In the normal course of things, the parliamentary hearing of election commissioner nominee Krishna Man Pradhan would have been completed on Friday. The Parliamentary Hearing Committee would have approved his nomination for the constitutional body, paving the way for his appointment by the President.

However, the House committee on Thursday decided to postpone his hearing indefinitely after listening to a complainant, who filed objections against Pradhan’s nomination, accusing him of sexual exploitation. The victim has accused Pradhan of sexually exploiting her for five continuous years until last year.

The woman who had lodged a complaint against Pradhan had settled the case out of court after the latter paid Rs10 million in compensation. Appearing before the committee, the victim—in her 30s—said she had to compromise as Pradhan had assured her a well-paying job.

“I reluctantly accepted his demand as I desperately needed a job,” the woman told the House committee, according to one of its members. The victim said she agreed to settle the case for money given her dire economic condition. She has also handed over an audio recording as proof of her exploitation by Pradhan.

“I filed the complaint to stop such a morally corrupt person from taking the constitutional position. How can you approve his nomination?” she questioned the lawmakers on the committee.

Talking to journalists after listening to the victim, Pashupati Shumsher Rana, who chaired the meeting, said they needed to study the matter seriously, as endorsing a candidate for a dignified constitutional position like an election commissioner is a serious responsibility.

Committee members said they wanted more time for additional hearings as they want to make the right decision.

Ishwari Neupane, a member of the committee, the evidence provided by the complainant is being studied. “We are aware that only a person with high moral integrity can hold the constitutional position. At the same time, we also need to ensure that we don’t do injustice to the nominee. We, therefore, are studying the matter closely,” she told the Post.

A two-thirds majority of the 15-strong committee, which has lawmakers from both the chambers of Parliament, can reject the nomination. A member of the committee said a wrong decision of the Constitutional Council has left them in a dilemma. A meeting of the constitutional council recommended Pradhan for the vacant post of election commissioner.

“It is the council's responsibility to nominate the right candidates for such important posts,” said the lawmaker. “We don't want to endorse a controversial nominee. But we are not sure if we can do that as Pradhan was picked by the heads of three state organs and the chief of the country’s largest party.”

The council headed by Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who also is the CPN (Maoist Centre) chair, had unanimously nominated him. Speaker Devraj Ghimire, National Assembly chair Narayan Dahal, Chief Justice Bishowambhar Prasad Shrestha and deputy Speaker Indira Rana too approved the nomination without question. Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba too gave his stamp of approval.

Legal experts say wrong recommendations by the constitutional council automatically raise questions about the intent and capability of its chair and members. “The council cannot make recommendations haphazardly. It must properly check the background of the candidate before nomination,” Raju Prasad Chapagain, former chair of the Constitutional Lawyers’ Forum, told the Post.

Legal experts say the Constitutional Council Act clearly states that the nominees for the constitutional positions must be qualified, appropriate for the particular position and hold high moral ground. “It is the responsibility of the members of the council to carry out proper vetting of the nominees. As other members have political background, the chief justice has a major role in vetting. But [Chief Justice] Shrestha failed in this case,” said a constitutional lawyer. He said Pradhan’s bad deeds were no secret in the legal fraternity.

“The council fully overlooked Pradhan’s tainted past. There must be some interest at play,” the lawyer further said.

Pradhan is the executive director of the Nepal Law Society. An expert on electoral reforms and governance, Pradhan has been in the position since 2000. He reportedly has good rapport with political and judicial leadership.