How a Legal System Becomes a Major Legal System, and the Major Legal Systems

How a legal system becomes a major legal system

A legal system does not become "major" merely by being old or by having many laws. It acquires that status through a combination of the following factors:

1. Wide geographical spread. The system must be followed in many countries and across different continents, not confined to one state. The Roman (Civil) law and the Common law spread through colonisation, conquest and voluntary reception, and today cover most of the world.

2. Historical depth and continuity. A major system has a long, unbroken history of development. The Civil law traces back to the Roman Corpus Juris Civilis (6th century AD) and the Common law to the English royal courts after the Norman Conquest of 1066. Longevity gives the system maturity and tested principles.

3. Influence on other systems. A legal system becomes major when other countries borrow its concepts, institutions and techniques. The French Code Civil of 1804 and the German BGB of 1900 were copied or adapted by dozens of states; English common law was exported to the USA, Canada, Australia, India and Nepal (partly).

4. Distinctive sources and methods. The system must have a recognisable identity — its own hierarchy of sources (statute, precedent, custom, religious text) and its own reasoning technique (codification and deduction in Civil law, judicial precedent and induction in Common law).

5. Organised legal profession and legal education. A developed body of judges, jurists, advocates and law schools is necessary. The Roman jurists, the English Inns of Court, and modern law faculties have all sustained their systems and spread them abroad.

6. Political and economic power of the parent state. Empires, trade and diplomacy carry law with them. British naval and commercial supremacy spread the Common law; French and German political dominance spread the Civil law; and today the economic weight of the USA and the EU keeps these systems dominant.

7. Capacity to meet social needs. A system survives and expands only if it can regulate new problems — commerce, industry, human rights — and adapt without breaking. Systems that failed to adapt (for example, many purely customary systems) remained local.

When these factors combine, a legal system crosses its national boundary, is received by many other states, and is then classified by comparatists as a major legal system (also called a legal family or legal tradition).

The major legal systems in brief

1. The Civil Law System (Romano-Germanic family)

• Origin: Roman law, especially the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian (533–565 AD); revived in medieval Italy and developed in continental Europe.
• Sources: Codified statutes are the primary source; custom and general principles of law are secondary. Judicial precedent is not binding in theory.
• Method: Deductive reasoning — general code provisions are applied to particular facts. Judges have less law-making power.
• Features: Comprehensive codes (Civil Code, Penal Code, Commercial Code), separate administrative courts, inquisitorial criminal procedure.
• Countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Japan, and most of Latin America and continental Europe.

2. The Common Law System (Anglo-American family)

• Origin: England, from the uniform law applied by the King's courts after 1066; equity developed separately through the Chancellor.
• Sources: Judicial precedent (stare decisis) is the primary source, along with statutes and customs; equity supplements the common law.
• Method: Inductive reasoning — principles are drawn from decided cases. Judges actively make law.
• Features: Adversarial trial, jury system (in some countries), binding ratio of earlier decisions, distinction between common law and equity.
• Countries: England, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and many Commonwealth states.

3. The Socialist Legal System

• Origin: The 1917 Russian Revolution; based on Marxist–Leninist theory that law is an instrument of the ruling class and must serve socialist construction.
• Sources: Statutes and party policy dominate; precedent has little value; private law is subordinated to public and economic law.
• Features: State ownership of the means of production, planned economy, collective rights preferred over individual rights.
• Countries: Former USSR, China, Cuba, Vietnam and other socialist states. After 1991 many of these systems moved closer to Civil law.

4. The Religious (Theocratic) Legal System

• Origin: Divine revelation; law is believed to come from God, not from the state.
• Sources: The holy scripture and its authoritative interpretations — the Quran and Sunnah in Islamic law, the Dharmashastra and Smritis in Hindu law.
• Features: No separation between religion and law; the religious court applies the sacred text; punishment is both temporal and spiritual.
• Countries: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan (Islamic law); Hindu law survives mainly as personal law in India and Nepal.

5. The Customary (Primitive) Legal System

• Origin: Long-standing usage and tradition of a community, unwritten and orally transmitted.
• Sources: Custom, tribal practice and the decisions of elders or chiefs.
• Features: Small, homogeneous societies; sanctions are social and religious rather than state-organised; no formal legislature or court system.
• Examples: African tribal law, indigenous law of the Americas, and the customary practices of many South Asian communities.

