According to sources, majority members have proposed 11 states based on ethnic lines while minority members have batted for six states mostly stretching from north to south. [break]
On the very last day of his office, SRC Coordinator Dr Madan Pariyar, who had remained neutral so far, also sided with majority members--Krishna Hachhethu, Surendra Mahato, Stella Tamang, Malla K Sundar and Bhogendra Jha to endorse the report, which proposes 11-state federal model including a non-territorial Dalit state, by majority.
But Dr Ramesh Dhungel, Sabitri Gurung and Sarbaraj Khadka prepared their own six-state model recording their dissenting opinion.
In addition, they also wrote separate letters to top leaders of the major parties on Monday, complaining that the majority members forcefully endorsed the decision refusing to entertain their opinion, according to a Nepali Congress leader who read the letter.
In addition to the number of states and the underlying principle for delineation, SRC members also remained divided over residual rights and caste-based priority rights, according to political sources who were briefed by the minority members.
The majority members favor giving residual rights to states and caste-based priority rights but the minority members oppose such provisions. The minority members maintain in the report that the residual rights should be given to the center.
Both sides were busy in finalizing their reports at different locations until late evening, according to members. But the separate reports will be presented together to Prime Minister Dr Baburam Bhattarai on Tuesday.
"We are in touch with them [majority members] to ensure that our report too is incorporated," said a member of the committee.
The government, with recommendations from major political parties, had formed the SRC, on November 23. The commission was mandated to suggest the government a federal model based on the report prepared by the State Restructuring Committee. The 43-member committee had endorsed a 14-state model through a majority vote while Nepali Congress party had supported a six-state model. The SRC was expected to suggest a consensus federal model for the country.
In the meantime, Nepali Congress President Sushil Koirala on Monday held a meeting with top CPN-UML leaders to discuss the divided report, according to political sources.
´Why are we rejecting majority report?´
The three members of the State Restructuring Commission have said in writing that the report is not acceptable to them because their opinions were not respected and it was prepared under the direction of the ruling parties.
The members registered a five-page note of dissent at the commission on Sunday and sent carbon copies of the letter to top leaders of the major political parties on Monday.
“We had realized at the very beginning that the report would not be acceptable as the SRC procedures were adopted through majority,” reads the letter.
In the letter undersigned by the three members, they have accused Pariyar of engaging in politics in the workings of the commission and preparing the report under the direction of the ruling political parties.
“So the report is not acceptable to us,” they said in the letter shown by a politician to Republica. In addition, they have termed the report as “self-centered” and not being objective. But they have not elaborated what they mean by self-centered.
According to their note of dissent, the majority members have ignored feedback and suggestions from different sectors, besides preventing GIS experts from carrying out proper mapping of the proposed states.
“The mapping of the states has been done with prejudice,” they said.
They have even said that they were verbally abused by some members from the majority group and coordinator Pariyar did not intervene.
According them, Pariyar on January 26 also threatened to prepare the report without incorporating their opinions and he prepared a report at a hotel in their absence.
“As the commission is reaching a conclusion despite our concerns, we did not attend its meetings in the last phase of its term,” the members have said in their note of dissent.
Related story
NA Lawmakers divided over EUEOM report
