The Nepali Judiciary - Supreme Court Of Nepal

• Reform activities to be conducted inside the court should be operated through umbrella of
the Strategic Plan. This should not be overlooked and other than this other activities should
not be implemented else it will send a message that the leadership is not honest towards
the plan.
• Initiation of application of technology in court proceedings is commendable and this should
be extended and expanded. While doing this, capacity enhancement of judges and
employees should also be taken into consideration.
4.3 Received Messages and Strategic Issues
On the basis of the analysis of the first Plan, situation analysis and consultation with stakeholders
and the message received thereon, the strategic issues to be addressed by the second Plan is as
follows:-
• There is a general consensus within the judiciary and external actors regarding the need
and appropriateness of planned reform. Therefore, it is necessary to give continuity to the
Plan.
• Pursuant to the changed context and transition, discussion among stakeholders were
organized and discussion as to whether the judiciary should formulate a five-year Plan or a
three-year Plan was organized wherein majority of the stakeholders opined that although
the structure and jurisdiction of the judiciary may change, the changes would not have any
substantial effect in its basic values and core functions and opined for formulation of a fiveyear
Plan and also opined that review of the Plan could be carried to incorporate any
changes and as such it has been decided to formulate a five-year Plan.
• The first Plan had defined the vision, mission and values of the judiciary and since the
vision, mission and values had been prepared on the basis of the Constitution,
responsibility vested by the law and the role to be played in adjudication and therefore no
substantial changes need be made in the vision, mission and values.
• The areas identified through the situation analysis of the first Plan are still relevant. Core
function and some of the activities indentified under some strategic interventions had been
repeated and as such it is necessary to delete them.
• It is not necessary to add anything in the core functions defined by the first Plan. Under the
core function, activities relating to court management such as adjudication and execution of
judgment are deemed to additional work of the judiciary and as such the managerial aspect
of the court has been removed from the core function and these activities are being
addressed through the strategic interventions.
• Result indicators identified by the first Plan is practical and on the basis of those indicators
and in order to achieve the targets it is necessary to redefine arrears, reform in procedural
laws and proper management and operation of physical and human resources.
• Strategic interventions identified by the Strategic Plan should be accurate and
implementable within a period of five years and therefore, it is necessary to review the
strategic interventions mentioned by the first Plan.
• Strategic Plan being the principal plan of the judiciary, all activities of the judiciary should
fall within the ambit of the umbrella of the Plan.
• Acquiring resources and logistics is not the only target of the Plan. Disciplined and honest
mobilization of resources is expected and therefore, the areas identified by the Plan should
be prioritized and work should be performed accordingly.
66