Kathmandu Post

Nation»

Document sparks serious debates

KATHMANDU, FEB 02 -
The two conflicting reports of the State Restructuring Commission, which many believe failed to offer a solution to the key contentious issues of constitution writing, have spurred heated debates among the parties, intelligentsia and the general public.

Opinions are divided on issues surrounding the proposed right to self-determination, political priority rights to dominant ethnic groups and the need for ensuring territorial integrity in the new federal set-up.

The Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML and smaller political parties fear that the 11-province model proposed by a majority of the SRC is obsessed with some individual ethnic issues and that it has completely forgotten graver issues of protecting territorial integrity and national identity at large. They argue that delineation of provinces in a way that denies those in the hills access to the border with India to the south is an immature decision given the history of blockades and its impact on the supply chain.

NC and UML leaders have said they will not agree to priority rights to dominant ethnic groups and the vaguely defined right to self-determination. Most of the Madhes-based leaders have, however, firmly supported the 11-state model. Most Madhesi parties and leaders, including Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister Bijaya Kumar Gachhadar, have endorsed the 11-province model. Gachhadar gave thumbs up to the majority camp’s report right after his arrival from New Delhi on Wednesday.

UML leader Surendra Pandey said that in supporting the flawed 11-state model, the Maoist and Madhesi leaders have completely forgotten much larger and important issues of national interest.

“Both the Maoist and Madhesi parties seem to have compromised on the issues of national interest for their vested interests. This could invite serious consequences in future,” said Pandey, who is also a member of the Dispute Resolution Subcommittee of the CA.

The report of the majority camp, which comprises representatives from the Maoist and Madhesi parties, has recommended two provinces— Madhes-Abadh-Tharuwan and Madhes-Mithila-Bhojpura—along the southern border. Unlike the minority camp’s report, the report of the Maoist-Madhes camp denies all of the non-Tarai states access to the border with India.

However, advocates of ethnic provinces, mainly the Samyukta Loktantrik Madhesi Morcha and some in the UCPN (Maoist), have called the opponents’ argument anti-federal. “Their statements are against the spirits of federalism and change in the country,” Tarai Madhes Loktantrik Party leader Hridayesh Tripathi said. Madhesi leaders have termed the minority faction’s report as “regressive” and one reminiscent of the partyless Panchyat.

NC leader Arjun Narsingh KC opines that the 11-state model fails to consider important issues of social harmony, viability of provinces and national interest. “We will stand against the 11-state model till the last moment even if it causes a loss to the party in the short term,” said KC.

Allaying fears of the NC and the UML, Madhesi leaders, however, say in a federal set-up each state should not necessarily be connected with India as the two states that lie along the southern plains will provide uninterrupted road access to others in the mid-hills.

The leaders, said Tripathi, should not hesitate to adopt the federal model. “Madhesis will not disrupt a smooth supply from the southern border. We cannot even think of separating the two Madhes provinces from each other and the country.”

On the right to self-determination, Tripathi said, “We have discussed the issues a lot at the Constitutional Committee and reached an agreement that the right to self-determination will not imply in case of national sovereignty,” added Tripathi.

UML leader Pandey warned that the decision to adopt a single Madhes with two provinces will harm the country and international relations will worsen in future. He argues that in case a dispute emerges between provinces over natural resources, it will jeopardise national integrity.

“In case the Madhes-based provinces obstruct the smooth supply of essentials, provinces close to the northern border will tilt towards the northern neighbour, which will be a serious challenge for national sovereignty,” added Pande.

Posted on: 2012-02-03 08:37

---