Nepal’s Supreme Court held a full court meeting on Friday morning to discuss media reports linking Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma and members of the judiciary to controversial figure Inam Sapkota. The meeting, chaired by Chief Justice Sharma, considered the reports and the questions they have raised about the judiciary, Supreme Court spokesperson Ashok Kumar Kshetri said. Judges called for an internal investigation committee, while the Bar has urged an impartial probe. Another full court meeting is scheduled for Monday.
What the full court discussed
The meeting brought the controversy before the court’s full bench of judges for discussion. According to spokesperson Kshetri, the agenda included both the matter described in the media reports and questions raised about the judiciary. The court has not, in the information available, announced a conclusion about the reported links. The decision to hold another full court meeting on Monday means the matter is due to return for further discussion.
The reports have named Chief Justice Sharma and Justice Hari Phuyal in connection with Sapkota. Justice Hariprasad Phuyal and Justice Shrikant Poudel have also been named in coverage of the controversy. The reports, as described in the available information, have prompted questions about the judiciary, but no further detail about the nature of the alleged connections has been provided. It is therefore important to distinguish the fact that judges have been named in reports from any finding by the court.
Denials and calls for an investigation
Both Chief Justice Sharma and Justice Phuyal have denied the reported links. Their denials are part of the response to the allegations, while the demand for an internal investigation committee reflects judges’ call for the matter to be examined within the judiciary. The available information does not say that such a committee has already been formed, identify who would serve on it, or set out the scope of any proposed inquiry.
The Bar has separately called for an impartial probe. That call places emphasis on the need for an examination regarded as independent and fair, amid questions raised by the reports. The request for an impartial investigation is distinct from the judges’ demand for an internal committee: the information available records both positions but does not indicate that either proposal has been adopted. The court’s Monday meeting is the next scheduled opportunity for the full court to discuss the issue further.
What happens next
The next full court meeting is scheduled for Monday, following Friday’s discussion. No decision about the proposed investigation committee has been reported, and the court has not announced any findings. The scheduled meeting establishes a next step in the court’s consideration of the controversy, but its agenda or any outcome has not been specified. The questions raised in the reports, the denials by the Chief Justice and Justice Phuyal, and calls for an inquiry remain central to the discussion.
For now, the confirmed developments are the Friday meeting, the spokesperson’s account of what it discussed, the denials and the competing calls for an investigation. The allegations themselves remain matters raised in media reports, rather than findings stated by the Supreme Court. Any further clarification, decision on an inquiry, or response from the court would help establish how the institution intends to address the questions that have been brought before it.
