CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY: Real or Farcical ?

Every body has been talking about Constituent Assembly; however, no body knows whether it is going to be farcical or real?

KESHAB POUDEL

"I will hold the elections for Constituent Assembly at any cost. That was the mandate given by the people." prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala (May 21, Kantipur 2007) "I will not compromise with anybody on holding the election for Constituent Assembly. I will not postpone it." Prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala ( October 4, 2004 meeting with Finish Minister).

Seven party unity needs to maintain and the new election date must be announced soon." Prime minister Koirala October 2007. Although he has already hold off the election twice, prime minister Koirala, the leader of the government, is still assuring the people that the elections will be conducted at any cost. Instead of dealing with the problems - which were hindering holding of free and fair election, prime minister Koirala was taken aback by ongoing situation.

People -who believed him - were too shocked by the postponement of the election. There are also some noted "experts and analysts" among people who were enjoying their wishful drive against the real decisive force. However, they were also disappointed by the decision to defer the election. "The postponement of elections shattered our notion that prime minister Koirala is man of action," said lawyer and member of civil society Bhimarjun Acharya. "I don't think election for CA. will be conducted"

Conducting the elections for Constituent Assembly and making a constitution through it is a very difficult task. Delaying of the election several times in recent days has proved that what elder generation of politicians did was right as elder politician showed respecting the drafts of the constitutions is more significant than the ritual of holding the elections for that. However, a group of communist, all the time, has taken a stand against the main trend of democratic forces to formulate the constitution by consensus rather than to make it an issue of contesting farcical election for Constituent Assembly.

One has to take the postponement of CA elections as a bitter truth on the basis of ground reality. An unseen power, which has decisive influence in the government and the decision making process of all the members of the alliance of ruling coalition, does not want it. The conflict between the prevailing public opinion and the unseen power seems to be incompatible. Thus, the present deadlock- the postponement of CA elections- supports that apprehension," said the political analyst.

Past Experiments

At the grass root level, everybody needs political stability and social order as a foremost priority. To achieve stability and order, a strong parliament, elected through electoral process, is required. Nepal's past experiences have proved that a first-past-post system of elections comes out with major parties; thus, they forms strong and stable governments. The brief experiments of the first parliamentary form between 1958 and 1960 and the second parliamentary form between 1991 and 2002 were the successful examples of strong and stable governments. Nonetheless, these governments suffered reversal through unconstitutional methods or by other kinds of extra constitutional machinations.

After the dismissal of Sher Bahadur Deuba's government by King Gyanendra on October 3, 2002, subsequent events were not in accordance with the constitution. As a result, the last experiment of parliamentary democracy was jeopardized. Like democratic minded people, the institution of monarchy has also faced a great crisis. A wishful thinking of monarch could not change the situation in his favor. The situation is similar with the seven party's leadership when they delayed the election repeatedly. "The King failed once in his push but this coalition has failed twice to hold the election. Prime minister Koirala expressed his wish that in an abnormal situation in his country, the elections too would be abnormal. He failed miserably even to hold that kind of elections which he had visualized," said the analyst.

Prime minister Koirala has several alternatives for the people and the parties of alliance. Nevertheless, both the people and parties seem to have no alternative for prime minister. Even after the postponement of Constituent Assembly for uncertain period, Koirala has assured the people about the continuation of his leadership to next poll. "This is time to show that there need a strong unity among seven parties alliance. This unity needs to persist till the elections will be held." prime minister reportedly told CPN-UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal. Prime minister Koirala's indication is that he has capability to retain this unity. CPN-UML backs Koirala as an incontrovertible leader.

Functioning of Party

As Nepal's political parties are not guided by grass root level popular opinion, there is slim possibility to produce impartial outcome. The way political party functions in Nepal does not truly reflect the opinion of the grass root. Instead, it reflects the opinion of the center of patronage. In normal democratic process, leadership is influenced by the people but in a handicapped democracy like in Nepal, people are forced to decide in accordance to their party or patrons.

