The Judicial Council, led by Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Sharma, has recommended four judges to fill vacant positions at the Supreme Court, sparking severe criticism from within the council and legal fraternity over the bypass of seniority and incomplete nominations.

The council on Tuesday recommended one chief judge and three judges of high courts for appointment to the apex court. The decision came at the end of a four-hour meeting that began at 1:00 pm, and it came over the objection of two of its own members, who registered notes of dissent.

The criticism began inside the room. Senior Justice and council member Sapana Pradhan Malla and member Mahesh Nepal each put their objections in writing.

A council member said Malla raised objections on four major grounds: non-compliance with the constitution and legal standards; lack of transparent and objective criteria; dismissal of senior judges elevated from district courts; and failure to maintain maximum inclusivity while ignoring the Nepal Bar Association.

Nepal's dissent was narrower. He objected specifically to the nomination of Pandey and Dangi, arguing that the selection went too far down the seniority list, though he supported Bagchand and Saru.

"When picking and choosing candidates from the middle of the seniority list, the council must provide concrete justifications," the council member quoted the dissenting members as saying. "Arbitrary selections without objective grounds cannot be accepted."

Both dissenting members declined to comment publicly when approached following the meeting.

Their objections point to the numbers. Among the nominees, only Ratna Bahadur Bagchand, Chief Judge of the Pokhara High Court, holds a chief judge position, and he leads the seniority list among high court chief judges. The remaining three are high court judges who were picked over several senior colleagues: Chandra Bahadur Saru (Patan High Court) holds the 5th rank, Janak Pandey (Patan High Court, Hetauda Bench) ranks 12th, and Gokarna Dangi (Janakpur High Court) stands at 15th among high court judges.

By choosing lower-ranked judges, the council bypassed high court chief judges Rajan Prasad Bhattarai, Lal Bahadur Kunwar, Hari Prasad Bhandari, and Rajeshwar Tiwari. Other senior high court judges superseded include Dinesh Prasad Yadav, Krishna Lal Bhattarai, Yamuna Bhattarai, and Tek Narayan Kunwar.

The nominations have drawn sharp backlash from the legal fraternity for overriding established precedence. Nepal Bar Association President Bijay Prasad Mishra criticised the decision, stating that the selection was an arbitrary "pick and choose" process without evaluating seniority, experience, or competence.

"The recommendation bypassed senior judges who rose through the ranks from district courts over decades," said Mishra. "There is concern that judges who issue rulings aligned with political interests may have been chosen. This risks establishing a dangerous precedent where candidates feel compelled to curry favour with political parties to secure appointment to the Supreme Court rather than merit."

Mishra further asserted that the council ignored inclusivity by excluding female and Madhesi representation, while also neglecting the legal practitioners' community. "The chief justice went back on his promise to prioritise experienced career judges. This proves that the government's agenda on judicial reform is merely an illusion," Mishra added.

He said qualified career judges who served extensively from the district level were systematically pushed aside, and warned that conducting appointments through minority consensus within the council sets a damaging precedent for judicial independence.

The second charge, incomplete nominations, concerns what the council left undone. Though five posts are vacant at the Supreme Court, only four names were recommended. Under the Judicial Council Act, nominations must be made at least one month prior to a vacancy. Justice Binod Sharma is retiring mandatorily in November, yet no candidate was named to replace him.

The dispute now moves to parliament. The recommended nominees must undergo parliamentary confirmation as mandated by Article 292 of Nepal's Constitution 2015, which requires parliamentary hearing approval for appointments of the Chief Justice, Supreme Court justices, heads and officials of constitutional bodies, and ambassadors.

The council will forward the names to the Parliamentary Hearing Committee, which will issue a public notice calling for complaints or objections from the general public. Following an examination of any complaints received, the committee will conduct hearings with the proposed justices. Upon parliamentary approval, the nominees will be officially appointed to the Supreme Court.