Kathmandu. The appointment of Radha Kumari Pokharel, who was appointed as a female member of the Board of Directors of the Nepal Insurance Authority, has been found to be illegal. Finance Minister Bishnu Poudel has appointed Pokharel as an expert female member with effect from Chaitra 1 based on a ministerial decision.
Although the ministry stated that it had decided to appoint Porkhel in accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the Insurance Act, 2079, the Act has not given the Finance Minister the right to make appointments. This right is fully vested only in the Government of Nepal, i.e. the Council of Ministers. Sub-section 5 of Section 7 of the Act states that the ‘Government of Nepal’ shall appoint members as per Section 6, Sub-section 1, Clauses d and e from among the persons who have fulfilled the qualifications as per Sub-section (1) of Section 8. In making such appointments, at least one woman shall be appointed.
The Ministry of Finance is an organ of the executive branch of the Government of Nepal and the Minister of Finance is only a government representative, not the entire Government of Nepal. Only decisions made by the Council of Ministers are valid as decisions of the Government of Nepal. The decisions made by the minister are only applicable as ministerial decisions.
If Pokharel’s appointment process is challenged in the Supreme Court while there are voices raised regarding her qualifications, there is a full possibility that the Supreme Court will overturn it with a demotion order.
Finance Minister Poudel is being widely criticized for appointing the inexperienced Pokharel as the woman director of the NEA. He is being criticized for appointing an incompetent woman as the woman director of the NEA. There are voices being raised saying that Pokharel does not have enough expertise and experience to be appointed as a female director as per the qualifications specified in Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Insurance Act.
The Steering Committee shall consist of a person appointed by the government as the Chairperson, a member of the Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Finance, a member of the Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, one member from among the persons with special knowledge in the life insurance business, and one member from among the persons with special knowledge in the non-life insurance business. Sub-section (2) of the same section provides that there shall be at least one female director who has acquired special knowledge in the insurance business mentioned in Sub-section (1).
Section 8 of the Insurance Act itself contains provisions regarding the qualifications of the Chairperson and members of the Authority. The criteria are that the candidate should have a master’s degree or equivalent in insurance, monetary, banking, finance, commerce, management, public administration, statistics, mathematics, economics or law and at least 5 years of senior managerial work experience in the relevant field.
Pokharel was appointed as the director of Vishal Bazaar Company on February 4, 2079, by the decision of Finance Minister Poudel. She has been the director there for only 2 years. Experts say that her work experience is not sufficient in this regard.
Supreme Court Advocate Anantaraj Luintel said that the appointment to be made by the Government of Nepal is illegal if it is made through a ministerial-level decision. ‘If the Act mentions the Government of Nepal, then the Council of Ministers should make the appointment, not through a ministerial-level decision,’ he said, ‘Therefore, if a female member of the Insurance Authority is appointed through a ministerial-level decision, it is illegal. If a writ is filed in court, that appointment is automatically null and void.’
Similarly, Pokharel is being criticized for not having enough work experience to be appointed as a female member. Advocate Luintel said that if it is found that the qualifications and work experience mentioned in the Act are not met, the court will take a serious look at this matter. “The Supreme Court has already annulled many such illegal appointments,” he said. “Therefore, if a writ is filed against any public appointment that is made against the law, the court can study the facts and decide to annul it.”
