Deadline Missed Again
Yuba Nath Lamsal
The deadline set for the promulgation of the new constitution, which is just a week away, is going to be missed again. The Constituent Assembly (CA) is unlikely to accomplish its task within the May 28 deadline. This indicates the height of irresponsibility of our parties and an example of betrayal of the people, who had elected their representatives to write a new constitution in time.
It has been more than three years since the CA was formed through a popular election. Originally, as per the interim constitution, the term of the CA had been fixed for two years.
The interim constitution requires a two-third majority in Parliament to amend any provision of the constitution. Given the composition of the parliament, a two-third majority cannot be acquired without the cooperation of the three main parties, namely, the UCPN-Maoist, Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. In the saddle of power last year were the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Madhesi parties, while the largest party - CPN (Maoist) - was in the opposition.
The ruling parties had proposed for the extension of the CA, but the Maoists in the beginning maintained that they would not support it unless the prime minister of the coalition government stepped down. The stance of the Maoists created a deadlock. But a compromise was brokered at midnight, and the life of the Constituent Assembly was extended.
The Constituent Assembly has, however, failed to complete its fundamental job even within the extended period. Now a similar situation has arisen. Only the nature and composition of the government have changed. The Maoists and Madhesi Janadhikar Forum are in the government while the Nepali Congress and the rest of the Madhesi parties are in the opposition.
In the present context, the CPN-UML, Maoists and Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) do not command a two-third majority required for the amendment of the constitution. Although the government has already registered a proposal for the extension of the Constituent Assembly, it does not have adequate majority to ensure its passage in Parliament. This requires the support of the Nepali Congress or all other fringe parties.
Given the mood of the parties, they are not prepared to easily support the government-sponsored proposal for the extension of the CA. They are currently bargaining for political benefits. The main opposition, the Nepali Congress, is against the unconditional extension of the CA. Its stated position is that there should be a guarantee that the peace process will conclude and that the present government should step down to facilitate the formation of a national unity government under the Congress leadership.
The Madhesi parties, except for the MJF and also some other fringe parties including the RPP and Jan Shakti Party, have joined the Congress bandwagon. Even CPN-UML is divided on this issue. A strong section of the CPN-UML has backed the Congress stance and demanded the exit of the Jhala Nath Khanal-led coalition government.
But no one has imagined the situation that would emerge should the CA fail to be extended. It is certain that a bigger political and constitutional crisis will emerge. A political vacuum would be created that would give rise to instability and uncertainty. In such an eventuality, three possibilities have been predicted. One is the takeover by the president and imposition of presidential rule. The second possibility is army rule. And the third one is the takeover by the Maoists with the help of its People’s Liberation Army living in the cantonments.
But none of the possibilities seem plausible. At this crucial juncture when the international community is closely watching the developments in Nepal, none of the aforementioned actors would risk taking over power in an undemocratic and forcible manner. So far as presidential rule is concerned, the ceremonial president is less likely to gamble his political career and popularity. Moreover, the president has in public dismissed such a rumor as being baseless and unfounded.
The army on its part has always kept itself away from politics and is accountable to the civilian government. More than that, the army is less likely to opt for army rule because of its past record. During the Maoist insurgency, the army failed to crush and defeat the Maoists. At a time when the Maoist combatants are still in the cantonments, the army would not risk losing its image and being labeled as a politically motivated institution. Should the army take over, revival of the civil war is a possibility.
Chances of the Maoists capturing power are also remote. The Maoists are in the process of transforming themselves into a peaceful force, and their immediate priorities are peace and the constitution, which have been reflected in the party’s political line adopted recently by the central committee meeting. The UCPN-Maoist would also not want to lose its status as the largest party. Moreover, the party is not sure of a success even if it went for a revolt to capture power.
If the life of the Constituent Assembly is not extended for a second time, the only option for the parties would be to go for a fresh election. The parties, however, are not confident that they will be able to retain their present position.
Despite the diverse arguments and positions on each and every issue, the parties have reached a tacit agreement and consensus on the issue of extending the life of the Constituent Assembly. Thus, the CA term will be extended at the last hour at midnight on May 28. Whatever the parties are now saying is just for public consumption.
Whether they extend the term of the CA on the basis of national consensus or by a majority vote, the question of legitimacy would be raised. Technically and constitutionally, the extension would be correct. But from the standpoint of popular legitimacy, it would be a mistake. The parties, leaders and candidates have failed in their duty to accomplish what they had promised to the people three years ago. It would be inappropriate to keep on extending the tenure of the CA time and again. So should the CA’s term be extended, it must be final, and a provision must be incorporated in the constitution banning further extension
The deadline set for the promulgation of the new constitution, which is just a week away, is going to be missed again. The Constituent Assembly (CA) is unlikely to accomplish its task within the May 28 deadline. This indicates the height of irresponsibility of our parties and an example of betrayal of the people, who had elected their representatives to write a new constitution in time.
