2.2 Extrinsic Aids

(a) Historical setting. The statute's birth-time: the conditions that produced it (the 2074 codes' drafting era; the post-constitution statute wave). The setting explains the mischief the words address. (b) Parliamentary history and debates. The bill's passage record — the classic exclusion (the debates' unreliability: the speakers' many voices) against the modern admission (the committee reports' weight — the Pepper v. Hart relaxation's lore, by name). Nepal's practice: the Parliament's committee records and the bill's presentations as the purposive evidence. (c) Official reports, including Law Reform Commission reports. The commission papers behind the Act (the law commission's and the drafting committee's reports) — the mischief's authoritative account (the Black-Clawson case's famous permission — the report's admissibility for the background, not the words' replacement). Nepal's faces: the Law Commission's drafts-and-reports, the thematic committees' papers. (d) Explanatory memoranda issued by governmentdepartments. The ministry's notes accompanying the bill — the official understanding's evidence; the weight: persuasive, never binding. (e) Textbooks and dictionaries. The dictionaries of the enactment's date (the contemporaneous meaning — the "dictionary of the year" discipline) and the legal treatises (the professional meaning's evidence) — the foreign authorities' persuasive-only status in the Nepali courts (the common law's and the Sanskrit tradition's ownclassics — the Mimansa's rules of U3.1.3 as the indigenous textbook). (f) Internationalconventions. The treaty behind the statute (the implementing Act…