With talks between the now six-member High Level Political Committee and agitating 33-party alliance led by CPN-Maoist faltering, the nation is now all set for the scheduled November 19 election of new Constituent Assembly (CA)—without Baidya and co on board.
The HLPC called on Chairman of the Interim Election Council Khil Raj Regmi the other day and asked him to go ahead and prepare for the polls, without the participation of the agitating alliance. Following the recommendation of the parties and the government decision, President Ram Baran Yadav has quickly passed proposed amendments to the Interim Constitution. As a result, despite widespread criticism regarding its jumbo size, the election on November 19 will once again elect a 601-member CA. [break]
But more than the size of the CA, which has been changed to accommodate the demands of some dissenting parties, it is the essence of the whole political process leading up to the election that will be the key to its success. And questions are still being raised on whether the election would actually be held on the scheduled date and whether the agitating parties, mainly CPN-Maoist, would become a major stumbling block to its success. After their talks with CPN-Maoist-led alliance failed to bring any result, the HLPC has decided to go ahead for the polls, but has not been able to assure the general public that the November election would be free and fair.
Since the dissolution of the CA on May 28 last year, we have maintained that fresh election is the only way out of the impasse. But election for the sake of holding it might not bring about the desired result. The election of the CA is not a regular parliamentary exercise. Not only should it involve all strata of the society, it should also lead to the election of an assembly that can fulfill people’s wishes. Therefore, leaving CPN-Maoist-led alliance out of the process could be a difficult proposition in the days ahead.
CPN-Maoist is indisputably one of the major political forces in Nepal; it split from UCPN (Maoist) with a sizeable number of CA members (92), making it bigger than CPN-UML which now commands only 88 erstwhile CA members after vice-chairman Ashok Rai quit the party with 20 ex-CA members. Thus, the absence of CPN-Maoist and other fringe parties in upcoming CA would fail to make the CA as inclusive as its first avatar.
We agree that many of CPN-Maoist demands are impractical and they might indeed have tried to foil the scheduled polls during recent negotiations. That said, the agitating alliance as well as HLPC constituents could have shown more flexibility to accommodate each other’s views. The demand for Chairman Regmi’s resignation from the position of Chief Justice has been portrayed as a major hurdle in negotiations.
We do understand that the present government was formed under the chairmanship of a chief justice, not Regmi as a person, to make it an independent body. Still, Regmi, whose tenure as CJ comes to an end in next May, could have given up his CJ position to facilitate negotiations. If nothing else, it could have been a potent face-saver for CPN-Maoist which could have made them more amenable to meaningful compromise. Regmi had nothing to lose. Instead, it would only have heightened his stature in the long run.
The accusation of CPN-Maoist leaders that India ruined the likely agreement on roundtable conference and poll deferral cannot be ruled out. Indian foreign secretary Sujatha Singh’s two-day visit to Kathmandu in the middle of negotiations between the parties could not have been a mere coincidence. The visit of a top bureaucrat of a neighboring country without any bilateral agenda for talks, that too in the middle of crucial political negotiations, is questionable. Whatever the cause, it is quite surprising how the parties in the HLPC seemed to prefer Regmi’s continuation as CJ to the inclusion of CPN-Maoist-led alliance.
Above everything else, CPN-Maoist wants a roundtable conference to agree on the basic contents of new constitution. But as we have long maintained, the most pressing issues before the country cannot be agreed upon among political parties by keeping general people at bay. The CPN-Maoist should understand that people are against any kind of violence for political gains. The retaliation by the general public against the bandh called by the party on Sunday is a case in point.
CPN-Maoist’s intention seems to be to finalize the constitution without a fresh mandate. That is simply not possible. Both the parties in the HLPC as well as the 33-party alliance should understand that going to election and seeking a fresh mandate is the only legitimate way out of the current impasse. The scheduled date for election should not be a reason for keeping CPN-Maoist out of the process.
The ideal situation is for CPN-M-led alliance to understand the need of the hour and participate in election on the scheduled date. If not, the parties should be ready to defer the election for limited time, for weeks not months, if all sides could be included in the electoral process.
For this, the HLPC should resume the dialogue with the agitating parties and keep the negotiation processes going. A win-win solution has to be found through consensus. Without such consensus, we might still have CA election. But that will make the prospect of a desired outcome from the new CA very remote. Another failed constitutional experiment could truly be a deathblow to the country’s democratic aspirations.
Related story
Hope is which will keep us alive
