Editorial»
Never a dull moment
NOV 27 - It is often said that there is never a dull moment in Nepal’s politics, as there is always something new and interesting happening. Political development of the last week has been dominated by two events: The intra-party acrobatics of Rastriya Prajatantra Party culminating in the proposed disciplinary action against Prime Minister Thapa, and UML boss Madhav Nepal’s meeting with Maoist leaders in Lucknow of India.
Battle Royal
The intra-party feud in the RPP to which a section of the media has characterized as ‘cock- fight ‘ is very interesting, not only because it is a battle royal between two personalities in the persons of an irrepressible old war horse Surya Bahadur Thapa and RPP ‘power-house’ Pashupati Shamsher Rana, the scion of the last Rana Prime Minister.
Doubtlessly, the nature of personalities involved and the type of language sounding more like those of feudal lords which is being used against each other, of course, have added colour and flavour to the whole battle. Also, the party in question has always been a conglomerate of personalities rather than an organisation which has evolved and grown through history bound by some mission and
ideology.
Access to power, patronage and resources are likely to be determining factors in this battle.
The Prime Minister may have
upper hand in this respect, as he has been rewarding the party workers with plum posts at
local bodies throughout the country, which will serve as ‘ barn ‘ for RPP cadres, as I said somewhere else.
Clearly, the coming days will see further misuse of state resources in factional fighting. The advantages with Pashupati Rana is his own support base in the party which he has demonstrated in the last convention, his own power of patronage as party president and personal clout.
Issues
However, the most interesting part of the quarrel is the issues involved. The RPP assertion that Thapa has lost his justification to continue as Prime Minister in the face of his failure to bring about political consensus to form an all party-party government is certainly valid. There is a general consensus that Mr. Thapa, like his predecessor, has utterly failed in every respect for which he was nominated as Prime Minister against the wishes of the five agitating parties. For that matter, any similar experiment under somebody else without operationalising the constitutional provisions is bound to meet the same fate.
However, RPP’s further demand that Thapa be accountable to his party for his actions does not cut much ice. Thapa did not become the Prime Minister on his own, nor was he recommended by anybody else including his own party. He was the king’s nominee, and will remain in his present seat as long as the king wishes so. The RPP was making similar demand on Lokendra Chand also.
The king nominated two Prime Ministers so far, both from the RPP, the party of former Panchas. But that does not mean that it is the RPP government as claimed by the RPP people. The king has favoured RPP people but on his own terms. The Prime Minister belongs to the king and not to RPP, notwithstanding the claim of the cabinet’s so-called executive power which nobody believes. In this regard, Thapa has a point when he says that he is answerable to the monarch, and not to his party.
In other political parties, particularly the Nepali Congress or other leftist parties, accepting the Prime Ministerial or ministerial nomination without party approval or recommendation, would be considered an act of indiscipline resulting in outright suspension of the person concerned. But this does not happen in RPP where individuals rather than party decision matter most. Therefore, rather than initiating action against its members at the very time when they accepted nominations without party approval, it appears ridiculous on their part to say now that the Prime Minister be answerable to the party.
Ramshackle coalition?
Another news doing its round from the Kathmandu rumour mill is the possibility of a ramshackle coalition consisting of UML, RPP and Nepali Congress (D). To prove the point, people are linking a few pieces together. There have been reports of confabulations between the three party leaders.
UML has been more vocal in demanding Thapa’s resignation than in reactivating the constitution, and it decided to unilaterally start dialogue with the king and the Maoists. The timing of this has matched with the crisis in RPP. A few days ago, Mr. Nepal also said that something catastrophic would happen in Nepal’s politics within a week. In this connection, RPP senior leader Lawati’s remark is also interesting and note worthy, when he said - RPP is the king’s party, and when the party President has asked Thapa to resign, rest of the workers must understand the signal.
Hot potato
I do not give much credence to such rumour. If Lawati’s remarks had been taken seriously, senior members of the cabinet who are now closest confidants of the Prime Minister would have been the first ones to jump out of the ship. And Pashupati Rana may be trying to use this opportunity to establish his democratic credential. As for UML, it is part of the five party alliance still committed to its platform which is to restore the constitutional process through an all-party government and restored House of Representatives, rather than just changing the guards. Even if there existed such a possibility, things have changed after MKN’s Lucknow visit, which will prove to be a hot potato with serious ramifications not limited to him alone.
Reactivation of the democratic process in accordance with constitutional provisions is the only way out of the current constitutional crisis. The issue, therefore, cannot be confined to change of individuals, rather it is to find ways to restore the constitutional process through political dialogue with constitutional parties for which a royal interest and initiative is the pre-requisite.
(The writer is former finance minister)Posted on: 2003-11-26 06:55
Headlines
Advertisements