6. The Mixed (Hybrid) Legal System

• Nature: A system that combines elements of two or more major systems.
• Examples: Nepal (Hindu religious law, customary law and English common law), India (common law with Hindu and Muslim personal law), South Africa (Roman-Dutch civil law with English common law), Scotland and Israel.

Conclusion

A legal system attains the status of a major legal system through wide geographical reach, historical continuity, borrowing by other states, a distinct method of reasoning, an organised legal profession, and the political and economic strength of the parent state. On this basis comparatists identify the Civil law, Common law, Socialist, Religious, Customary and Mixed systems as the major legal systems of the world.

Family of law influencing the Nepalese legal system

Nepalese law has been shaped mainly by the Hindu legal family (the Dharmashastra tradition), with later and lesser influence from the common law and civil law families.

1. Hindu legal family (primary influence). For centuries Nepal was a Hindu kingdom and law drew on the Dharmashastra texts (Manusmriti, Yajnavalkya Smriti, Narada Smriti). The first comprehensive code, the Muluki Ain of 1910 BS (1854 AD) of Jung Bahadur Rana, was built on Hindu norms, the caste hierarchy and the idea of dharma. The Muluki Ain of 2020 BS (1963 AD) removed formal caste-based inequality and unified the law, but Hindu ideas remained visible in family and inheritance law for a long time.

2. Common law influence. From the 1950s, especially after the Pradhan Nyayalaya was set up in 2008 BS (1951) and the Supreme Court was established in 2013 BS (1956), Nepal adopted common law features: the adversarial trial, writ jurisdiction (habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, quo warranto), judicial review and the value of precedent, which the Constitution of Nepal 2072 recognises through the binding force of Supreme Court interpretation.

3. Civil law influence. Nepal prefers comprehensive written codes, such as the Muluki Civil Code and Muluki Criminal Code, 2074, and the Civil and Criminal Procedure Codes, 2074. This codified, systematic form is characteristic of the civil law tradition.

4. Other influences. International human rights treaties, ILO conventions and, in constitutional matters, the experience of India and other South Asian countries.

Indigenous features of the Nepalese legal system

1. Dharmashastra base. Law was treated as part of dharma, and the king ruled by rajdharma.
2. Muluki Ain tradition. Codifying the whole law in one national code (1854, 1963, and now the 2074 Codes) is a distinct Nepalese tradition.
3. Custom and local dispute settlement. Community institutions such as Bheja, Parma, Badghar and Mukhiya-led settlement, and later the Panchayat-era Nyaya Panchayat, handled local disputes. The Mediation Act and the Local Government Operation Act, 2074 (with municipal judicial committees under Article 217) continue this idea.
4. Customary land tenure. Raikar, Birta, Guthi, Kipat and Jagir were indigenous land systems with their own rules. Land reform from 2021 BS (1964) reshaped them.
5. Caste and ethnic diversity. The old law gave different treatment to castes and communities; today the Constitution (Article 24) forbids untouchability and caste discrimination, and recognises the customs and cultures of Nepal's diverse peoples.
6. Unified personal law. Unlike India, Nepal never left personal law to separate religious communities; the Muluki Ain created one national law.
7. Constitutional history. Nepal was a Hindu kingdom. It was declared a secular state in 2006 (confirmed by the Interim Constitution of 2007), the monarchy was abolished in 2008, and the Constitution of Nepal 2072 (2015) established a federal democratic republic.

Conclusion. The Nepalese system is a hybrid. Its roots are Hindu and customary, its procedure and judicial review largely common law, and its statutory form civil law, with the Muluki Ain codification tradition as its most distinctive indigenous feature.

Comparison of the Law of Rome, France, Germany and Japan

1. Roman Law

Roman law is the foundation of the entire civil law family. Its development passed through three great phases:

• Archaic period (753–367 BC): Customary law, the ius civile of the Twelve Tables (451–450 BC), applied only to Roman citizens.
• Classical period (150 BC–AD 235): The ius gentium and ius honorarium (praetorian law) developed; jurists like Gaius, Papinian, Paul and Ulpian gave responsa. The Corpus Iuris Civilis of Justinian (AD 528–534) — Institutes, Digest, Code and Novels — codified the whole system.
• Post-classical period: Greek influence and vulgarisation, later reception in medieval Europe through the glossators and commentators.

