The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court recently annulled an amendment to the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 2029, which had allowed the operation of national priority projects within conservation areas, including national parks. Following this decision, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli has suggested that a constitutional and legal remedy could be explored to address the issue.

Speaking at the silver jubilee event of the Independent Power Producers Association of Nepal (IPPAN) last week, Prime Minister Oli stated that a constitutional approach should be taken to correct the decision made by the Constitutional Bench. He argued that the Supreme Court could be requested to reconsider its ruling through constitutional and democratic means. His statement came after energy producers raised concerns about the ruling’s impact on 267 projects totaling 19,736 MW within national parks and reserves, where significant investments have already been made. Additionally, the decision has left the future of another 20,000 MW of planned projects uncertain, as they were in the process of obtaining permission from conservation authorities.

However, constitutional law experts assert that there is no legal provision for reconsidering a ruling made by the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court. Senior advocate Balkrishna Neupane emphasized that such decisions are final. While the Supreme Court has the authority to review decisions made by individual justices, he clarified that a Constitutional Bench ruling, decided by a panel of five justices, cannot be overturned. Neupane acknowledged the concerns of energy producers but maintained that the only alternative would be to introduce new legal amendments that align with the court’s ruling.

Several hydropower projects are now in jeopardy due to this decision, including Upper Tamakoshi, Khare, Sipring Khola, Khanikhola, Singati, Upper Chaku A, Chaku Khola, Bhotekoshi-1, Balefi A, Indrawati, Nilgiri-1, Nilgiri-2, Langtang, Chilime, Rasuwagadhi, Sardi Khola, Khimti Khola, Upallo Khimti, Sikles, Midim Khola, Bhujung, and Super Madi.

Senior advocate Bipin Adhikari echoed Neupane’s stance, stating that there is no need to reconsider the ruling simply because it creates difficulties. However, he pointed out that if a new legal framework is introduced to address the grounds on which the Supreme Court based its decision, the ruling’s effects could be minimized as a precedent. Similarly, constitutional scholar Bhimarjun Acharya stated that the ruling is final and cannot be reviewed through any legal process.

The government had amended the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 2029 through an ordinance ahead of the Investment Summit in late April. The amendment allowed the government to approve national priority projects, including those approved by the Investment Board Nepal, within conservation areas, provided that human-nature coexistence was maintained. The ordinance was later passed by parliament. However, advocate Dilraj Khanal filed a writ petition against it in the Supreme Court, arguing that the amendment was unconstitutional. On January 15, the Constitutional Bench ruled in favor of the petition, striking down the amendment. The decision is expected to significantly impact ongoing and planned hydropower projects within conservation areas.