Substantive steps must be taken to halt the Tarai belt's steady slide into anarchy. But not by putting constitution-making on hold. We are not in favor of any more delays in the constitutional process, now in its ninth year. The longer the process has dragged on, the more complex it has become. With the passage of time the number of stakeholders in the process has also increased. Since these stakeholders come from vastly different ideological backgrounds and often promote conflicting interests, the task of building broad consensus for new constitution has proven tricky. So it would not be wise to further delay the constitution under any pretext. But as things stand, the Tharu and Madheshi protestors are unlikely to heed the government call for fresh talks unless the government makes a substantive offer. The agitating Madheshi parties have been saying that they would be more amenable for talks if the constitution process is put on hold. In our view, it is still possible to accommodate the legitimate demands of protestors by staying within the ongoing constitutional process. It's more a matter of political will of the leaders of the ruling parties than of time.We realize the gravity of the matter. With every passing day, the number of casualties from the conflagration in the Tarai belt is mounting. So, again, halting the constitutional process to take the disgruntled parties into confidence makes sense. But at what cost? The four major parties came together for the historic 16-point deal in June as they had by this time realized that any more delay would put a big question mark over their credibility as lawmakers. Not just that. It would also have emboldened the forces that didn't want a constitution through the CA, with unforeseeable consequences. So instead of postponing the ongoing constitutional process, the four party leaders should collectively commit to addressing the genuine demands raised by the protestors in the Tarai belt. If, in the course of discussions between the two sides, it is felt some more time is needed to sort out contentious issues, the CA calendar can always be pushed back by a few days, or even a few weeks.
But as things stand there is no guarantee that delaying the constitution will lead to meaningful dialogue. When the first CA was dissolved on May 28, 2012, most of us feared the worst: the end of the country's sovereign status, another dictatorship, or a second civil war. Successful CA II elections allayed these anxieties, even though many doubted important political actors in CA II, the same ones who contributed to the demise of the first CA. It was in this background that the historic 16-point agreement was signed in June among the four parties who together commanded over 90 percent of CA seats. Surely, these political parties had the mandate to write the new constitution. This did not, however, mean that their draft was flawless. Far from it. But it was a good starting point, something that could built upon. Now that people in the Tarai have expressed their displeasure with the draft constitution, there can be amendments to accommodate their concerns. But it's not in the interest of any of the forces who own up post-2006 changes to further delay the constitution and risk it all.
Related story
Let’s live and let live
