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

Is Nepal's democracy in danger?

Rabindra Mishra

A political crisis in Nepal is set to worsen after the postponement, for the third time, of elections for a Constituent Assembly (CA) that has to draw up a blueprint for the country's future.

Many analysts are doubting if the polls will be held at all.

They also say the latest postponement of the polls will only benefit the monarchy, which is ironic given that all the major parties have agreed on the abolition of the monarchy. The Maoist rebels have been blamed for the postponement of the elections for coming up with two new demands:

• That the monarchy be abolished immediately by the present, interim parliament
• That the CA elections be held on a fully proportional voting system

Both the demands contradicted their earlier agreement with seven political parties who they joined in opposition to King Gyanendra. The postponement of the polls should be viewed against the wider Maoist strategy.

Change

In their days as a guerrilla force, their fundamental strategy was to gain influence in the countryside before surrounding and entering the capital, Kathmandu, for a final strike. A decade of insurgency left them dominating much of rural Nepal. But when the Maoists realised intimidation and violence were less effective in Kathmandu, they changed their strategy. In late 2004, they decided to work with mainstream political parties to further their goals. The strategy received a boost when King Gyanendra sacked the democratic government and took over power in February 2005. Enraged by the king's action, the mainstream political parties, who had in the past refused to collaborate with the Maoists, decided to accept the rebels into their fold. Together, the Maoists and the seven mainstream parties took on the king in a series of street protests in April 2006 that resulted in the king handing back power. In subsequent months, the Maoists became part of the interim parliament and the government. They also went about gaining as much influence as possible in commerce, the media and other areas of public life in the capital. So having established themselves in Kathmandu, they have one final objective left - to capture power.

Pressure

Most analysts agree that the Maoists have little chance of doing this through competitive politics. They have lost much of their influence in the countryside, and are unpopular in the cities. That seems to be why they wanted November's elections put off. In the meantime they will try to pressure other parties to agree to their demands for the immediate ending of the monarchy and for the CA polls to be held under a fully proportional voting system. They have also shown an ability to outwit their opponents in a way that erodes the authority of much of the state. It was the failure of the democratic parties, the king, the army and other security agencies which made the Maoists' journey to the capital possible in the first place. Now they have reached a point where they seem able to put a break on a national objective like holding elections, something that virtually the entire country had agreed on. This, many say, has severely weakened the public's confidence in its legitimate institutions.

Bloodshed fears

Many people have begun to talk about Nepal entering an era of either ultra-rightist (military or military-backed) or ultra-leftist (Maoist) dictatorship. They are not ruling out bloodshed between the army and the Maoists, who have concentrated a large number of their members in Kathmandu. The coming days and months are crucial for Nepal's fragile peace process. So is the special session of parliament on Thursday which will look into various options to address the prevailing crisis. It is understood that the army has already opposed the idea of the current interim parliament declaring Nepal a republic. Sources say the army is also unhappy about Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's Nepali Congress Party's recent decision to vote for the abolition of the monarchy when the Constituent Assembly meets. The Maoists have now hinted that they are ready to compromise on the timing of the abolition of the monarchy. But they look far less likely to compromise on the proportional representation issue. Whatever is decided - and other options are up for discussion - the result could well need amendments to the constitution and relevant electoral laws. From all this mess, it is King Gyanendra who is gaining.

From a position of rock-bottom unpopularity, when he had to give up power in April, 2006, his standing has been gradually picking up - thanks to the chaos and discord among the political parties and Maoists. Some leaders now say that democracy in Nepal is in serious danger. They are arguing that a broader coalition should be formed which would also take into its fold the pro-monarchy forces to stop the country from sliding into dictatorship. But the wider held view is that a final showdown between the army and the Maoists in Kathmandu is more likely than ever. If such a situation arises, nobody knows who will prevail. However, one Indian expert on Nepal, retired Gen Ashok Mehta, believes that Delhi would be prepared to give military help to the government in Kathmandu rather than see the Maoists seizing power by force.

Source: BBC News Service, October 8, 2007

India for legitimate poll process in Nepal

Kathmandu, (PTI): India would support any political system chosen by the Nepalese people as long as it is through a legitimate election process, Indian Prime Minister's envoy, Shyam Saran, said here Friday, stressing full support to the peace process in the Himalayan nation. India would support whatever political system the people of Nepal would decide, Saran said, adding that the best way to get the mandate of the people is through the legitimate means of election.

India regards holding free and fair constituent assembly election of central importance for ensuring lasting peace and multi-party democracy in Nepal," said Saran, who held high-level discussions with a wide range of political leaders including Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, CPN-UML general secretary, Madhav Kumar Nepal, and Maoist chief Prachanda among others.
"In India's view, election is the only way for the people of Nepal to choose their future, including the manner in which they want to be governed," said Saran, a former Indian Foreign Secretary.
The special envoy of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is on a three-day visit to Nepal to assess the political situation and convey the message of the Indian leader after the crucial November constituent assembly elections were postponed.

India remained committed to help the peace process in every way possible to achieve the goal of a democratic, stable and prosperous Nepal," the former Indian Ambassador to Nepal told mediapersons ahead of his departure for New Delhi Friday. Saran's remarks came at a time when the Maoists have walked out of the government, forced the postponement of the polls and registered a motion in the interim Parliament seeking the abolition of the monarchy and adoption of a proportional-based electoral system as precondition for participating in the polls.
Indian envoy Saran said he is "optimistic" that the current political crisis facing Nepal can be resolved on the basis of an understanding among the major political parties.

