Nepal Supreme Court Shuts Down Rumors of Dropping Its Lottery-Based Case Assignment System

Nepal’s Supreme Court has firmly denied reports that it is preparing to scrap its lottery-based system for assigning cases. Court spokesperson Arjun Prasad Koirala said in a Wednesday press release that there are no ongoing discussions or plans to replace the current process, which remains in effect under the 2021 guidelines.

The clarification comes after a wave of media reports and social media posts suggested the court was exploring an alternative to the ballot-style assignment method.

Why the lottery system matters

The lottery-based process was introduced in late 2021 as part of a broader shift in how the Supreme Court manages case allocation. The reform ended the chief justice’s discretion over assigning cases and moved the process toward a more randomized, rule-based system designed to improve transparency.

Under the revised system, cases are assigned through a daily lottery process rather than by direct administrative choice, a change that was widely seen as a major institutional reset for the court.

What the court is saying now

According to the court’s latest statement, that framework is unchanged. Koirala described the rumors as baseless and emphasized that no formal internal discussion has taken place about replacing the current method.

For now, that means the lottery system remains the court’s official mechanism for distributing cases, with no sign of an imminent policy reversal.

Why this clarification is significant

The dispute is less about procedure than trust. Case assignment rules can shape how quickly disputes move through the judiciary and, in high-stakes matters, can influence perceptions of fairness and independence.

By publicly rejecting claims of a shift away from the lottery process, the Supreme Court is signaling that it wants to avoid uncertainty around a system that was created to limit discretion and reduce suspicion of manipulation.

The bigger picture

The episode also shows how quickly speculation can spread when courts operate under intense public scrutiny. In this case, the court’s response was direct: no alternative is being considered, and the lottery system remains the governing process for case assignment.