The Supreme Court on Thursday started hearing on two cases against Lokman Singh Karki, who currently remains suspended as the chief of the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA).

A full bench of Justices Ishwor Prasad Khatiwada, Ananda Mohan Bhattarai and Anil Kumar Singh heard arguments from the plaintiff’s side on Thursday. 

Advocate Surendra Bhandari and 10 other lawyers for about three and a half hours argued that Karki lacked qualification and “high moral character as defined by the constitution” to hold the constitutional post.

The advocates claimed that Karki’s tenure in government service fell short by seven years when he was appointed the CIAA chief in May 2013. 

Drawing the bench’s attention to “royal edict”—for which qualification was not required—through which Karki was first appointed, the lawyers argued that excluding his service tenure of six years and two months in the then royal council, his tenure in government service adds up to only 18 years. 

As per the constitutional provision, a minimum of 20 years of government service is a must for a person to hold a constitutional post like the chief commissioner of the anti-graft body. 

Karki in his qualification had claimed to have served in the government for 24 years, which has been challenged in the apex court by Advocate Om Prakash Aryal. 

Besides, lawyers also presented the fact that Karki was on study leave for two years and was suspended for three months after the second people’s movement. 

A Krishna Jung Rayamajhi-led commission formed after the 2006 people’s movement had also indicted Karki for his involvement in suppressing the movement in capacity of chief secretary. 

Regarding his moral character, lawyers urged the bench to take seven points into consideration—one who respects rule of law and democratic values, one who safeguards human rights, maintains professional decorum, impartial, facilitates justice, who does not distort facts and high moral character perceptible to public. 

“The constitution has made both the conditions—qualification and high moral character—mandatory to head a constitutional body,” said advocate Bhandari. “And Karki does not hold either.”

Lawyers also told the bench that they would present the discussion notes of remaining facts related to the case, which could not be presented on Thursday.   

Karki’s lawyers, including senior advocates Sushil Panta, Mahadev Yadav, Badri Bahadur Karki, Upendra Keshari Neupane and Balkrishna Neupane, are set to present their arguments on Friday.  

The bench has assured lawyers that it will provide an opportunity to listen to the both sides once again after the lawyers from the defendant’s side present their arguments. 

Government attorney Kiran Regmi argued that the case should not have been opened as Karki’s appointment was made following due process of law. 

Earlier on Thursday, Karki’s lawyers had urged the apex court to postpone the hearing citing the Bar Day. The Nepal Bar Association had also requested the court to postpone the hearings of the cases if lawyers involved in those made a request to that effect. 

The bench, however, decided to hear the case as per its December 2 decision that the December 22 hearing would not be postponed or delayed at the request of either party.