Road over reason

Opposition protest plans |

There is no point to continued protest of the opposition. The Constituent Assembly has not been convened for the last two months just to gain the trust of UCPN (Maoist) and other parties in the 30-party opposition alliance. In the first meeting of the CA after the two month interregnum on Monday, Chairman Subhas Nembang suspended the assembly for another week, again to win the confidence of the irascible opposition and to broaden the support for new constitution. But the opposition parties still decided to go ahead with their bandh program.

This makes us question their intent. Are they really committed to the constitutional process? If so, why don't they come back to talks table? Why are they now putting forth new conditions just to initiate dialogue with the ruling alliance when unconditional dialogue has been the bedrock of the peace and constitution process since its inception in 2006? It might not sound good, but the hard reality is that the Maoist and Madheshi parties are proving to be sore losers. If they, a clear minority in the CA, cannot dictate terms of new constitution, they now reason, there cannot be any constitution.

We don't for a moment believe it is right of Nepali Congress and CPN-UML to try to steamroll the opposition. But whatever their past failure to garner the trust of the opposition, the two ruling coalition partners have shown remarkable patience with Maoist and Madheshi parties. Despite their clear numerical strength in the CA, which is enough to promulgate constitution on their own, they have suspended CA proceedings in the hope that the opposition parties would be more reasonable. The opposition continues to insist that they first be assured that the new constitution will be drafted only on the basis of consensus. Yet if absolute consensus was so important, the political parties should not have agreed to CA elections to start with. It was precisely because the parties were so divided on their future vision of the country that they agreed to second CA polls. It's thus disingenuous of UCPN (Maoist)—which, like NC and UML, had canvassed for second CA elections asking people to give them two-third majority—to now argue that NC and UML can't leverage their two-thirds strength to promulgate new constitution.

But that should be the last option. Before that it's important to explore every avenue to broaden the support base for it. But this can only happen if the opposition is ready for talks. The opposition parties cannot both decline to discuss any reasonable solutions and also blame the ruling parties of trying to scare them into submission. They must first realize that this is not the time for disruptive protests which will only alienate more people from the Maoist and Madheshi parties, overshadowing even their very genuine fight for a more inclusive state. Bandh, which hits daily wage earners the hardest, is not a suitable means of protest for the forces that claim to represent the interests of the poor and the marginalized. It's also counterproductive. The opposition will make the most meaningful contribution to the constitutional process from the CA floor—not from the street.