Its chief features were codification in the Corpus Iuris, a strong distinction between ius civile, ius gentium and ius naturale, written and codified law as the primary source, and the absence of judicial precedent as a binding source. Roman law was not applied in a single state but became a "written reason" (ratio scripta) received throughout continental Europe.

2. French Law

French law before 1789 was a dual system: the pays de droit écrit in the south (Roman law) and the pays de droit coutumier in the north (customary law). The Revolution of 1789 abolished feudal privileges and unified the legal system. The Code Civil (Code Napoléon) of 1804 — drafted by a commission under Portalis, Tronchet, Bigot de Préameneu and Maleville — became the model civil code. It rests on the ideals of liberty, equality, private property and the secular state. It spread to Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Latin America and, through the Code Noir and colonial administration, to other parts of the world. France follows a strict separation of powers (Montesquieu), a hierarchy of courts with the Cour de cassation at the top, and the doctrine of stare decisis is not binding.

3. German Law

Germany was politically fragmented until 1871. Its law was a mixture of Roman law (the Pandekten tradition), Germanic customary law and canon law. The Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) of 1900 was the product of the Pandectist school (Savigny, Windscheid). It is more systematic, abstract and scientific than the French Code, with a General Part (Allgemeiner Teil) and a strong doctrine of legal transactions (Rechtsgeschäft). The Weimar Constitution (1919) and the Basic Law (Grundgesetz) of 1949 introduced constitutional supremacy and judicial review. The German Civil Code influenced Japan, China, Korea, Greece, Portugal and Brazil. Germany follows the doctrine of Rechtsstaat (rule of law) and a federal court structure with the Bundesgerichtshof.

4. Japanese Law

Before the Meiji Restoration (1868), Japan followed Chinese-influenced customary and feudal law. After 1868, Japan deliberately borrowed:

• French model: The first Civil Code drafts (Boissonade) were French-inspired.
• German model: The final Civil Code of 1896–1898 was based on the German BGB, especially its first part.
• American influence: After World War II, the 1946 Constitution introduced judicial review, fundamental rights and due process on the American pattern.

Thus Japanese law is a hybrid: a German-style civil code, an American-style constitution, and indigenous family and customary institutions. It is a classic example of "reception" of foreign law.

5. How All Four Fall Under the Civil Law Family

Despite their different historical phases, all four share the essential marks of the civil law family:

1. Codification: Each has a comprehensive written code — the Corpus Iuris Civilis, the Code Civil, the BGB and the Japanese Civil Code.
2. Primacy of legislation: The legislature, not the judge, is the primary law-maker. Judicial precedent is persuasive, not binding.
3. Roman law heritage: All four trace their conceptual vocabulary — obligations, contracts, property, delict — to Roman law, either directly or through the Pandectists.
4. Separation of public and private law: Each distinguishes ius publicum from ius privatum, with separate administrative courts in France and Germany.
5. Inquisitorial procedure: The judge plays an active role in fact-finding, unlike the adversarial common law model.
6. Doctrine of stare decisis absent: Courts are not bound by their own or higher courts' previous decisions in the strict common law sense.
7. Reception and diffusion: Each system has been received or borrowed by other countries, which is why they form a single family.

6. My Opinion

In my opinion, these countries fall under the civil law family not because their laws are identical, but because they share a common method, mentality and source of authority. The differences — Roman law being juristic and uncodified in its classical phase, French law being revolutionary and egalitarian, German law being scientific and systematic, and Japanese law being a deliberate hybrid — are differences of degree and historical phase, not of kind. The unifying thread is the Roman law tradition, the belief in a comprehensive written code, the supremacy of the legislature, and the subordination of the judge to the text of the law. Therefore, despite their different phases of development, they all belong to the same civil law family, and their comparison shows how a single legal tradition can adapt to different political, economic and cultural conditions while retaining its essential identity.

Administration of Justice in Nepal

Meaning: Administration of justice means the working of the state's machinery, namely courts, tribunals, quasi-judicial bodies, prosecution and investigation agencies, to settle disputes, punish offenders and protect rights according to law. In Nepal it rests on the rule of law, an independent judiciary and separation of powers.

