Constitution writing takes a back seat

Yuba Nath Lamsal

It seems as though the constitution writing process has taken a back seat as political parties are heavily preoccupied in power sharing. Now political parties and their leaders are making their own calculation to reap maximum benefit out of the present situation of crisis and take the reign of power at their hands. In this race are the two largest parties namely the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. The UCPN-Maoist and other smaller parties, too, are not an exception.

Although it has not come into surface, the two ruling parties themselves are at odds internally.  Their discontent is related to the leadership of the government and not the constitution. The CPN-UML has already raised the issue that the time for the Nepali Congress to lead the coalition government is up and Sushil Koirala should quit to hand over the reign of the government to CPN-UML chairman KP Sharma Oli. The UML is citing the agreement reached with the NC in general and NC chief Sushil Koirala in particular prior to the formation of the present coalition government. If the words of the UML leaders were to be believed, Sushil Koirala should have quit the government by January 22, 2015 irrespective of whether the constitution was promulgated or not and handed over the leadership of the government to UML chief KP Sharma Oli. It could not happen as the constitution was not promulgated by then. The constitution was not delivered within the period of one year or on January 22, 2055 and it is still not certain when the country would get a new constitution. In this situation, CPN-UML and its chairman are desperately pursuing for getting the leadership of the government. However, this possibility is getting weaker as the Nepali Congress is not willing to quit the leadership of the government easily. Instead, the Nepali Congress has made a strategy not to give the leadership of the government to the CPN-UML.  In case Sushil Koirala had to quit the leadership of the government, Nepali Congress will try to project someone else like Sher Bahadur Deuba or Ram Chandra Poudel for the next prime minister. Thus, the Nepali Congress is not in the position and mood of handing over the leadership of the new government to CPN-UML.  In such a scenario, CPN-UML may threaten the Nepali Congress to walk away from the government and withdraw support. Nepali Congress has visualized this scenario too and is busy in making contingency plans. Some leaders of the Nepali Congress have already in touch and consultations with the UCPN-Maoist and Madhesi leaders for possible partnership. In fact, the Nepali Congress, in recent months, is not comfortable with the present coalition and partnership with the CPN-UML. It will be happy if the CPN-UML walks away from the government because it will open doors for the Nepali Congress to build partnership with other parties. Moreover, the Nepali Congress will have ground to criticize the UML for spoiling the atmosphere of delivering the constitution, if the UML withdrew from the government. Given this scenario, the Nepali Congress is not very enthusiastic to deliver the new constitution.

The CPN-UML is aware of this situation and is accordingly weighing different options. If UML walks away from the government, it will make no difference for the Congress and instead pave the way for the UCPN-M and Madhesi parties joining the government. CPN-UML does not want this scenario to happen and does not want the UCPN-M to benefit from the government. At the same time, UML has realized that the possibility of its leading the government is getting thinner. If it walks away of the government, CPN-UML will have to sit in the opposition, which this party at the moment does not want. Thus, even if CPN-UML was not given the leadership of the government, it will continue with the coalition government as the other option of sitting in the opposition bench is not its choice. In this situation, CPN-UML will continue with the strategy not to let the Nepali Congress and UCPN-Maoist get closer for which it will have to continue its partnership in the government.  Its priority thus is not the constitution rather it wants to prolong the present situation which can be used against both the Nepali Congress and the UCPN-Maoist. It wants the promulgation of the new constitution only when there is a guarantee that the leadership of the next government will be given to the CPN-UML. Otherwise, its interests will be best served in the present situation.

UCPN-Maoist and Madhesi parties, too, have their own calculations. They too are not interested in the early constitution. Although they are talking of street protests and other forms of pressure tactics to deliver early constitution based on consensus, it may not be their real motive. The crux of the problem in constitution writing appears to be the issue of federalism, its nature and number. However, that, too, is not the real issue. The real issue is power sharing. They have seen that the third largest party in Constituent Assembly in the past had taken benefit of power more than the largest and the second largest parties in the past.  In the first Constituent Assembly, the UCPN-Maoist was the largest party whereas the Nepali Congress was the second largest party. But the CPN-UML took benefit of the government more than the UCPN-M and the NC. The CPN-UML led the coalition government twice in the period of four years. In the present Constituent Assembly also, no party has the majority and there has to be a coalition. In case the Nepali Congress-UML coalition breaks down, a new coalition will have to be formed. This is exactly the situation, the UCPN-Maoist and some Madhesi parties are seeking.  UCPN-Maoist and Madhesi parties know well that they can least influence in constitution making and setting the agenda of the new constitution because of their lesser number. Nepali Congress and CPN-UML combined enjoy almost two-third majority, which is sufficient for adopting the new constitution. If the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML continue to have their partnership and bonhomie, the role of the UCPN-M and Madhesi parties will be nowhere. Thus, the priority of the UCPN-M and the Madhesi parties is to break the coalition and partnership between the NC and UML. Their role will be effective only when these two largest parties clash. UCPN-M and Madhesi parties are effortful to break the partnership between the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. As a result, the constitution has not been their priority.

There has, thus, been a kind of a tacit agreement among all political parties not to deliver the new constitution at the earliest but to prolong this political transition. If this situation continues, the present Constituent Assembly, too, may meet the same kind of fate that the first Constituent Assembly witnessed. Thus, the constitution writing and its promulgation is not in the priority of political parties and there is likelihood that this political transition may continue for a couple of years which may lead to holding another election for another Constituent Assembly.