The Legislature-Parliament has no code of conduct for its members, whose primary task is to pass laws for state bodies and set examples for public office holders.

Despite some earlier efforts to formulate the code, it never has been a priority for the House and the political parties since the restoration of democracy in 1990, lawmakers and former speakers say.

The parliamentary practice worldwide is to have a clear code of conduct and an independent monitoring committee to preserve the integrity of Parliament as well as of parliamentarians. However, Parliament in Nepal has never set ethical standards since the one convened during the democratic set-up in 1991.

Clause 18 of the Constituent Assembly regulations provisioned a code of conduct and formation of a monitoring committee to discipline lawmakers in their activities in and outside Parliament.

Former speaker Subas Nembang said the code of conduct and an investigating body could not be formed as the CA was busy with the constitution drafting process. “Some attempts were made during my tenure even though it did not materialise,” said Nembang.

“However, I believe maintaining a political culture is more important than [having a] code of conduct.”

The absence of set standards for parliamentarians to guide their behavior has allowed MPs to repeatedly commit what is not in keeping with the sanctity of the sovereign body.

Umesh Yadav, a UCPN (Maoist) lawmaker, broke chairs and attempted to assault then-CA Chairman Nembang in January last year. However, no action was taken against him.

The Speaker did nothing against another Maoist lawmaker, Bal Krishna Dhungel, despite being convicted of murder by the court. Baban Singh, a Member of Parliament who faced criminal charges was left scot-free.

In a clear conflict of interest, lawmakers are being allowed to deliberate on a bill to upgrade the status of the Manmohan Institute of Health Sciences, an institute where they have stakes.

Despite the absence of code, experts say the Speaker has the prerogative for action against MPs that bring disrepute to Parliament. “Speaker is the final arbiter in Parliament to maintain its decorum,” said former Speaker Daman Nath Dhungana. “The lack of code of conduct is just an excuse for the present malpractice.”

According to Maoist lawmaker Ram Narayan Bidari, a committee formed in 2014 had done preliminary work on a code of behaviour for parliamentarians to follow. It included an exhaustive list of what MPs were supposed to do or not to do, ethical standards and their behaviour both inside and outside Parliament.

“There has been plenty of malpractice in the absence of a code,” Bidari said. “Hopefully, the present Speaker [Onsari Gharti] will take steps to rein them in.”