1. Constitutional foundation

• Part 11 of the Constitution of Nepal, 2072 deals with the judiciary.
• Article 126: judicial power is exercised by courts and judicial bodies according to the Constitution, law and principles of justice; the judiciary is independent.
• Article 127: hierarchy of courts: Supreme Court, High Courts and District Courts, plus other judicial bodies set up by law.
• Article 128: the Supreme Court is the highest court, a court of record, with final interpretation of the Constitution and the law and the power to punish for contempt.
• Article 133: the Supreme Court's extraordinary jurisdiction to enforce fundamental rights, issue writs and declare laws void if inconsistent with the Constitution.
• Article 153: the Judicial Council (Chief Justice as chair) recommends the appointment, transfer, discipline and removal of judges.
• Article 20 and Article 46: right to justice (fair trial) and right to constitutional remedy.

2. Court structure

3. Agencies involved

• Judiciary: Supreme Court, High Courts, District Courts and special courts.
• Quasi-judicial bodies: tribunals and offices that decide disputes in their field, such as the Revenue Tribunal, Administrative Court, Chief District Officer and Land Revenue offices, Election Commission (election disputes) and local judicial committees.
• Investigation: Nepal Police for ordinary crime, and the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) for corruption.
• Prosecution: Attorney General (Article 157) and Government Attorneys conduct cases for the state.
• Legal aid: the Legal Aid Act, 2075 and legal aid committees provide free legal service to poor and vulnerable persons.

4. Process of justice

1. Complaint or FIR to the police, or plaint to the court.
2. Investigation and filing of charge-sheet by the government attorney within the legal time limit.
3. Trial: evidence, examination, cross-examination and argument.
4. Reasoned judgment.
5. Appeal to the High Court and Supreme Court, and review where allowed.
6. Execution of the judgment.

5. Alternative dispute resolution

Mediation (Mediation Act, 2068) and arbitration (Arbitration Act, 2055), together with court-referred mediation and local judicial committees, reduce case load and give cheaper, quicker justice.

6. Problems

• Case backlog and delay.
• Allegations of corruption and political influence in appointments.
• Limited infrastructure, trained staff and legal awareness.
• Costly litigation and long distances to courts.
• Weak implementation of court decisions.

7. Reforms

• Judicial Council and National Judicial Academy for appointment and training.
• Case management, e-filing and online cause lists.
• Wider legal aid and mediation.
• Protecting independence of judiciary (Article 126) in practice.

Conclusion

Nepal's administration of justice is constitutionally well designed around an independent, hierarchical judiciary supported by prosecution, investigation, tribunals and ADR. Its real effectiveness depends on reducing delay, strengthening integrity, and enforcing decisions so that justice is timely, fair and accessible.

Codification of law means the process of collecting, arranging and reducing the whole body of law on a subject (or the law as a whole) into a systematic, written, authoritative form — usually a statute or code — so that the law becomes certain, accessible, uniform and easy to apply. In codification, scattered rules from different sources (customs, precedents, statutes, religious texts) are not merely collected but also revised, harmonised and enacted afresh by the legislature. It differs from consolidation, which merely brings existing statutory provisions on a subject together into one Act without changing their substance.

Codification distinguished from consolidation

Development of codification and consolidation in recent Nepalese legal history

1. Ancient and medieval period. Law was based on religious texts (Dharmashastra, Smritis), customs and royal edicts. King Jayasthiti Malla (14th century) and King Ram Shah of Gorkha (17th century) issued early written codes, but these were local and not systematic.

2. Muluki Ain 1910 (1854) — the first real codification. Prime Minister Jung Bahadur Rana enacted the Muluki Ain after consulting Hindu legal texts and customs. It was the first attempt to codify the entire civil, criminal and procedural law in one document, though it was based on caste hierarchy and religious values. It remained the principal code for over a century.

3. Muluki Ain 2020 (1963) — reformative codification. After the 1950 political change, the old Ain was replaced by the Muluki Ain 2020, which abolished caste-based discrimination in law, introduced the principle of equality before law, and modernised family, property and criminal law. It was a genuine codification because it reformed the law, not merely collected it.

4. Sectoral codification after 1990. The restoration of democracy (1990) and the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 2047 led to codification in separate branches:

   • Muluki Civil Code 2074 and Muluki Criminal Code 2074 (effective 17 Bhadra 2075) — separated civil and criminal law into distinct codes.
   • Muluki Civil Procedure Code 2074 and Muluki Criminal Procedure Code 2074.
   • Contract Act 2056, Company Act 2063, Labour Act 2074, Consumer Protection Act 2075, Electronic Transactions Act 2063, Right to Information Act 2064, Domestic Violence (Offence and Punishment) Act 2066, Human Trafficking and Transportation (Control) Act 2064, etc.

