Troubling signs

Constitution making

Related story

Coronavirus: Symptoms and signs that are linked to COVID, but a...

The failure of 601-member Constituent Assembly to promulgate new constitution on January 22, 2015 has given rise to serious political turmoil in Nepal. This was due to the stand-off between the ruling coalition partners, Nepali Congress and CPN-UML on the one side and the opposition alliance led by UCPN (Maoist) on the other with regard to issues like restructuring of the state, division of power between the President and Prime Minister, secularism and the independence of judiciary.

Of all unresolved issues, however, the one related to restructuring the state proved to be the biggest stumbling block in negotiations between the two sides. Following this, the lawmakers of the two camps shamelessly created scenes of vandalism by throwing chairs, mikes and other devises in the Constituent Assembly in the night of January 22.

The six or seven state model prepared by Congress and UML neither addressed the Maoist demand for ethnicity-based states nor of Madheshi parties for identity-based states. The Madheshi parties had stopped their violent Tarai movement in 2007 only when Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala formally signed an agreement to grant 'one Madhesh state' from east to west in the Tarai region. But now to the great dismay of the Madheshi parties the coalition government in its state restructuring model has granted only two patches of Janakpur state and Lumbini states in the Tarai and lumped the three Tarai districts in the east—Sunsari, Morang and Jhapa—with hill districts, in the same way the two districts of the west—Kailali and Kanchanpur—have been lumped together with hills and like Chitwan in the central region has been lumped with other hill districts. The Madheshis have always been opposed to vertical division of federal states on north-south axis, fearing this could weaken their strength and defeat the primary purpose of self-rule.

Now the Maoist party's difficulty is that if they accept the state restructuring model of the government, they will lose whatever remaining base they have, as they had made a clear commitment for states based on ethnicity. By the same token, if the Madheshi parties accept the state restructuring model of the government, they would be tarnished. It is also feared that the fringe Madheshi groups who took up arms for the cause of Madhesh would be stronger once moderate parties in the region fail to meet the aspirations of people.

Between 2008 and 2013 the number of the Maoist MPs in the Constituent Assembly fell from 237 to 80; in the same period the strength of Nepali Congress shot up from 115 to 196 and that of CPN-UML from 108 to 175. On the other side, the number of MPs from Madheshi parties fell from 87 to 50. The right-wing parties, including RPP and RPPN-Nepal, benefited substantially as the number of their MPs increased from 15 to 37. Interestingly, the percentage of votes obtained by Madheshi parties remained almost unchanged: it was 12 percent both in 2008 and 2013. But their MP numbers fell mainly because of splits. In 2008, only three Madheshi political parties had fought Constituent Assembly elections, but the number increased to 13 in 2013 election.

By virtue of the fact that the ruling coalition partners enjoy over two-thirds majority in Constituent Assembly, they are entitled to promulgate constitution on their terms. But they are not doing so as they fear it could generate a big backlash. In its show of strength, the 30-party opposition parties led by UCPN (Maoist) organized different programs in various parts of the country to compel the government to come to their terms on new constitution.

The protest programs of opposition parties peaked on February 28, 2015 in Kathmandu, but to their dismay public participation was far from satisfactory. This demonstrated that the common people are not in a mood to confront the government. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the coalition partners in the government command complete support of the people.

In the meantime, signs of foreign interference in constitution making process are already visible. Some external forces appear uncomfortable with the demand for federal states in Nepal. In certain quarters, there is a feeling that Western powers in general favor keeping Nepal secular in their bid to Christianise the country. Other external forces have kept their hands off our internal politics, but some of our own leaders want them to play 'positive' role in constitution making.

The only win-win situation for the ruling parties and the Maoist-led opposition would be constitution on the basis of 'consensus.' But the political parties have failed to develop consensus on disputed issues over the last seven years and we should not expect miracles in the next few days. The more the delay in constitution, the more the chance of regressive forces emerging. There is a fear of foreign powers exploiting the rift between ruling and opposition parties.

Constitution making is difficult if ruling and opposition keep national interest above their vested interests. Only through dialogue can contentious issues be sorted. Interference in constitution making from outside would be catastrophic. Therefore, lawmakers should come out with new constitution based on consensus without wasting any time. If they fail to do so, people will be compelled to seek alternatives. In that situation, lawmakers would not only be treated as law breakers but as criminals who wasted enormous amount of money, time and resources in the name of constitution.

The author is a Professor of Economics and Executive Director of the Centre for Economic and Technical Studies