"There is no reason why the peace process should fail, we should look towards the positive achievements of Nepal made over the past two years," he said. "We would like to see this peace process and electoral process remain on track," Saran said. "The sooner the elections are held, the better it would be for progress of the peace process." He repeatedly stressed that it is the right of the people of Nepal to decide how they want to be governed and what type of political system they want, and the only legitimate way of doing so is holding the Constituent Assembly elections at the earliest. "India will support whatever mandate the people of Nepal will give and the international community believes that election is the only credible way to get the people's mandate," he noted. Saran also stressed that the genuine demands of the Terai region must be addressed while resolving the political issues in the country.

"But we must be able to distinguish between the genuine political demands of the Terai groups and the criminal activities being carried out by some groups taking the advantage of the open border," he said. Nepal's six-party alliance running the interim government has been insisting that a fresh mandate was necessary to decide the fate of the 238-year old monarchy in a legitimate manner. The Maoists and their allies command only 85 seats in the 330 seat parliament and their motion cannot be endorsed without the support of the other parties in the ruling alliance.

Source: The Hindu, Chennai, October 13, 2007

Nepal debates monarchy's future

The interim parliament in Nepal is holding an emergency debate on the future of King Gyanendra.

The meeting is being held at the instigation of former Maoist rebels, who pulled out of the coalition government last month. The Maoists are demanding the immediate abolition of the monarchy. But the governing Nepali Congress party is insisting that a new parliament should first be elected which will decide the future of the royal family. Elections, which were earlier scheduled for 22 November, have now been postponed and no new date has been set for the vote.

Deadlock

"We are confident that our proposal will be adopted by the parliament. We are negotiating with other parties to persuade them to back our proposal," Maoist spokesman Dev Gurung said. Nepal's Home Minister Krishna Prasad Situala said that the government was confident that the crisis will be resolved through the debate in parliament. He said that talks would be held with all parties to reach an agreement. The two sides have been trying to find a solution to the deadlock since the Maoists withdrew from the government. Elections to the constituent assembly were delayed earlier this month after the two sides failed to come to an agreement on the fate of the monarchy. The elections are a key element of a peace deal signed in 2006 that ended 10 years of Maoist insurgency. One of the first tasks facing the new constituent assembly when it is elected is to decide the monarchy's future. But the former rebels now demand a republic be announced before elections are held. Last week, the Nepali Congress announced its support for a republic - but only once elections had been held.

Source: BBC NEWS: October 11, 2007

Prime Minister Who Would Be King

Yubaraj Ghimire

G.P. koirala was arguably the most powerful prime minister the country ever had, going by the powers vested in him. For the past 16 months, he has been acting not only as the country's prime minister, but also discharging all the roles of the head of state. And King Gyanendra has become a political recluse.

Koirala has of late come in for sharp criticism for representing the state in various Hindu religious functions like the kings have been doing for a century in 'Hindu Nepal'. With the country declared secular in May 2007, it was expected that the government or head of state would maintain no direct link with such activities. On September 30, about half an hour after Koirala offered puja to Kumari, known as living Goddess, as head of the state and left the durbar square area, King Gyanendra arrived there without fanfare. He offered puja to Kumari, a tradition the kings have been maintaining for the past 250 years, and returned home. The crowd that booed Prime Minister Koirala when he visited there, greeted the king — something Gyanendra perhaps did not anticipate.

That clearly irked PM Koirala who not only sought an explanation from the chief of army staff a day later, but also ordered that half the army personnel currently deployed in the palace be removed. But many who supported the pro-democracy movement when King Gyanendra assumed absolute power are now fed up with Koirala and refuse to support him on the issue.

In fact, the crowd that hooted him delivered a simple message — Koirala is a prime minister and he should not be acting like a king, at least during religious functions. Nepali society with more than 80 per cent Hindu population, and the rest being Buddhists, Muslims and Christians, still remains a religious society and favours the king or any other individual's right to religion, something that the interim constitution guarantees as a fundamental right. Koirala has been denying that right to King Gyanendra of late.

Gyanendra, despite his unpopularity at the peak with absolute powers, was able to secure lots of sympathy, if not support from the people, when he was literally put under quarantine since February 18 when he issued a customary message in the name of the people on the occasion of Democracy Day. Since then, thrice in the past, the king was denied permission by the prime minister when he expressed his desire to be part of the tradition of the kings. Instead, Koirala took the king's role unto himself.

But what he apparently heard from the chief of army staff on the morning of October 1 must have added to that insecurity. COAS Katawal made it clear that while the Nepal army was a disciplined institution and willing to carry every order of a democratically elected government, it was worried about the complete surrender that the prime minister had made to the Maoists. He also made it clear that the army would honour each and every provision of the interim constitution and the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), the basis of Maoists joining the interim government, parliament and announcing that they had renounced the politics of violence. The army is unhappy with initiating a deal with the Maoists to become a republic even before the election to the constituent assembly takes place, against the pledge in the interim constitution that the first CA meeting will decide the fate of the monarchy.

With elections unlikely in November given the present political impasse, Koirala not only loses the political but also the mass support that he enjoyed only 16 months ago. His imminent fall now seems triggered by the army's likely non-cooperation as well.

Source: The Indian Experss, October 4, 2007