5. Consolidation in recent days. Many old scattered statutes have been consolidated into single Acts — e.g. the Labour Act 2074 consolidated various labour laws; the Local Government Operation Act 2074 consolidated local body laws; the National Penal Code 2074 and National Civil Code 2074 replaced the Muluki Ain 2020. The Muluki Ain 2020 itself was earlier a consolidation-cum-codification of the 1910 Ain.

6. Constitutional and institutional support. The Constitution of Nepal 2072 (2015) guarantees fundamental rights and directs the State to make laws in conformity with it. The Nepal Law Commission (established 2016 BS / 1959 AD) is the apex body for drafting, revising and codifying laws. After federalism, provinces and local levels also make laws, so codification now occurs at three tiers.

Conclusion. Nepalese legal history shows a clear movement from religious-customary law to systematic written codes — from the Muluki Ain 1910 to the Muluki Civil and Criminal Codes 2074. Recent days have seen both codification (new, reformed codes) and consolidation (unifying scattered statutes), making Nepali law more certain, uniform and rights-based.

Hindu Law vs. Muslim Law

Conclusion: Hindu law is a body of religious and customary rules largely codified by legislation, while Muslim law is a personal law of religious origin, contractual in marriage and largely uncodified, though both are now applied and interpreted by the courts.

Meaning of law-making process

The law-making process is the whole series of stages through which a bill passes before it becomes law. It begins with the identification of a need for a new law or an amendment to an existing one, and ends with the authentication, publication and enforcement of the enacted text. In a constitutional democracy it is the procedure by which the legislature, acting within the powers given to it by the constitution, converts a political demand or a social problem into a binding legal rule. It therefore includes proposal and drafting, introduction in the House, general discussion, clause-by-clause consideration in committee, reporting, voting, transmission to the second chamber (where one exists), assent by the head of state, publication in the official gazette, and finally enforcement and judicial interpretation. The process is not merely technical; it is the practical expression of the doctrine of the separation of powers, of parliamentary sovereignty within constitutional limits, and of the rule of law.

Development in the law-making process in recent days in Nepal

Nepal's law-making process has changed substantially over the last three decades. The main lines of development are as follows.

1. From royal ordinance to constitutional legislation. Under the Panchayat system and even under the 1990 Constitution, the monarch retained substantial law-making power through ordinances and, in the Panchayat era, through the Rastriya Panchayat itself. After the 2006 People's Movement and the Interim Constitution of 2007, and finally under the Constitution of Nepal 2015, legislative power is vested in the federal Parliament, the provincial assemblies and the local assemblies. Article 114 of the Constitution allows the President to promulgate an ordinance on the Government's recommendation only when Parliament is not in session and the matter is urgent; the ordinance must be placed before the House of Representatives within 60 days of the start of the next session, failing which it lapses. This has made ordinance-making an exception rather than a normal route.

2. Bicameral federal legislature. The Constitution of Nepal created a federal structure with a bicameral Parliament — the House of Representatives (lower House) and the National Assembly (upper House). A bill other than a money bill must pass both Houses, and the Constitution lays down a procedure for resolving disagreement between them. This is a major structural change from the unicameral arrangements of earlier periods.

3. Provincial law-making. The 2015 Constitution created seven provinces, each with its own Provincial Assembly and its own law-making process for provincial subjects listed in Schedule 6 (and concurrent subjects in Schedules 7 and 9). Nepal therefore now has law-making bodies at three levels, federal, provincial and local, in place of one central legislature. Provincial bills follow the same broad stages — introduction, committee scrutiny, passing, assent by the Provincial Head, and publication in the Provincial Gazette.

4. Committee system and pre-legislative scrutiny. Modern Parliaments in Nepal rely heavily on subject committees (such as the Finance Committee, the Law, Justice and Human Rights Committee, and thematic committees). Bills are referred to these committees for detailed clause-by-clause examination, public consultation and expert testimony. This has shifted real decision-making from the floor of the House to the committee stage, which is a marked development from earlier practice.

5. Public participation and consultation. Recent years have seen growing use of public hearings, stakeholder consultations, publication of draft bills for comment, and e-consultation. The Right to Information Act, 2064 (2007) and the Good Governance Act, 2064 have strengthened the demand for transparency. Civil society, bar associations, media and citizen groups now routinely submit memoranda on pending bills.

