End to endless extension?

Nepal´s political players have come full circle again. As the parties to Nepal´s five-year-old peace process repeatedly fail to deliver on their promises—of taking the peace- and constitution-making process to its logical finish—the stage is set for yet another extension of the term of Constituent Assembly (CA). Sometime this week, when the parties work out a new deal and the majority of the CA members votes ´Yea´, the CA will get a new lease of life: Of three or six more months. That will be the fourth extension of the CA´s term in one and a half years.



But will it be the last extension of the historic assembly´s term, as directed by the Supreme Court (SC)? Will the parties—that have repeatedly failed in the recent past—succeed in forging the much-needed consensus and finish it all in the next six months? Most importantly, what guarantee is there that the parties can bury the differences within and among them and move ahead to finally make it happen this time around?



Nobody´s sure whether it will be the last extension. The legal pundits in the bigger parties have already expressed their objections over the verdict, saying it constitutes “interference in the affairs of the CA”, which doubles as parliament. Others have welcomed the verdict believing it will discipline the parties to complete the remaining tasks in the next six months. In any case, doubts remain.



Here´s why. After it was elected in the spring of 2008, the CA was given two years to finish the task of constitution writing. It failed and its term was extended until May 2011, disregarding the provision in the Interim Constitution according to which the CA´s term can be extended for six months, and that too in the event of a state of emergency. Four consecutive failures later, the parties are haggling and negotiating for a new power-sharing deal before extending the term of the CA which expires November 30.



To optimists, though, the failures may be the pillars of success. In recent months, the bigger parties, who dominate the 601-member CA, appear to have made some progress as far as the peace- and constitution-making process is concerned. Yet major stumbling blocks remain. Durable peace and a workable, democratic constitution won´t be possible without overcoming them.



LASTING PEACE?



Earlier this month, as the nation prepared for the fifth anniversary of the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), the bigger parties signed the Seven-Point Agreement—the latest in a series of similar deals that started with the 12-point agreement signed in November, 2005 in the Indian capital. Much like the older ones, the newest deal, too, initially sparked euphoria. But as they failed to implement it on time, the initial excitement ebbed considerably. Only the fact that the field work on the regrouping of the 19,000 ex-Maoist combatants has gone ahead smoothly, although it has been slightly delayed, has rekindled some hope.




Many more than 6,500 ex-combatants have opted for integration into the national army, while almost all the rest have chosen voluntary retirement. The issue of rehabilitation has taken a back seat for now. Members of the Special Committee for integration and rehabilitation of the ex-combatants hope those who fail to qualify for the army can be encouraged to go for rehabilitation. That, they say, is likely to get the backing of United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and other donors.



The start of the regrouping—for integration, rehabilitation and voluntary retirement—is indeed a major step forward in the peace process. It was a task the parties initially agreed to finish in six months. Five years later, even as the process moves forward newer challenges cropped up. Thanks to the dissenting Mohan Baidya and Ram Bahadur Thapa faction of the Maoist party, the peace process appears headed for further choppy waters.



Owing to the newer demands and conditions set by the Baidya faction, the integration and rehabilitation issues have looked more complex than many experts had imagined. Baidya faction´s posturing has also affected another crucial area of the peace process: Return of the land forcibly captured by the former rebels. Maoist Chairman Puspa Kamal Dahal directed his cadres to return all seized pieces of land to the rightful owners in Bardia last week. Yet in the face of local Maoists´ flip-flops, the rightful land owners remain disappointed. That shows how difficult and complicated the mission to build peace is.



STATE RESTRICTING



CA members working to minimize differences related to constitution-making say most of the contentious issues have been resolved. But the issue of restructuring of the Nepali state is one area that calls for intense home work, far-sightedness, scientific planning, intense brain-storming and negotiations. If that happens, the parties can expect consensus and eventual agreement. Once inked, that agreement will have far-reaching implications for Nepal and her diverse peoples.



For one, the restructuring will eliminate the old divisions of Nepal such as 14 zones and five development regions. Based on the recommendations made by the State Restructuring Commission (SRC), the CA will discuss and eventually decide on the names, shapes, boundaries and sizes of the different federal states. But skepticism remains. The headless SRC which is filled with political appointees, critics say, is unlikely to recommend any ground-breaking model.



It is expected to merely polish the recommendations made by the State Restructuring Committee, one of the thematic committees that worked to prepare the draft of the constitution. As the SRC begins work, diverse Nepalis´ voices vis-à-vis state restructuring and federalism are diverse too, if not divided. Sample this. There are those who pitch for, and back, federal states named after "historically marginalized" indigenous nationalities.



There are those who oppose the idea of dividing Nepal into ethnicity-based federal states, and, instead suggest cultural or natural heritage-inspired names. And there are those who simply like the idea of turning the existing Zones into 14 federations. The debate is on, and it may take a long time before an agreement is reached. Meanwhile, the parties can take some more time to discuss the issue and decide wisely.



WAY AHEAD



At this point, though, time is running out for them to decide on the future of the CA post-November 30. They can have a new power-sharing deal and, based on that, change the government, if they want. But in light of the recent Supreme Court verdict, the parties will have no choice but to finally complete and declare the new constitution by May 2013. By that time, they will also need to ensure that the peace process is pretty much done and dusted. Failing which, as the verdict states, the parties will have no choice but to dissolve the CA and pave the way for new general elections or referendum.



Got the guts to go back to the people again?



The writer is a BBC Nepali Correspondent



nepal.surendra@gmail.com

Related story

Your time is limited