Kathmandu — The CPN-UML has expressed serious dissatisfaction over the conduct of Ramhari Khatiwada, Chairperson of the State Affairs and Good Governance Committee, calling into question his continuation in the role. UML lawmakers have accused Khatiwada of failing to maintain the integrity of a bill that had already been deliberated by the committee, citing discrepancies between the version approved by the committee and the one presented in Parliament.
Discrepancies in Civil Service Bill Spark Controversy
In Wednesday’s meeting of the committee, UML lawmaker Padam Giri pointed out significant differences in the “cooling period” provision included in the Civil Service Bill. He called for a thorough investigation into the roles of both the chairperson and the committee secretary.
“From an ethical standpoint, both the chairperson and the secretary cannot remain in their positions. To ensure an impartial investigation and proper action, they must vacate their posts,” Giri said unequivocally. He described the incident as one of the most “shameful” episodes in Nepal’s parliamentary history. “The entire committee discussed and reached a decision, but the bill submitted to Parliament contradicts that decision. This is not just a technical error—it signals a serious ethical lapse,” he stated.
Giri emphasized that the chairperson and secretary must take full responsibility, as they were the final signatories on the draft approved by the committee. “It’s not about what any minister, secretary, or bureaucrat did in the process. Ultimately, the responsibility lies with those who signed off on it,” he added.
Demand for Accountability and Ethical Leadership
He further remarked, “Such cover-ups must stop now. If this incident goes unpunished, similar breaches could recur, eroding public trust in democracy and the parliamentary process.” UML lawmaker Basudev Ghimire also called for Khatiwada’s immediate resignation. “The chairperson must set an example through responsible conduct,” he said.
The CPN-UML has taken the discrepancy between the committee’s decision and the version of the bill presented in Parliament very seriously and has demanded a full investigation. Lawmakers have strongly emphasized the need for holding those responsible accountable. This incident has raised serious questions about transparency and accountability within parliamentary committees and the legislative process.
The core issue now being asked across the country and within Parliament is: Can the decisions of a parliamentary committee be tampered with before being tabled in the House? And who bears the responsibility?
All eyes are now on the committee’s leadership and the actions it will take moving forward.
