Law Day: Time to look beyond paper promises

By: Jivesh Jha & Bishnu Chandra Nepali

Published: May 8, 2026, (The Annapurna Express, page 4)

As we observe Law Day on May 9, it is a moment not just for celebration, but also for honest reflection. The day marks the enforcement of the Supreme Court Act and symbolizes our commitment to the rule of law. Yet, an uncomfortable question remains: have we truly succeeded in enforcing our legal mandates in both letter and spirit?

Many argue that Nepal’s commitment to the rule of law still falls short of what our Constitution promises. Laws look impressive when written, but they lose their meaning if they remain only in books. When legal provisions are not followed in practice, they become little more than decorative words.

Take, for instance, the clear constitutional provision under Article 132, which bars former Justices or Chief Justices of the Supreme Court from holding government positions. Despite this, we have witnessed instances that appear to contradict this mandate. During the 2013 Constituent Assembly elections, former Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi simultaneously held the position of Chief Justice and head of the executive (while the legislature was in a state of animated suspension).

Such events raise serious concerns about separation of power and constitutional compliance.

Another example lies in the formation of oversized cabinets in the past, which seem to go beyond the limits envisioned under Article 76. When constitutional provisions are bent or ignored for political convenience, it weakens public trust in governance.

Fate of fundamental rights

The gap between enactment and enforcement is more visible in everyday life. Article 30 of the Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to a clean environment. Yet, pollution continues to affect cities and towns across the country.

Likewise, the Constitution guarantees the right to employment, but hundreds of youths leave Nepal every day in search of jobs abroad. If rights exist only on paper, can we truly say they exist at all?

The same can be said about the right to housing. Many citizens still struggle to find adequate shelter despite this being a fundamental right. As consumers, people are frequently overcharged, with prices of goods varying widely from one shop to another without transparency. Restaurants and hotels often charge arbitrarily, raising questions about the enforcement of consumer protection laws.

Political appointments

The Constitution also envisions fair and merit-based appointments in public offices. However, reality often tells a different story. Many individuals appointed (in previous governments) to key positions have strong political affiliations rather than proven competence.

It is not uncommon to find that loyalty to political parties outweighs merit and qualifications. This creates a system where capable individuals are overlooked, while less qualified individuals are elevated.

Question of rule of law

This situation reflects what legal scholar AV Dicey warned about when he discussed the rule of law. He emphasized that laws must not only exist but must also be applied equally and fairly. If political influence dominates legal processes, the very foundation of the rule of law is shaken.

It raises a deeper question: are we moving toward a “rule of law” or merely a “rule by law”? The difference is crucial. The rule of law ensures fairness, accountability and equality before the law. Rule by law uses laws as tools to serve those in power.

The consequences of this gap are visible. Many young people feel disappointed and see no future within the country. They look abroad for opportunities, believing that merit is better recognized elsewhere.

Even within the bureaucracy and other sectors, frustration grows when capable individuals remain stuck while others rise through political connections.

So, has the system failed us, or have we failed the system? The answer likely lies somewhere in between. Political leaders often act in their own interests, but citizens, institutions, and watchdog bodies also have a role in demanding accountability.

Law Day should not be reduced to a symbolic event marked by speeches and ceremonies. It should serve as a reminder that laws must be implemented, not just written. Observing Law Day without ensuring implementation risks turning it into an empty ritual.

Way forward

If Nepal is serious about strengthening democracy, it must commit to implementing the Constitution fully and faithfully. This means respecting constitutional limits, ensuring merit-based appointments, protecting fundamental rights and holding violators accountable—regardless of their position.

Otherwise, the gap between promise and practice will only widen. And, if that happens, the celebration of Law Day will lose its meaning, becoming just another date on the calendar rather than a true reflection of justice in action.

In a country where many people still face problems like distance, poverty and language barriers in reaching the courts, Law Day reminds the government that “justice delayed is justice denied.”

Law Day acts as a guiding light for the nation. The 2015 Constitution brought major changes in how power is shared, and the judiciary now plays a key role in settling important political disputes.

It also shows that no matter how serious political instability may be, the Constitution remains supreme. The day honors the strength of legal institutions that have continued through many changes—from monarchy to republic, and from conflict to peace.

https://theannapurnaexpress.com/story/64175/