As we see it, the first part of Maoists precondition is valid and the parties should not shy away from debating it in the parliament floor. There are two reasons why the Maoists want to discuss it in the parliament. First, they hope that if the issue is taken up in the parliament, many fringe parties and even the lawmakers from major parties will speak, and vote if necessary, against President Dr Ram Baran Yadav’s move. Second, the Maoists are carefully retreating on the issue—they want to use the parliament’s floor to conclude the debate on “civilian supremacy” so that the Maoist cadres doesn’t feel let down by their leadership and will remain motivated.
We are aware of the argument coming from some quarters that the parliament cannot take up the issue since it’s already in the purview of the court (a case in this regard is pending in the Supreme Court). It is up to the constitutional experts to decide whether any discussion – or a decision for that matter – on the issue in the parliament would be tantamount to stepping into the jurisdiction of the judiciary. But the president, in reply to the Supreme Court, has argued that he took a political decision out of necessity and it should not be made the subject of judicial review.
If it cannot be a subject of judicial review, it should surely qualify to be taken up in the parliament. The president stayed the army chief’s sacking by the cabinet only after the parties representing majority in the parliament asked him to step in to protect the constitution. The parties, who knocked on the door of the head of the state to intervene, must show courage to face the issue, as Maoists are demanding, in the parliament and to defend it.
Related story
Parliament to discuss key agendas amid opposition’s disruption...
