The Supreme Court's directive to the Speaker of the House, Subash Chandra Nembang, to intervene to end the futile prime ministerial elections has been interpreted by different political parties in terms that suit their own interests. Since the directive was issued, the Nepali Congress has been pushing for the unanimous election of Ram Chandra Poudel as prime minister while the UML and the Maoists are demanding a new election process. Some are even demanding action be taken as if the Supreme Court's directive were an order. But these are only suggestions to the government on the part of the Supreme Court. The directive, however, has definitely given the parties the opportunity to rethink their positions and move in a new direction. If the parties want to take the country forward, this is their chance to work together. And it is the speaker of the legislative parliament who has to assume the leading role in making this happen.

The meaningless elections have made a mockery out of the democratic process. People are losing faith in the democratic system and the speaker's inaction about only undermines his reputation. Right now, the speaker can either initiate extended discussions among parties to seek a consensus or make use of his special rights to end the impasse. The speaker has even the right to suspend the clause in the parliamentary regulations that stipulates the elections continue until a candidate is elected. Instead of expressing dissatisfaction over the apex court's directive, the speaker should make use of his authority to release the country from the stalemate. If the speaker does not act now it will ultimately endanger the country's parliamentary system. His inaction will cost the country dear. The speaker should realise this and take appropriate measures.