6. Drafting and legislative support institutions. The Nepal Law Commission has become the principal body for drafting, revising and consolidating legislation. The Parliament Secretariat maintains a Legislative Drafting Section. The Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs vets bills for constitutional and legal consistency before introduction. This has improved the technical quality of statutes.

7. Publication and accessibility. Enacted laws are published in the Nepal Gazette and are increasingly made available online through the Nepal Law Commission's website and the Parliament's website. This has made law more accessible to citizens, lawyers and courts, and has supported the principle that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

8. Judicial review as part of the process. The Supreme Court, under Article 133 of the Constitution, can declare any law inconsistent with the Constitution void. In practice, judicial review has become an integral part of the law-making process, because a bill that is passed without constitutional scrutiny may be struck down later. This has forced Parliament and the executive to be more careful about constitutional limits, fundamental rights and the doctrine of proportionality.

9. Codification and reform. Recent decades have seen large-scale codification — the Muluki Civil Code, 2074 (2017) and the Muluki Criminal Code, 2074, the Criminal Procedure Code, 2074, the Labour Act, 2074, the Right to Information Act, 2064, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2059, the Local Government Operation Act, 2074, and many others. These replaced scattered, colonial-era and Panchayat-era statutes with modern, rights-based and federal legislation.

10. Use of ordinances and delegated legislation. Despite the constitutional limits, Nepal has seen frequent use of ordinances in recent years, especially when Parliament is deadlocked. This has raised concerns about the balance between the executive and the legislature. At the same time, delegated legislation — rules, regulations, by-laws and directives made by the Council of Ministers, ministries and local bodies — has expanded greatly. The Supreme Court has insisted that delegated legislation must remain within the four corners of the parent Act and must not violate fundamental rights.

11. Local level law-making. The Constitution and the Local Government Operation Act, 2074 empower Rural Municipalities and Municipalities to make local laws on the local subjects listed in Schedule 8 (and concurrent subjects in Schedule 9). This is a new tier of law-making that did not exist before federalisation.

12. Rights-based and inclusive orientation. Recent laws increasingly reflect the fundamental rights in Part 3 of the Constitution — equality, dignity, inclusion, proportional representation, rights of women, Dalits, indigenous peoples, Madhesis, persons with disabilities and sexual minorities. This is a clear shift from the earlier welfare-and-control model to a rights-based model.

Conclusion

The law-making process in Nepal has thus moved from a centralised, monarch-dominated and largely secret procedure to a constitutionally regulated, bicameral, federal, committee-based and increasingly participatory process. The main developments in recent days are federalisation, bicameralism, provincial and local law-making, stronger committee scrutiny, public consultation, improved drafting institutions, wider publication, and active judicial review. These changes have made the process more democratic and transparent, though challenges remain in the form of frequent ordinances, slow passage of bills, and uneven implementation.

Short notes on any THREE of the following:

---

a. Panchayat System in Nepal

The Panchayat system was the partyless political system that governed Nepal from 1961 to 1990. After King Mahendra dissolved the elected government of B.P. Koirala in 1960, he introduced this system on 5 Poush 2017 BS (1961 AD) under the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1962.

Structure: It rested on a four-tier pyramid of councils — Village/Town Panchayat at the base, then District Panchayat, Zonal Panchayat, and the National Panchayat at the apex. Members were chosen partly by indirect election and partly by royal nomination. The system was "partyless" (dal-vihin), meaning political parties were banned.

Features:

• Sovereignty vested in the King; the monarch was the real source of power.
• Class organisations (Varga Sanga) and Gaun Pharka (back-to-village) campaigns were used to mobilise support.
• Fundamental rights were limited; no freedom to form political parties.
• The Back-to-Village National Campaign and the Panchayat ideology of "one village, one class" served as its ideological base.

Criticism and end: It was criticised as authoritarian, feudal, and a tool to legitimise royal rule. The 1980 referendum allowed the system to continue with reforms, but the 1990 People's Movement (Jana Andolan I) forced its abolition. The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 replaced it with multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy.

---

b. Chinese Law

Chinese law refers to the legal system of the People's Republic of China. It is a socialist legal system, distinct from the common law and civil law families, though it borrows heavily from the civil law tradition.