Leo Rose and John T. Scholz have written in their book Nepal Profile of a Himalayan Kingdom, "The structure of these early party organizations reflected the patron-client relationship characteristic of the Rana social order, although there was considerable more variety in party recruitment techniques than Rana patrons had. Some leaders gathered followers through personal charisma or ideological persuasion, other through previous acquaintances in schools, the British or Indian army, or earlier political activities, still others by extension of more traditional relationships or ethnic identity. Successful party leaders attracted followers who themselves were patrons with their own following, thus creating party linkages based on personal support through several intermediate patrons."

"Loyalty varied considerably in intensity and longevity, with numerous intermediate patrons shifting their allegiance when conditions changed. Ethnic identities, status, conflicts, and regional factors, of course, limited the interchangeability of these intermediaries- if a powerful notable joined one party, local factions opposed him would seek the support of a competing party," write authors duo. The recent convention of Nepali Congress is an example of how senior party leader forced his juniors to accept decision as he wished. Despite absolute majority in the central committee who favors that the fate of monarchy be decided by the Constituent Assembly, the party endorsed republican agenda. As Congress president and prime minister Koirala knew that the party leaders were against his move, he ruled out the issues in debate and vote. Moreover, he declared that his fellow members should endorse his proposal for republic form."If a credible and liberal democratic party like Nepali Congress has that kind of working behavior, one cannot imagine the lowest ebb of other parties of the alliance in which almost all are of one party totalitarian ethos of communist dogmas," said the analyst.

With half of the population illiterate and more than 30 percent of the population living below poverty line, the country is handicapped in several senses. In addition to these, the country has not developed infrastructures well as mechanisms to guarantee the rule of law. As there are ways to rig election in a handicapped country like Nepal, it is just a wishful thinking to hold free and fair election. "Above all these, there are other serious constraints of zonal conflict which has its disguise and influence. A prolonged crisis of political instability has made all previous efforts to build up required infrastructures and procedures to govern ineffective and irregular. In such a background, it is unthinkable that people in Nepal will be able to decide their fate fairly and fearlessly," said the analyst. "When all these things have already been destroyed by a ruling syndicate under the blessing of an unseen power, the sovereign people would be force to accept the fate accompli"

In search of a better constitutional order, Maoists faction of communist led an insurrection in which about 15000 persons lost their lives. There was irreparable loss in every aspect. Despite all these, Maoists failed to materialize their dreams after they got stuck in their conflicting choice between personal ambitions and political ideals. Leaders of previous parliamentary parties have lost their will to adhere to the "ideal" constitution of 1990. Like Maoist, they have also failed to formulate better alternative constitution than what the nation has practiced through previous parliaments. "In such a situation, an honest soul searching require from all segments of society instead of roaming in the wilderness for a better constitutional order. Let there be a direct decision of the people through referendum as Maoist and CPN-UML demanded as an alternative proposal to end deadlock. It would be very logical and prudent to let the people decide whether they support the same constitution of 1990 which was an outcome of Janadolan I or they want a new one based upon republican model," said the analyst.

"It is unnecessary to put monarchy into referendum if the previous constitution is out voted in the referendum. The fate of monarchy would consider shield and if people don't want another form of constitution and the whole extremist pressure will be subsided and the country would much ahead to tackle its all round progress and development," said the analyst. However, none of the political parties has clear perceptions about the firms and contents of the coming constitution. They have repeatedly declared to the people that the election will be held on time. Nonetheless, they have already postponed the election twice. Despite their failure to substantiate their promises, they still have reasons to believe that the elections for Constituent Assembly will be held on time. The eight parties have again promised to conduct impartial election on time. However, people still have reasons to question, "Is the election going to be real or farcical?"

Source: Spotlight, VOL. 27, NO. 9, October 12, 2007