Spread the love

Chief Secretary and House General Secretary faulted for conduct inconsistent with their positions

Kathmandu, Aug 5:  A parliamentary probe committee has concluded that Nepali Congress lawmaker and State Affairs Committee Chair Ramhari Khatiwada bears moral responsibility for the error in the report of the Federal Civil Service Bill. The committee’s report points out that several high-ranking officials, including the Chief Secretary and the Secretary General of the Federal Parliament, failed to act in a manner consistent with their official duties.

The report states that if officials had performed their duties appropriately, the mistake in the report would not have occurred. When the State Affairs Committee passed the bill and forwarded it to the House of Representatives, the report bore the signatures of Chair Khatiwada and Secretary Suraj Kumar Dura. As a result, both their names have been clearly mentioned in the probe committee’s findings.

One member of the committee explained: “The report has underlined that political office-bearers must take political and moral responsibility. Since Khatiwada and Dura signed the flawed report, their names have been explicitly mentioned.”

Though the Chief Secretary is also found responsible in terms of duty and legal accountability, sources say his name has not been directly stated in the report.

The committee finalized the report at 4 AM this morning and passed it unanimously. UML lawmaker and committee member Ishwari Gharti confirmed the consensus: “After long discussions, the report was unanimously passed early Tuesday morning,” she informed.

The bill was originally passed by the State Affairs and Good Governance Committee on 2nd Jestha, 2082. About a month later, it was tabled in the House of Representatives, and on 15th Ashar, 2082, the House passed it.

However, controversy erupted soon after. Critics flagged a clause that seemed to undermine the ‘cooling-off’ period, a provision that bars government officials from taking certain positions for a specific period after leaving office. In response to the dispute, the House formed a seven-member special parliamentary committee on 23rd Ashar.

Even before the probe committee was formed, on 18th Saun, Chair Khatiwada held a press conference, saying he was ready to face any consequences if he was found complicit in the error regarding the cooling-off clause.

What is the ‘cooling-off’ period?

The cooling-off period restricts former civil servants from taking up constitutional, diplomatic, or other government appointments for a fixed time after resignation or compulsory retirement. The State Affairs Committee had agreed on a two-year period.

Senior officials had been expressing dissatisfaction with this provision. Later, attention was drawn to contradictory language in Clause 82 of the bill. Sub-clause 4 clearly stated that the cooling-off period would apply, but Sub-clause 5 seemed to override it, implying the restriction might not apply to certain top officials. This contradiction sparked demands for a thorough investigation.

Originally tabled in the Federal Parliament on 2nd Fagun, 2080, by then-Minister for General Administration Anita Devi, Clause 82 of the bill restricted retired civil servants from taking up employment elsewhere. While the original draft did have restrictions, it didn’t fully block appointments, nor did it include a formal cooling-off clause. That provision was introduced later through lawmakers’ amendment proposals during clause-by-clause discussions.

As per the amended bill passed by the committee, Clause 82(4) says a civil servant who resigns or retires from government service cannot be appointed to any constitutional or government post within two years of leaving office.

Then comes Sub-clause 5, which states that individuals retiring from gazetted special or first-class positions in the federal civil service must not take up roles involving constitutional or diplomatic appointments or projects operated by agencies other than intergovernmental bodies or international development partners within two years.

The use of certain wording in Sub-clause 5 triggered the confusion. It led some to interpret that the cooling-off period would not apply to officials like Chief Secretaries, Secretaries, and Joint Secretaries. That ambiguity prompted the formation of the special committee on 23rd Ashar.

The committee was initially given 21 days to complete its work. Later, the deadline was extended by a week, ending this past Sunday. But discussions continued into Monday as a follow-up to Sunday’s meeting.

The seven-member committee is chaired by Congress lawmaker Jeevan Pariyar. Its members include Congress MP Sushila Thing, UML MPs Ishwari Gharti and Narayan Prasad Acharya, Madhav Sapkota from the Maoist Centre, Ganesh Parajuli from the Rastriya Swatantra Party, and Roshan Karki from the Rastriya Prajatantra Party.

Once tabled in the House, the committee’s report will be formally enforced.

People’s News Monitoring Service