criminal procedure code, civil
code and civil procedure code and the judiciary should take special initiatives in this regard.
In the absence of these codes, the judiciary should identify the areas of reform and should
initiate process of reform in the Act and Regulation.
• Pilot courts were initiated with certain objectives but unfortunately due to the proceedings of
the court, the objectives of the pilot courts have not been achieved. These courts have not
been effective. There are no substantial differences in the proceedings of the pilot courts
and other courts. People have not experienced speedy justice and there are rumors about
irregularities. Divisions of work load among judges are not appropriate and as such these
areas should be taken into consideration seriously.
• Lower level staffs of the courts are not involved in the implementation of the Plan. Majority
of them are unaware about the targets, objectives and activities of the Plan. There is a
grave problem in profession management. Hearing of case comes before the Bench after
many months and sometimes hearing of cases does not come for a long period and when
such hearings comes before the Bench it is adjourned. Lawyers repeatedly seek
adjournment of cases and the courts contrary to standard issue adjournment orders and as
such justice becomes inaccessible. The practice of adjournment of cases by the court in
the absence of proper and valid reasons is not a good practice.
• Execution of summons is one of the biggest problematic areas in the administration of
justice. Special programs should be included for reform of this problem in the Plan. The
63