Historical development:

• Ancient period: The Tang Code (653 AD) is regarded as one of the most advanced early codifications, based on Confucian ethics and li (ritual) combined with fa (law).
• Imperial period: Law served as an instrument of the emperor; the Qing Code was the last imperial code.
• Republican period (1912–1949): The Kuomintang introduced the "Six Codes" modelled on continental European law.
• Socialist period (1949 onwards): After the 1949 revolution, Soviet-style socialist law was adopted. The Cultural Revolution (1966–76) destroyed legal institutions. Since 1978, under Deng Xiaoping, China has rebuilt its legal system through major codes.

Features:

• The Constitution of 1982 (as amended) is the supreme law.
• The National People's Congress is the highest organ of state power and the legislature.
• The Communist Party plays a leading role; law serves socialist modernisation and the market economy.
• Courts are people's courts; the Supreme People's Court heads the judiciary. There is no judicial review of legislation in the Western sense.
• Recent reforms include the Civil Code (2021), which is the first comprehensive civil code of China.

---

c. PIL in Nepal

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a legal action brought before a court not for the enforcement of a personal right but for the protection of the interest of the public or a class of people who cannot approach the court themselves. In Nepal, PIL is a product of the Supreme Court's liberal interpretation of its extraordinary jurisdiction.

Constitutional basis:

• Article 133 of the Constitution of Nepal (2015) confers on the Supreme Court the power to issue writs — habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition and quo warranto — for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other legal right.
• The words "and for any other legal right" and the phrase "appropriate writ" have been interpreted to include public interest matters.

Leading cases:

• Yagya Murti Banjade v. Nepal Government (2038 BS) — early recognition of PIL.
• Surya Prasad Sharma Dhungel v. Godavari Marble Industries — environmental PIL.
• Advocate Prakash Mani Sharma v. Council of Ministers — on the right to information and clean environment.
• Meera Dhungana v. Nepal Government — on women's property rights.

Significance: PIL has been used in Nepal for environmental protection, consumer rights, rights of women, children, prisoners, and the poor. It has made the judiciary an active guardian of the rule of law. However, critics argue that PIL is sometimes misused for publicity and that courts lack the machinery to enforce their orders.

---

d. Legal Reforms in Malla Period

The Malla period (about 1200–1768 AD) is regarded as a golden age of Nepali law and justice. King Jayasthiti Malla (1382–1395) of Kathmandu carried out the most important legal reforms.

Major reforms:

• Jayasthiti Malla's code: He divided the people into 64 occupational castes and prescribed the duties and punishments for each. He introduced the Manav Nyaya Shastra (a Sanskrit legal text) as the basis of justice.
• Ram Shah of Gorkha (1606–1636): He is remembered as the "just king." He introduced standard weights and measures, fixed rates of interest, and laid down the principle that the king himself was subject to law. His Nyaya Shastra contained rules on evidence, witnesses, and punishment.
• Mahendra Malla and others: Continued the tradition of written codes and judicial procedure.

Features of the legal system:

• Justice was administered by the king, Bharadars (courtiers), and local Panchas.
• Punishments were based on caste, gender, and the nature of the offence; trial by ordeal (Dharma Pariksha) was common.
• Written documents (Lal Mohar, Sanad) were used to record grants and decisions.

Significance: These reforms laid the foundation for a codified legal tradition in Nepal and influenced the later Muluki Ain of 1854.

---

e. Comparative Law

Comparative law is the study of the similarities and differences between different legal systems of the world. It is not a branch of law like criminal or civil law, but a method of legal study.

Scope: It compares major legal families — the civil law (Romano-Germanic) family, the common law family, the socialist legal family, and religious/philosophical systems such as Hindu, Islamic, and Chinese law. It also compares specific institutions, e.g., the role of precedent in England versus the role of codes in France.

Purposes:

• To understand one's own legal system better by seeing it against others.
• To assist law reform and legislation by borrowing good practices.
• To promote international understanding and harmonisation of law (e.g., in trade, human rights).
• To help courts interpret foreign or international law.

Methods: Functional comparison (comparing how different systems solve the same social problem), historical comparison, and structural comparison.

Importance in Nepal: Nepal's legal system is a mixed system — Hindu legal tradition, common law influence from India and England, and civil law elements. Comparative study helps Nepali lawyers and lawmakers modernise the law. It is also essential in the study of international law and in legal education.