Ever since controversies over his personal and academic details surfaced, Chief Justice Gopal Parajuli has tried to use judiciary to defend himself and hound those who questioned him.

In the Judicial Council (JC) meeting on April 27, 2017, Gopal Parajuli, then senior-most Supreme Court justice requested the then Chief Justice Sushila Karki to resolve controversies surrounding his citizenship certificate and academic.

Chair of the meeting Karki dismissed Parajuli’s plea stating that Judicial Council is not the body to authenticate certificates. “Authenticate it from the concerned agencies, then only council would take the decision,” Karki had said.

There was intense argument during the meeting following Karki’s refusal. “Why should we (Judicial Council) become part of your forgery?” Karki had said. After that incident, Judicial Council meeting did not convene during Karki’s tenure despite her repeated attempt. 

This shows that even before assuming the post of chief justice, incumbent Chief Justice Gopal Prasad Parauli tried to make a decision in his favour concerning the authenticity of his date of birth and educational certificates.

This was one of many episodes that show Parajuli tried to make a decision favourable to him to resolve the controversies surrounding him even before taking charge of the Supreme Court. 

The latest of this series came when senior advocate Surendra Bhandari, who was defending Dr Govinda KC in a contempt of court case, blamed Parajuli of issuing death threat against him and demanded police security. Convening the full court (meeting of all justices at the Supreme Court) CJ Parajuli tried to use the full court to defend him. However, majority of the justices refused his plea, stating that institution should not be dragged to cover up his personal controversies. 

Parajuli has used his position to cover up his weakness and take revenge against those who question him. Before he was appointed as Chief Justice, Advocate Bikas Giri on May 31, 2017 had filed a case in Supreme Court demanding probe on his academic certificates and citizenship certificate. When the hearing on the case was fixed, Parajuli remained absent. Giri remained incommunicado for a week and appeared before the apex court on June 8, 2017 after Parajuli was named officiating Chief Justice. Subsequently, Giri filed an application demanding withdrawal of case he filed against Parajuli. A bench of Justice Purushottom Bhandari refused to withdraw the case, but the bench scrapped the writ without hearing anything from the defendant.

When Parajuli was officiating Chief Justice, he revived the case regarding the date of birth of Surendra Singh Basnyat who had retired from Janakpur High Court as Chief Judge.  After finding Basnyat had two birth dates - March 1, 1954 and July 3, 1954, the Judicial Council on December 16, 2016 had endorsed the first one. Basnyat went to the Supreme Court challenging the JC decision. The joint bench justices Deepak Kumar Karki and Sharada Prasad Ghimire overturned the decision taken by judicial commission. 

Based on the verdict on Basnyat, CJ Parajuli called the meeting of Judicial Council on June 13 last year and took decision about the controversy of his date of birth. The meeting fixed his date of birth as April 28, 1953 and recommended his name in Constitutional Council. If the date of birth submitted when he was appointed as justice of Supreme Court, he could have become chief justice for only 56 days, the corrected date of birth allowed him to hold office of 10 months and 23 days.

“The principle of natural justice is that any individual cannot take decisions on the issues related to him,” said former Justice Balaram KC. “Section 30 of Civil Code (Muluki Ain) concerning court procedure clearly mentions it. Such values were established with a view that there should not prejudice, and there should not benefit to him/her and injustice to others,” he said.  

CJ Parajuli is also using court as a tool to take revenge against those who question him.  In a contempt of court case against Dr Govinda KC who protested demanding good governance in the judiciary, Supreme Court hurriedly asked the court administration to prepare report and fix the bench in a single day. On January 9, a single bench of Justice Dambar Bahadur Shahi instructed the administration to present Dr KC before the court within 9 am next day. Following the court verdict, police took Dr KC into custody that was beyond the normal practice. On February 1, senior Advocate Dr. Surendra Bhandari lodged a complaint at District Administration Office saying that CJ Parajuli issued him death threat.

Concerning the contempt of court case against Kantipur Daily, CJ Parajuli forwarded the case to his own bench and issued an order that was against the principle of natural justice. He also ordered Press Council Nepal to probe the news published in Kantipur and ensure news against CJ Parajuli are not published again which was effectively an attempt to impose pre-censorship in media.