To drive home this point, let me discuss what the Maoists want and whether CMDP is a willing accomplice or not. The first thing that Maoists want is to discredit the institution of presidency. When President Ram Baran Yadav reinstated the army chief who was earlier sacked by Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Maoist leaders said that the president’s move was unconstitutional as he was simply occupying a ceremonial post and the CMDP leadership concurred with the view.
They led a delegation to meet the president and expressed their opinions. When the president said that he was a ‘constitutional’ and not a ‘ceremonial’ head (he was merely hinting that he has certain duties defined by the constitution such as appointing heads of constitutional bodies at the recommendation of relevant authorities), these leaders went on to portray the president as an incarnation of deposed King Gyanendra.
When the leadership of CMDP is well aware of the unflinching integrity of the president, was that a fair portrayal? The constitutional basis, or the lack of it thereof, of the president’s move will, in any case, soon be determined by the Supreme Court. What is certain is that the president took the step to diffuse an escalating situation and also to keep the army’s organizational structure and chain of command intact. In fact, the president should be credited for doing so. When Maoist Chairman Dahal asked Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala to think of an alternative to the president, CMDP leaders wrote op-eds asking for the same. Wasn’t that too much of a coincidence?
Voting suspended in Namkha, Humla over dispute on hospitalized...
CMDP leaders seem to be interpreting the constitution in a way that best suits the Maoists´ ideology and the strategy that they want to implement. Though these leaders labeled the president’s move unconstitutional, they were however tight-lipped about the legality of the government’s decision. When it was clear that the government had not followed due processes, (the decision to sack the army chief should have been recommended to the president who would then have approved the decision or sent it back for reconsideration or sought the Supreme Court’s advice on its legality), they did not say anything. They maintain that the president’s move breached the government’s executive authority, but the question is: whose government – Maoists’ government or the coalition government of which the Maoists are a part of?
Although prime minister is the chief executive, the interim constitution clearly stresses on the need for a political consensus while taking decisions. Did that ever happen? Out of three other parties besides the Maoists, two walked out of the government while the third one wrote a note of dissent.
As the name of the group suggests, CMDP is a citizens’ movement for peace and democracy. But when Maoists cadres issue death threats, simply because someone holds a different view than their party, the CMDP leadership chooses to remain mum about it. What type of democracy do these people want? Or, have they subscribed to the Maoists’ version of democracy? And when the video of PM Dahal lecturing his fighters about the strategy to capture state power surfaced, we never heard a word from them. Have they concurred with the Maoist view that the video was leaked to derail the peace process?
I am neither undermining the earlier contribution of CMDP in restoring democracy nor I am against any leader of the movement. In fact, I still have respect for all of them. But when their actions contradicts the best interests of the nation, then it is a cause for serious concern. I am sure they can do better than that and I hope they can rectify their mistakes so that I can join the ranks of the civil movement as a foot soldier once again.
bshiwakoti@gmail.com
-1200x560-1781083488.webp)
