Constitutional interpretation is a source of constitutional law: what the Supreme Court says the constitution means becomes part of the constitution's living content. Under Article 128, the Supreme Court's interpretations and legal principles bind all courts and organs (the precedent rule). Landmark lines of Nepali decisions — on the reinstatement of dissolved legislatures, on citizenship, on inclusion, on the constitutionality of statutes and of prosecutions, on environmental rights (the Unit 18 prescribed cases are largely this line) — have made constitutional law without a word of textual amendment. Three judicial craft-rules operate through this source: stare decisis (precedent discipline), constitutional avoidance (decide on non-constitutional grounds if possible), and restraint vs.
activism (the political-questions doctrine and the interpretive doctrines of Unit 14 are the vocabulary of this debate).