Nature — three descriptive theses:
1. It is fundamental law — the apex of the legal hierarchy (Article 1 of Nepal's Constitution states the Constitution is the fundamental law, and any law inconsistent with it is void to that extent).
2. It is political law — constitutional law is where law meets politics: it channels the competition for power (elections, no-confidence, federalism), and its interpretation (ratio of constitutional adjudication) is inevitably value-laden. This is why constitutional interpretation is distinct from ordinary statutory interpretation (living tree vs. original intent; textual, structural, purposive approaches).
3. It is partly non-justiciable — constitutions contain directives and aspirations (Nepal's directive principles and policies in Part 4, which Article 55 declares non-justiciable: no question may be raised in court as to their implementation), side by side with hard, enforceable rules (the fundamental rights of Part 3, with the right to constitutional remedy as their guarantee).
Scope — what constitutional law covers (map of this course and its sequel):
• The nature and classification of constitutions; constitutionalism, rule of law, separation of powers (this course);
• The structure of the State and distribution of powers — unitary/federal systems (this course, Unit 6);
• Organs of the State: legislature, executive, judiciary — their composition, powers and mutual relations (Constitutional Law-II);
• Fundamental rights and their enforcement; directive principles; constitutional remedies (Constitutional Law-II);
• Constitutional bodies (Election Commission, Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority, Auditor-General, Public Service Commission, National Human Rights Commission), the constitutional council that recommends appointments, emergency powers, amendment, and the living constitution built by interpretation.
Scope in Nepal — the point students must appreciate: Nepal's constitutional law cannot be understood from the 2015 text alone. It is the product of seven constitutions (1948, 1951 interim, 1959, 1962, 1990, 2007 interim, 2015), of revolutions and movements (1950/51, 1990, 2006), and of a rich body of Supreme Court jurisprudence interpreting each of them. Constitutional law in
Nepal is also intensely comparative — its concepts (judicial review, fundamental rights, proportional representation, federalism) are borrowings domesticated to Nepali experience.