It has been more than three years since the CA was formed through a popular election. Originally, as per the interim constitution, the term of the CA had been fixed for two years.
The interim constitution requires a two-third majority in Parliament to amend any provision of the constitution. Given the composition of the parliament, a two-third majority cannot be acquired without the cooperation of the three main parties, namely, the UCPN-Maoist, Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. In the saddle of power last year were the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Madhesi parties, while the largest party - CPN (Maoist) - was in the opposition.
The ruling parties had proposed for the extension of the CA, but the Maoists in the beginning maintained that they would not support it unless the prime minister of the coalition government stepped down. The stance of the Maoists created a deadlock. But a compromise was brokered at midnight, and the life of the Constituent Assembly was extended.
The Constituent Assembly has, however, failed to complete its fundamental job even within the extended period. Now a similar situation has arisen. Only the nature and composition of the government have changed. The Maoists and Madhesi Janadhikar Forum are in the government while the Nepali Congress and the rest of the Madhesi parties are in the opposition.
In the present context, the CPN-UML, Maoists and Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) do not command a two-third majority required for the amendment of the constitution. Although the government has already registered a proposal for the extension of the Constituent Assembly, it does not have adequate majority to ensure its passage in Parliament. This requires the support of the Nepali Congress or all other fringe parties.
Given the mood of the parties, they are not prepared to easily support the government-sponsored proposal for the extension of the CA. They are currently bargaining for political benefits. The main opposition, the Nepali Congress, is against the unconditional extension of the CA. Its stated position is that there should be a guarantee that the peace process will conclude and that the present government should step down to facilitate the formation of a national unity government under the Congress leadership.
The Madhesi parties, except for the MJF and also some other fringe parties including the RPP and Jan Shakti Party, have joined the Congress bandwagon. Even CPN-UML is divided on this issue. A strong section of the CPN-UML has backed the Congress stance and demanded the exit of the Jhala Nath Khanal-led coalition government.
But no one has imagined the situation that would emerge should the CA fail to be extended. It is certain that a bigger political and constitutional crisis will emerge. A political vacuum would be created that would give rise to instability and uncertainty. In such an eventuality, three possibilities have been predicted. One is the takeover by the president and imposition of presidential rule. The second possibility is army rule. And the third one is the takeover by the Maoists with the help of its People’s Liberation Army living in the cantonments.
But none of the possibilities seem plausible. At this crucial juncture when the international community is closely watching the developments in Nepal, none of the aforementioned actors would risk taking over power in an undemocratic and forcible manner. So far as presidential rule is concerned, the ceremonial president is less likely to gamble his political career and popularity. Moreover, the president has in public dismissed such a rumor as being baseless and unfounded.
The army on its part has always kept itself away from politics and is accountable to the civilian government. More than that, the army is less likely to opt for army rule because of its past record. During the Maoist insurgency, the army failed to crush and defeat the Maoists. At a time when the Maoist combatants are still in the cantonments, the army would not risk losing its image and being labeled as a politically motivated institution. Should the army take over, revival of the civil war is a possibility.
Chances of the Maoists capturing power are also remote. The Maoists are in the process of transforming themselves into a peaceful force, and their immediate priorities are peace and the constitution, which have been reflected in the party’s political line adopted recently by the central committee meeting. The UCPN-Maoist would also not want to lose its status as the largest party. Moreover, the party is not sure of a success even if it went for a revolt to capture power.
If the life of the Constituent Assembly is not extended for a second time, the only option for the parties would be to go for a fresh election. The parties, however, are not confident that they will be able to retain their present position.
Despite the diverse arguments and positions on each and every issue, the parties have reached a tacit agreement and consensus on the issue of extending the life of the Constituent Assembly. Thus, the CA term will be extended at the last hour at midnight on May 28. Whatever the parties are now saying is just for public consumption.
Whether they extend the term of the CA on the basis of national consensus or by a majority vote, the question of legitimacy would be raised. Technically and constitutionally, the extension would be correct. But from the standpoint of popular legitimacy, it would be a mistake. The parties, leaders and candidates have failed in their duty to accomplish what they had promised to the people three years ago. It would be inappropriate to keep on extending the tenure of the CA time and again. So should the CA’s term be extended, it must be final, and a provision must be incorporated in the constitution banning further extension
Comments
Post a Comment