Joint Secretary Third Paper Government Advocate Group 2079.09.03 Question Paper

 Public Service Commission

Internal Competitive Written Examination for Nepal Judicial Service, Government Advocate Group, Gazetted First Class, Joint Secretary or similar (Non-Technical) Posts

Time 3 hours 2079/09/03 Full Marks: 100 Paper : Third Subject: Law and Administration of Justice

Answers to the following questions should be written in separate answer sheets.

1. According to the investigative report of the investigation officer of Mura regarding the criminal offense of the government of Nepal, there is a provision that if the public prosecutor decides whether or not to pursue a case against such a person in order to evaluate the collected evidence of the person who appears to have committed a crime, the case should be filed in the relevant court. In this way, during the investigation of a crime, the accused may be exempted from punishment in order to encourage him to cooperate with the investigating officer or the prosecutor, or if he can bargain with the prosecutor and cooperate in such a way (prosecution bargaining or 'plea bargain'), the indictment with a demand for remission of punishment. The arrangement that can be filed is in the Civil Criminal Procedure Code, 2074.

As prosecution work is an integral part of the administration of justice, the public prosecutor is free to perform such a function. According to the Code of Civil Criminal Procedure, 2074, when the public prosecutor files the charge sheet, in addition to other things, the personal details revealing the identity of the accused must be filled in for the loss (damage) caused to the victim due to the offense committed by the public prosecutor. If he has negotiated the compensation amount for the prosecution, there is a provision that the demand with the details of the remission of sentence should be mentioned. However, the public prosecutor did not mention the correct and detailed personal details of the accused in the indictment, the proportion of the received evidence and the punishment demand did not match, the maximum punishment was demanded not based on any rationale, the accused rarely made such a request for the sentence to be reduced if he had bargained in the prosecution, and without evaluating the damage caused to the victim on an objective basis, the accused will be acquitted in most criminal cases or the victim will not receive compensation or will receive a nominal amount.  Judges, defense lawyers, lawyers, sociologists, professors and civil society representatives have .

In the above mentioned background, what policy, legal, institutional and procedural reforms can be made to make the prosecution work more scientific, objective and practical when the government charges are filed? Mention (5+7+5+8=25)

a) Subject to mention the personal details of the accused including biometrics,

b) Proportion of evidence obtained for the offense committed by the accused and the demand for punishment,

c) Practical application of plea bargaining,

d) The amount of compensation to be received by the victim of the crime.

2. Looking at the structural form and jurisdiction of the courts in Nepal, four-level and three-level courts have been practiced and developed in different periods. Apart from these three levels of courts, some other tribunals and specialized courts have also been formed and the justice administration is being carried out. Jurisdiction has a very important role in the justice administration process. Various arrangements have been made in the prevailing laws of Shani with the aim that the final solution of my dispute should be from the High Court.

The Supreme Court is the highest in the judicial system of Nepal. The interpretation or interpretation of the law by the Supreme Court is a constitutional provision to be followed by the government of Nepal and all courts, and the Supreme Court is also a record court. The organs of the state are and should be established to protect the interests of the people according to their needs. If we look at the annual report of the Supreme Court in Nepal for the past few years, it can be seen that the number of cases in the Supreme Court has not increased significantly and we have to wait for the decision of the case for years. From this, it is heard that the saying that justice delayed is the same as justice denied is confirmed.

How responsible is the provision of jurisdiction of the court in the creation of the mentioned situation? Currently, the Supreme Court is considering a case like this, what kind of improvements do you see in it? Submit a suggestion. 25

3. The Government of Nepal has been making multilateral and bilateral treaties with foreign states and intergovernmental organizations for various purposes. But even though some multilateral treaties have been ratified, there are complaints that they have not been implemented and this has also been seen from the report prepared by the Nepalese government. Similarly, after the signing of some provisions of the bilateral treaty by the Government of Nepal, questions have arisen and more complexity has been created in the implementation. In order to negotiate with foreign states and intergovernmental organizations for a treaty on a matter, the Government of Nepal is responsible for making the final draft of the treaty, accepting the certified copy, and even signing it. Taking authority from the Council of Ministers to sign a treaty and raising questions from the administrative and political level about the same treaty and obstructing its implementation, Government of Nepal from foreign states or intergovernmental organizations. There is also a situation where there has been praise for the work done by Ar. On the other hand, even though Article 279 of the Constitution of Nepal provides for the ratification, accession, approval or support of the treaty, it has become a subject of various political debates whether or not a treaty should be ratified by the Parliament. Similarly, Section 9 of the Nepal Treaty Act, 2047 states that if any provision of the treaty to which the Government of Nepal is a party is ratified, acceded to, accepted or supported by the Parliament and is in conflict with the prevailing law, the provisions of the treaty shall apply to the extent of the conflict. Complications are also seen. There is no difference of opinion about what should be done so that the law of the state is compatible with the treaty when becoming a party or accepting it. Answer the following questions in the mentioned context.

a) What should be considered when Nepal negotiates, drafts or signs treaties with foreign states and intergovernmental organizations and what improvements should be made in the provisions of bilateral treaties?

b) What kind of treaties with foreign states and intergovernmental organizations should be passed by the parliament? Make it clear.

c) In order to effectively implement the treaties made with foreign states and intergovernmental organizations, what should be taken care of? Submit a suggestion.

4. Although Nepal has adopted a federal system of government, the structure of the judiciary is unitary in nature. The Constitution of Nepal has provided for three levels of Supreme Court, High Court and District Court, although there is a High Court in each province, these courts are not structures under the province. There is a judicial committee system at the local level. Even though such judicial committees are not part of the regular court structure, there is provision for appeal to the district court on the decision made by the judicial committee. Although there were extensive discussions for the establishment of a constitutional court during the drafting of the constitution, it was finally decided to have a constitutional bench in the Supreme Court. This bench consists of the Chief Justice and four other judges appointed by the Chief Justice on the recommendation of the Judicial Council.

In the federal system of government, there may be disputes between the laws created by the union, state and local levels, conflicting disputes and jurisdictional disputes between these levels. According to the Constitution of Nepal, the fundamental rights granted by the Constitution are unfairly restricted or any law is in conflict with the Constitution for any other reason or such law or any part thereof or any law made by the Provincial Assembly is in conflict with any law made by the Federal Parliament or any law made by the Municipal Assembly or Village Assembly is inconsistent with the Federal Parliament or It has the jurisdiction to initiate proceedings and settle cases related to disputes between the union and the state, the state and the province and the local level and the local level, which are in conflict with any law made by the provincial assembly. The Supreme Court (Constitutional Bench Operation) Rules, 2072 have arranged the detailed procedure of this bench. It can be seen from the annual reports of the Supreme Court that only a small number of disputes are settled by the constitutional bench and the cases that have exceeded five years are yet to be settled. In some cases, there is a situation where the preliminary order has not been made for a long time. The number of judges in the constitutional bench and the provisions regarding the decision or order made by this bench are not final are also being debated.

In the context of Nepal's adoption of the federal system, whether any changes in the structure of the judiciary are necessary or not, identify the problems that may arise in the system of the constitutional bench and present suggestions and action plans including the constitutional, legal, administrative and procedural arrangements that should be made for the effectiveness of the constitutional bench. 25