27 Chait, Kathmandu. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, democracy is a government where all power is vested in the people. Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States of America, has a well-known opinion about democracy, “Government of the people by the people for the people.”

The people transfer the sovereign rights vested in them to their representatives for a certain period of time through the ballot. And, representatives elected by the people rule.

But what to do if the elected representatives are not accountable to the people? It is appropriate to mention the opinion of former British Prime Minister and author Winston Churchill.

A small man enters a small room, holds a small pencil and makes a small mark on a small piece of paper. The sum of these little marks determines the fate of the country for the next five years,’ said Churchill, ‘as soon as the election is over, the little man is forgotten, neglected and ignored – until the next vote comes.’

When the people are ignored, the right to recall is the right to remove the elected representative from office before the end of the term. Such an arrangement makes the representative accountable to the people.

If MPs or local people’s representatives fail to fulfill their duties or break public trust, they are removed from office. The right of recall is believed to strengthen democracy. However, it is not without its negative aspects such as expensiveness and instability.

If we look at the context of Nepal, the Parliament can recall the Prime Minister through a motion of no confidence. The president and vice president can be removed by passing the impeachment. The prime minister can dismiss the minister.

Only on Thursday, Prime Minister Balendra Shah dismissed Labor, Employment and Social Security Minister Deepak Kumar Shah. Less than two weeks after he became a minister, the Prime Minister removed Sah from the post on the recommendation of Ravi Lamichhane, chairman of the ruling Rashtriya Swatantra Party (RASWPA).

In the letter written by Chairman Lamichhane, it is said that Sah has been recalled according to the provision of ‘right to recall’ mentioned in the constitution of RSWP. It is not that the Prime Minister cannot remove any member of the Council of Ministers even without the recommendation of the party.

It is the prime minister’s prerogative to form the cabinet as he wishes. Constitutionalist Dr. Vipin Adhikar says that the Prime Minister can add or remove ministers at any time. He says, ‘The prime minister’s right to add and remove ministers will not be blocked whether written in the constitution of a party or not.’

It is said in the constitution of the RSVP, ‘The ordinary members of the respective areas of the party will have the right to recall their representatives if they do not act satisfactorily. According to the regulations made by the central committee, if the general members of the relevant area decide by a certain number or percentage, the central committee of the party will start the process of canceling the position of the relevant people’s representative.

Similarly, the RSWP says that ‘if the proportional representative of the party acts contrary to the party’s interests or on the basis of performance evaluation or for other mental reasons, the central committee may recall him and the central committee will proceed to the termination of the position of the representative according to the regulations’.

The decision of the RSVP to dismiss the controversial person is positive. But ‘right to recall’ does not mean dismissing the minister. Its concept is different. “Party recalling its MP or minister is not a right to recall,” Constitutionalist Dr. Bipin Adhikari says.

After Sah was dismissed from the post of Labor Minister, analyst Dumbar Khatiwada wrote on social network X, ‘Right to recall’ is the right of the citizens to recall the representative if he does not act according to the mandate, not the party recalling the minister.’

In ‘Right to Recall’, the right to decide is not in the party committees, but in the voters. Dr. The official says, ‘Whoever voted and won, he has the right to recall. Where the voter has the right to decide.’

Existing laws are sufficient to remove MPs who act contrary to party instructions or do not follow the law.

‘Right to recall’ ie the right to recall is not exercised by the leaders who sit at the top, but by the voters at the bottom. In Nepal, the ruling RSWP is trying to explain the meaning.

On 25 June 2077, Sarita Giri, a member of the House of Representatives of the Samajwadi Party, was relieved of her post. While passing the constitution amendment bill to include Nepal’s (Chuchche) map including Limpiyadhura in the Nissan seal, Giri violated the party’s instructions (WHIP).

After that, the party sent a letter to the Federal Parliament Secretariat mentioning the provisions of the Political Party Act, 2073 and the Interim Statute of the Samajwadi Party, 2076. It is worth noting that there is no mention of ‘right to recall’ in the Samajwadi Party constitution.

Section 28 of the Act on Political Parties provides that the chief whip of the parliamentary party can whip the motion of confidence or no-confidence in the government, the matter of approving the government’s policies and programs, the matter of passing the annual budget and any other matter of national or public importance. After violating this provision of the Act, Samajwadi Party decided to take action against Giri.

In Article 89 of the Constitution, it is mentioned that “if the party for which he was elected as a member of the party informs that he has left the party in accordance with the federal law”, the federal parliamentarian will be dismissed from office.

In the year 2079, after the audio of asking Durga Prasai for 20 crores was made public, the party’s MP Dhakakumar Shrestha was removed from the party as an ordinary member of the party. Since he was no longer a party member, Shrestha was also no longer a member of Parliament.

Similarly, if he resigns himself, if he dies, and if he is absent from ten consecutive meetings without informing the House, the position of MP will not be retained.

In July 2080, the meeting of the CPN Maoist Center decided to recall General Administration Minister Aman Lal Modi. At that time Anita Devi Sah of the Janamat Party was returned to Modi as General Administration Minister.

In this way, there are dozens of examples where the party recalled the minister. Even the Maoist center has not provided for ‘right to recall’ in its constitution.

Laws, regulations or any other law made by the parties who are experts in constitutional law and parliamentary affairs shall not exceed the provisions mentioned in the constitution. In the constitution of 2019, there was a provision that the members of the National Panchayat can be ‘suspended’.

After the establishment of the republic, the proposal to remove MPs when 25 percent of the voters demanded it reached the state system committee of the House of Representatives. But it did not take legal form.

Since there was no legal system, it was not possible to ‘recall’. Constitutionalist Dr. The officer says, ‘It is one thing to call the action taken according to the act related to political parties as recall. If not, calling like this and right to recall is a completely different matter.’