Oped»
Wake up, wake up
- NOTE OF DISSENT
JUN 20 -
It’s been three weeks since the initial term of the Constituent Assembly (CA) ended, and it has been three weeks since the three major parties that count in Nepal reached a three-point agreement to extend the CA’s tenure by three times four months. At the end of the three weeks, the three parties still seem to be poles apart as far as the implementation of the letter and spirit of the three-point agreement and other previous pacts is concerned. The Maoists as the largest party in the CA are insisting that they head the next government of “national unity” (whatever that means), and the two other major parties continue to insist that the Maoist party should shed its quasi-military status and become and behave like all the other civil parties without having recourse to armed affiliates.
The back to square one scenario was expected by many except those who believe in the professed good intentions of our political parties. But now, there are media reports that Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal has made up his mind to quit to pave the way for a three-party consensus. (The report was denied by the official government spokesman on Friday.) But all indications are that sooner rather than later, Nepal will resign and pass the buck to other (more deserving?) leaders from one of the three parties. A change in government leadership may please a few who think that Madhav Kumar Nepal was the major hurdle to the timely drafting of the constitution. But will it really result in the present day cliché of “taking the peace process to the logical conclusion” and the writing of the constitution within the extended CA term?
To many like me, the CA members have failed miserably in their primary duty of writing a constitution in the stipulated two-year time frame given to them. But what happened? The assembly was seen to have been held captive by the three major political parties; and as a result, the CA was unable to deliver. Writing a constitution that can satisfy the numerous demands of numerous groups is a Herculean task, and all the demands made by different groups and political parties are unlikely to be met. But attempts towards this direction have to be made so that the constitution can meet with the approval of not merely those who claim to represent the people in the CA but the largest number of people themselves. The exercise will not be easy as the people will have to be convinced that the new statute will be for their good in the long run.
The shape and contents of the constitution should have been the one sole area where the political parties should have tried to narrow down their differences. The three main political parties, each of whom has indicated the kind of constitution they want to see in force, are nowhere close to a consensus on the kind of constitution this country will finally have. The three parties have wasted time and energy in what appears to lay observers as attempts to keep one or the other party at bay and prevent it from the seat of power. If the political parties had indulged in the same exercise in drafting the constitution instead of running after power, there might have been no need to extend the CA’s life. Indeed, less bad blood would have been created among the numerous political parties as the debates and differences would have been on the future constitution of the country and not on who leads the government. If this had happened, the people would not have seen the parties as being power hungry groups who want to attain the seat of power by hook or crook and stay on there whatever the consequences to the country.
The prime minister’s possible resignation has fuelled a renewed flurry of political activities and speculations. UML chief Jhalanath Khanal told news persons that the government failed to deliver, thereby putting forward his own candidature. But the second largest party in the CA, the Nepali Congress, has asked the prime minister to withhold resignation until an agreement is reached on the “package deal”. The party itself is embroiled in a leadership battle. But the Maoist party itself is also not without its share of internal disputes and power struggles. There are more than a few indications that the writing of the constitution that has been put on the back burner will remain there until a new permutation and combination is worked out to rule this country. With the Maoists insisting that it should lead the new government, there seems to be little that the other parties can do except to make way for the once armed (and still militant) party. Whatever happens, if the politics is power centred, one can hope for little by way of a proper constitution writing process.
On the other side of the coin, the former king paid a visit to the Tarai area last week. The media, whose coverage of the former king is not without a little bias, reported a large turnout to greet the former monarch. This is the third time that the former king has gone out of the valley and been seen with the people. One of the cries heard during the latest Tarai visit was, “Come back and save us from the present leaders.” The political parties at odds among themselves would do well to note the warning signals and not dismiss the people who turned out for the former king as a “ploy” of traditionalists, status quoists and fundamentalists to take the country back. (The Maoists too had been dismissed by the then governments and officials way back in the late 1990s as insurgents and rebels of little or no consequence as they did not have any hold among the people.)
If the visit of the former monarch to the Tarai area does not serve as a warning signal to the political parties about the disenchantment of the people with the political leadership, nothing will. If the political parties instead of listening to and working for the people continue to indulge in fighting for seats of power instead of for building a working understanding among themselves on a generally acceptable new constitution, they will not only be doing a disservice to the people but also taking the country on the path to disaster. The people are waiting for results with respect to the new statute, and they expect much from the parties. Will they disappoint us again?
Posted on: 2010-06-21 08:30
Headlines
Advertisements
