We have repeatedly emphasized the need to broaden the political support base for the new constitution. The four major parties, the signatories to the historic 16-point agreement, together have nearly 90 percent of the seats in the Constituent Assembly. Still, efforts to take other smaller political parties represented in the CA, and even those on the outside, into confidence should continue at every step of constitution-making. That would add to the legitimacy of new constitution. For their part, the parties opposed to the ongoing constitutional process have in the past two days been staging protests, sometimes violent, to disrupt discussions on the proposed draft constitution. They have pelted stones at the vehicles of senior leaders like Madhav Kumar Nepal and Pushpa Kamal Dahal. They have clashed with the police at various parts of Tarai. The two-day feedback collection had to be cancelled in Dhanusha district after violent incidents on the first day. We are aware that not everyone is satisfied with provisions in the draft constitution. Nor are we. But there are legitimate channels to air such grievances, for instance the public platforms provided during the feedback phase. The smaller parties can even demand changes in the draft constitution from the CA floor.But the violent protests we witnessed in various parts of the country in the past two days cannot be a part of the democratic process. RPP-Nepal cadres tried to forcibly disrupt public meetings in Kathmandu and Makawanpur for the absence of 'Hindu state' in the draft constitution. Likewise, cadres of some small Madhesh-based parties pelted stones on the vehicles of senior leaders and tried to disrupt feedback programs in Tarai districts. Birgunj was brought to a standstill on Tuesday due to a strike called by Madhesh-centric parties. It is hard to understand what they are trying to achieve through these disruptive tactics. Perhaps they are still smarting from their unexpected loss in the second CA elections. They can't accept the bitter reality that their political agendas have been rejected by the sovereign people. Shunned, they have taken to the street to regain their lost clout. They don't seem to realize that their use of violence as a political tool is alienating even the small section of the people they can count among their supporters.
In a working democracy, there can be no bigger endorsement of political parties than people's mandate expressed in free and fair elections. If the constitution could be written from the street, we wouldn't need to spend billions of dollars in two CA elections. Yes, in a democracy, minority voices should be respected, but only if such voices are expressed through proper democratic channels. The Maoists decided to enter the political mainstream because they realized, albeit a little late, that they could not achieve their political goals through violence. But efforts are again underway to impose political agenda through street action. This is perhaps the ugliest aspect of the Nepali democratic process after 1990. But after the bloody Maoist insurgency the public has no appetite for violence. Thus under no circumstances should the constitutional process be allowed to be a hostage to violent street protests.
Related story
'Joining hands with NCP to form govt in Province 2 would be cou...
