Oped»
In my humble opinion
JUN 24 -
A fter the election to the Constituent Assembly (CA), the entire political process has been topsy-turvy. If all the parties had sincerely honoured the decision of the people to form a hung CA, there would have been the desired constitution by the deadline of two years. But there was deep resentment against the decision of the people by almost every party. The due process would have demanded immediate formation of a consensus government led by the Maoists on the basis of being the largest party. But they were not given the chance to form a government until almost the end of the first quarter of the year.
Meanwhile, the doctrine of consensus was replaced by the doctrine of majority, and the Nepali Congress refused to join the Maoist-led government, opting for the position of opposition. It was OK because an opposition is not only compatible with democracy, but it is also necessary to ensure responsible performance of the government. The coalition had a comfortable support of nearly two-thirds of the CA. The country was hopeful that a constitution would come out by the deadline.
The due process at this stage would demand the writing of the constitution as the number one priority followed by the conclusion of permanent peace, ending the decade-long armed conflict. The peace process would demand very sincere negotiations between the government and the combatants, both of whom were headed by the Maoists. Although the consensus approach would have been the ideal situation, the preference by the NC to stay in the opposition was still a positive aspect because the coalition had the advantage of a two-thirds majority, and the presence of the opposition would have acted as a pressure agent to follow the track. The constitution would have been formulated without any trouble with the given two-thirds support. In the given period of stability, all the parties could have used it to expand their political bases by mobilising their cadres for greater ground in the ensuing election. The promulgation of the constitution would have heralded a completely new age for Nepal. But it was not to be.
What went wrong was the change of motives of the parties. The priorities were completely changed and the mandated function of writing the constitution was given the least priority. The Maoists overestimated themselves and started behaving as the sole masters, ignoring the norms of a coalition. That created gradual distancing between the Maoists and the coalition partners, culminating in the downfall of the alliance. After the fall of the Maoist-led coalition, another miraculous combination of 22 parties was created with the common motive of keeping the Maoists out of power. With the Maoists and a faction of the Madhesi Jana Adhikar Forum (MJAF) staying away from the coalition, its strength was far short of the two-thirds required for passing the constitution. Although it made a verbal commitment to facilitate the formulation of the constitution and conclusion of stable peace—the dual objects of the transitional phase—the coalition’s actions did not corroborate that promise.
What followed the formation of the 22-party coalition was dirty politics of competing for power. The Maoists had left government of their own will. They were supposed to aid the work of writing the constitution, but they became intent on bringing down the fragile coalition. The coalition had full knowledge that there would not be the required two-thirds majority without the support of the Maoists who have 238 members in the CA (38 percent). The Yadav-led faction of the MJAF, which was opposed to the coalition, occupies 26 seats (over 4 percent). The coalition was not only unable, but also seemingly unwilling, to accommodate the opposition in the process. So the fragile coalition was raised on the unhealthy plank of anti Maoist intentions. The 22 odd parties could not unite on any other agenda except the Hate Maoist slogan. The Maoists rode on the opposite pole of trying several strategies to bring the coalition down. There was no meeting point, and the one-year period was wasted in the unnatural drama of simulating attempts of agreement.
That the constitution could not be made under the given circumstances was a foregone conclusion. But there was a common interest. Everybody wanted an extension of the tenure of the CA. An unnatural drama of agreement was enacted at the penultimate moment at midnight to extend the CA by one year. The purported agreement included commitments which were denied the very next day. The process of constitution making is not touched in the protracted exchange of mutual accusations as in the past year. If this process is not reversed, there will be no constitution even with the extended term of the CA. A new and very effective process is briefly suggested hereunder.
The first step should be formation of the proposed State Restructuring Commission. This should be a politically neutral body manned by professional experts. Second, the present government should resign and an all-party government should be formed with the leader of a small party as the head. This will ensure that there will not be undue pressure from the centre of power on the prime minister. Let all the central committee members of all the parties be made deputy PMs, chief deputy PMs and ministers extraordinary. They don’t have to work because there will be no work anyway.
Third, after the SRC is in action, which will take a quarter of a year to finish its job, the party leaders should wine, dine and whine in the common hall of a posh five-star hotel until all of them become tired of accusing each other. Some dictionaries with superlative vituperative language should be provided with easy translation. A number of tutors can also be hired. There is no dearth of such tutors in accusation in each party. Pro-monarchists of several hues can be found on demand. More experts can be found in the print media. The benefit of such an opportunity will be that in future sessions of the CA, the members can work without having leaders trading accusations.
The SRC will definitely produce a desirable and workable model on the contentious issues of creating federal and local units and division of power between the centre and the states. Let this model be referred to a popular referendum. The people will accept or reject that model with their sovereign will. With the model at hand, the rest of the new constitution can be written by a bunch of constitutional experts in a fortnight. The CA can simply put its stamp of approval to the final product and the CA members can digest their pay, allowances and perks of three years in peace.
knsad66@yahoo.com
Posted on: 2010-06-25 08:14
Headlines
Advertisements
