How do you view the voices of dissent against the draft constitution?There were problems in the past, there are problems now and there will be problems in the days to come over the constitution. But such problems will not obstruct the process. Due to dissenting views from various sectors, we might not be able to promulgate the constitution by mid-July, as planned. But we are working on a war footing. The process is on. The CA has decided to send the draft to the people for their opinion and feedback. Having taken their feedback, Civic Relation and Constitution Advisory Committee will forward the draft to Constitutional Political Dialogue and Consensus Committee, which will then send it to Drafting Committee. Drafting Committee will make necessary changes based on the feedback and prepare the bill, which will then be endorsed by CA. Thus constitution is not very far.
The delay is because these processes have to be followed. As regards dissent in Nepali Congress, UML and UCPN (Maoist), they are individual views. Everyone is free to air his/her view in a democracy. A member of CA or a leader from a party can express any opinion in the CA. But they do not decide the shape of the constitution. Ultimately, constitution will be finalized as per the spirit of 16-point agreement between NC, UML, Maoist and MJF (Democratic). This will be the guiding principle of the constitution process.
But big parties are themselves mulling retaining CA after promulgation of constitution. This was not in the agreement.
If the political leaders start issuing statement against what has been already decided at top level, it will be difficult to complete constitution process. Every party leader should be committed to the decision taken by their leadership. The 16-point deal has clearly stated that the responsibility for delineating boundaries of provinces will rest with the Federal Commission and the transformed Legislature Parliament will take a final decision based on the Commission report within three months of its submission. This is the common understanding and it will prevail, unless the four party leaders decide otherwise. Like I said, individual views do not count.
Some say the voices of dissent are backed by foreign forces. What do you say?
Some analysts have raised this concern. Perhaps they are right. But all patriotic Nepalis, civil society members, political actors and media persons should focus on bringing the constitution on the basis of the needs and recommendations of Nepal and Nepalis, not based on what foreigners want. All foreign friends and well-wishers should support the process that Nepali people have started. The draft constitution is set to be published in Nepal gazette. There is no going back. As long as we are committed to constitution as per our needs and reality, nothing can spoil this process.
Some Madheshi leaders have approached India. Rajendra Mahato has threatened blockade of Kathmandu. Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal is set to visit India. What do you make of these developments?
I do not know the details of the visit of Rajendra Mahato and his colleagues to the Indian Embassy and what they really said there. But if any politician in Nepal seeks solutions from foreign embassies instead of raising the issue in sovereign CA, nothing can be more unfortunate than that. No patriotic Nepali can be expected to knock the doors of foreign embassies instead of going to the Nepali people. Not a single person, who wants to see a sovereign, democratic, independent and prosperous Nepal, can think of doing so.
Besides, this tendency of visiting foreign embassies to solicit support won't help the constitutional process. Regarding Rajendra Mahato's threat to blockade Kathmandu, no one has the right to do so. Overwhelming majority of Nepali people is patriotic. They will not tolerate such acts, whoever it is imposed by. As regards, the Maoist chairman's (India) visit, it will be too early to comment on it. Let us wait until he comes back.
There have been differing interpretations of the so-called 'gentlemen's agreement' behind the 16-point deal.
The four party leaders agreed to constitute a coalition government led by UML comprising Maoist and MJF (Democratic), immediately after promulgation of constitution. There is nothing more than this to the gentlemen's agreement.
Congress and UML have been criticized for their rigid provisions on citizenship.
You need to view citizenship issue in context. This issue has been raised and discussed many times in Nepal. Even commissions were constituted to resolve the issue for once and all. But it seems some people always want to revive the dispute for vested interests. I and my party (UML) are very clear about it. There should be no restriction in giving citizenship to bona-fide Nepalis. A child should have a right to citizenship either through his/her father or mother's name, if both are Nepalis. The person born to an unidentified couple in Nepal will also get Nepali citizenship by descent. No dispute about it.
The dispute is over a person born to a Nepali and a foreign parent. We are open to citizenship to a person born to foreign father and Nepali mother, and vice-versa. The question is whether to confer citizenship by descent or to confer naturalized citizenship to such a person. Another issue is related to equal provisions for men and women. We had proposed same conditions for both men and women who marry foreigners. But those who claim to be advocates of equality did not support this provision. They wanted separate provision for a foreigner man marrying Nepali woman and Nepali woman marrying foreigner man. This is why you have unequal provisions in the draft constitution. The draft is more flexible than even the Interim Constitution.
The hue and cry about citizenship is guided by vested interests. I have been closely analyzing the statements coming from political circles. They are pushing this agenda on the behalf of their siblings residing in various countries and their possibility of marrying foreigners and coming back to Nepal. Perhaps they want to secure space for their siblings and spouses in Nepali politics, business or bureaucracy. It is unfortunate that they view sensitive issue of citizenship through such parochial lens.
So what, in your view, should be done to resolve this dispute?
Accept the provisions in the draft constitution. Genuine grievances of people over citizenship should he heeded. But let us not forget, citizenship is like a bridge between the state and people and it is also a symbol of indivisible loyalty of a person to the state. Countries like India and US also have rigid criteria on citizenship. Countries formulate citizenship policies based on their demography and their relations with neighboring countries. We should do the same.
What is your view on the demand for resolution of state boundaries before the promulgation of new constitution?
Like I said, it will be decided as per the 16-point agreement. Individual views won't make much difference in what is already agreed by parties. However, while I say this, I should also mention that public opinion and feedback that Civic Relation and Constitution Advisory Committee will put forward on the issue will have some impact. Our parties do not have good track record of honoring public opinion. Let me remind you of an instance from the CA I. The majority of the people had suggested that provinces be named based on heritage, rivers, mountains or some symbols that reflected common identity. But the parties completely disregarded such opinions and insisted on ethnic names. The CA was dissolved.
Public opinion on various other issues was also swept under the carpet. So if we take public feedback holistically, it could help to correct the flaws. But if we pick one issue and ignore others, this will only create more confusion. We must respect public opinion. Let us wait to see how people will react to the solicitation of public opinion by Civil Relation Committee. I am sure people won't give opinions against national interest. Often, public gives very wise opinion. It is the leaders who interpret it wrong.
How do you view the concerns of the international community regarding new constitution?
Nepal is passing through very difficult times. It cannot afford any more instability, uncertainty, and political transition. The introduction of the draft constitution in the CA and its acceptance by wider section of the society has brought a beacon of hope. It is a great achievement. All Nepalis who want to see stable, peaceful and prosperous Nepal should support this draft. They should reject those propositions which are intended at brewing conflict and instability and which are against national interest. This is the time to look ahead and promulgate the constitution as soon as possible. Only this will serve our national interest. This is no time to think about personal interests, not at a time when the country is not only in the middle of a wrenching transition but also struggling to deal with the fallout of a devastating earthquake. The real friends of Nepal will and should support this process. But it won't stop even if they don't.
Related story
Making a great first impression at an interview
