The special parliamentary investigation committee formed to probe the controversial inclusion of a cooling-off period in the Federal Civil Service Bill is preparing to finalize its report. A key debate has centered around the language used to describe the error—whether it was simply a human oversight or a more serious act of negligence.
The committee meeting, which began at 7:30 AM in Singha Durbar, has zeroed in on finalizing the language in the report. The initial draft had admitted the use of incorrect language inconsistent with the political consensus regarding the cooling-off provision. However, committee members were divided on whether to label it a “human error” or “gross negligence.”
Initially, both terms—“human error” and “serious negligence”—were included. These referred to the fact that the cooling-off clause in the bill did not align with related legal provisions. After extended discussions, the committee decided to merge the two terms into a single phrase: “serious mistake.”
Focus on accountability and future safeguards
According to members, the committee is also discussing recommendations for actions against those responsible for the confusion and preventive measures to avoid similar legislative mistakes in the future. The report will include names of those involved in the drafting and questions how inactive language regarding the cooling-off period was inserted in the first place.
The bill in question was initially presented by then-Minister of General Administration Anita Devi. Clause 82 of the bill had originally stated that civil servants could not take other jobs post-retirement, but it did not bar them from holding public office. It was only after lawmakers submitted amendment proposals that a formal two-year cooling-off period was inserted.
Controversial clause created legal contradictions
The amendment added a provision stating that retired special- and first-class civil servants must wait two years before taking any constitutional or government position. However, Clause 5 of the same section had contradictory wording that appeared to render the cooling-off period inactive, sparking political uproar and leading to the formation of the investigation committee.
Committee’s term ends today, report due tomorrow
The committee was formed on Asar 23 and initially given 21 days to complete its work. An extension of one week was granted, and that deadline expires today. The final report is scheduled to be submitted to the House of Representatives tomorrow.
The committee includes two members each from the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, and one member each from the Maoist Center, Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), and Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP). Members include Jeevan Pariyar, Sushila Thing (Congress); Ishwari Gharti, Narayan Prasad Acharya (UML); Madhav Sapkota (Maoist); Ganesh Parajuli (RSP); and Roshan Karki (RPP).
The House is now awaiting the report, which could influence how civil service reforms move forward and how future legislative processes are safeguarded.
