Dahal would like to dislodge Bhattarai from power since he faces a big risk of desertion of his loyalists to his vice-chairman and consequently, his political relevance and the financial clout that it brings to him. There are talks that some of his trusted comrades have already switched sides. With the party’s General Convention slated for February 2013, if it is not postponed again as has happened repeatedly in the last two decades, Dahal has to do something, and soon. If he loses the party election, his political career would take a serious hit.
PHOTO: BIJAY GAJMER/REPUBLICA
The heat on him is unmistakable and that comes across during his talks with leaders of the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. Hence, Dahal has been shifting his positions multiple times a week, sometimes in a single day itself. So he promises NC the leadership of the next government without being in a position to throw out Bhattarai who, actually, needs to be removed sooner rather than later. Dahal has resorted to covert media bashing of his bête noir although, in public, he has been “fully backing” the party-led government. This, in large measures, has contributed to the current political impasse. Add to this lack of a plan for honorable exit for Bhattarai. NC and CPN-UML understand Dahal’s precarious situation but are unable to do anything to help him for fear of harming their own political ambitions. Dahal needs some kind of assurance for his own political relevance and future and it looks like the two parliamentary parties have not been able to allay his fears.
Bhattarai, meanwhile, is taking full advantage of this. While all this has been happening, NC leaders have made asses of themselves in public. Instead of insisting on the inevitability of the election and exposing Bhattarai’s demonstrably hollow commitment to hold the election on November 22, they have conveyed an image of being power-hungry politicians and a stumbling block to the way forward. They need to stop complaining about the Maoists’ breach of past agreements. Their efforts, instead, should be toward putting in place measures to ensure free, fair and credible election.
Countering the propaganda by Bhattarai apologists, NC should have exposed his duplicity on holding the election. Despite knowing that election without necessary amendments in the Interim Constitution was not possible, Bhattarai dissolved the Constituent Assembly and then blamed the NC and the UML for it, terming them “anti federalists”. In this, he was helped by both the ignorant and willfully misleading accounts of the events leading to the May 27 dissolution of the CA by commentators in both the Nepali and English press.
Although April election looks doubtful at this point, it is the best way forward. The coming election would be no less than a referendum on some issues that are going to have far-reaching consequences for Nepal. This government’s demand for a “package” deal before it paves way for a new government is utter nonsense. Actually it is more than that. It is undemocratic. Let the people decide what the future course should be. It is very much possible that the people may vote for the agenda of the UCPN (Maoist) and Madhesi Morcha when it comes to the federal model. But it is equally possible that a majority of the people could reject that. I really do not know. But whatever the verdict of the people turns out to be, let us accept it.
There could be other outcomes as well. There may not be clear-cut expression of the will of the people, and we could see an electorate divided right down the middle or nearly so. In that case, the best option would be a Yes or No referendum on important issues, with the parties working out the percentage of votes that should be taken as endorsement of a referred question. The new parliament can enact necessary laws to this effect. True, none of these provisions get exact mention in the Interim Constitution (though Article 157 talks of referendum). But neither is there any provision for holding an election. The Interim Constitution does not foresee a situation whereby CA would expire without drafting a constitution. The way forward, therefore, is a political understanding. This leads to the question of what kind of election should be held and who would conduct it. For the sake of stabilizing turbulent Nepali politics, it would be better to go for a five-year parliament which shall also work as Constituent Assembly for the first year or two by which time the constitution should have been promulgated.
As for who conducts it, the best option is an all-party interim government. Should Bhattarai be leading such a government? But he is the one who has contributed the most to this stalemate. Allowing him to lead the government would be no less than rewarding him for his obstructionism. Nepali Congress has a strong claim to government leadership. This is not just because of some past agreements with the Maoist and Madhesi parties. It has a record that is rooted in democracy and history. I find it an absolute waste of time to respond to those who try to even compare the democratic credentials of the NC and the UCPN (Maoist), let alone their reasons behind putting the Maoists on a higher pedestal.
Let us examine NC’s record. We have had four general elections in the country after the first People’s Movement—parliamentary ones in 1991, 1994 and 1999 and for the CA-cum-parliament in 2008. The one in 1991 was conducted by an NC-led all-party interim government. The NC prime minister at the time, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, lost the election. In two of the next three elections, all conducted by NC-led governments (in 1994 and 2008) the party got fewer seats than its main rival. Moreover, in 2008, the home minister, from the Congress, lost his seat. However, NC, despites its justified claim to government leadership, must be ready to accept a person from another political party who can become an interim prime minister. But if the parties cannot reach an agreement, President Dr Ram Baran Yadav must make his move. He has demonstrated he can take the right decisions despite the risks of personal attacks from various quarters. He must act again for the sake of democracy.
The writer is 2007 Nieman Fellow
Twitter: @damakant