 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
1-Aug-2008
NEPAL: Wobbling From Crisis to Crisis: Update No. 167
By Dr. S. Chandrasekharan.
In the last few days Nepal has been moving from one crisis to another and the unity that was seen earlier stopped with the removal of monarchy and declaring Nepal a republic. It took more than three months to elect a President and a Vice President but the government is yet to be formed.
It is not realised that the immediate and the foremost task of the political parties is to frame a new constitution within the stipulated two years and in that sense the constitutional assembly is the supreme body. Instead, what we see is constant infighting and wrangling over the posts and powers ( spoils) for an interim government that is yet to be formed. If the present trend continues the new constitution will not be finalised even in the next five years!
Another phenomenon we see is the bewildering changes in the alignment of the parties and contradictory statements being made by political leaders. It is getting almost difficult to believe anybody’s statement as final!
It is also not realised that the configuration of the constituent assembly is such that of the four main parties, three will have to join to form a two thirds majority and of the three, one will have to be the Maoist party to take all important decisions concerning the constitution and governance. Consensus should have been the watch word and instead the parties are going in different directions. This trend will have to be reversed.
It all started with the three non Maoists parties ganging up together to form a “left democratic alliance” just on the eve of presidential and vice-presidential elections. As “Rising Nepal” had said this coalition is an unnatural one with no common ideology except to teach the Maoists a lesson. A lesson has been learned by the Maoists that ‘overreach’ can sometimes misfire and it so happened that both their candidates lost.
Miffed over the results, Maoist leader Prachanda declared that they will not form the government but would sit in the opposition as their candidates lost in the elections. But then they form the largest component in the constitutional assembly and their support is necessary for running the government and in constitution making.
The other parties having realised the situation took the stand that the Maoists having the largest number in the constituent assembly should be asked to form the government. Both the Nepali Congress and the UML, in turn declared that they would stay in opposition. But the fact of the matter is that no party wants to stay out of power and all are eager to share the power and the spoils that go with them!
It was surprising to see on 24th July one senior leader of UML K.P.Oli declaring that his party would w “stake its claim for government leadership, if the three party combine moved on to form a new government.” He was saying this when his party leadership was cozying up to the Maoists and the three party left democratic alliance was already cracking. Surely, Oli must be aware that his party coming third in terms of numbers cannot run a government even for a day and cannot carry on the task of constitution framing with the help of the other two parties alone without the Maoists.
It was at this point on 24th July, in the 25 party meeting on government formation, Prachanda made three demands for his party could form the government. These were one-. The left democratic alliance should be dissolved. two- There should be a commitment to give stability to the Maoist led government until a new constitution is drafted. three- Key Maoist concerns should be reflected in the common minimum programme of the coalition government.
These three conditions were rejected by the other three main parties and now Prachanda has said on record that these were not “pre conditions” which means he is flexible now.
There was no need for him to demand the dissolution of the three-party alliance which even otherwise is bound to break by its own inner contradictions as was seen in the incident relating the Vice President taking oath in Hindi.
For six days various student organisations, youth wings, other organisations affiliated to the Maoists, Nepali Congress and the UML took to the streets first in Kathmandu and then to other parts of the country demanding an apology from the Vice President for taking the oath in Hindi. Meantime a PIL case was filed in the Supreme Court which in turn issued a show cause notice to Vice President why he took the oath of office and secrecy in Hindi. Significantly, the MJF office in Kathmandu was vandalised by the agitators. The MJF in retaliation called for a total bandh in the four Terai districts where they are strong and life was brought to a standstill in those districts.
Poor Paramananda Jha, the Vice President did not realise that the divide between the Pahadis and the Madhesis is still deep despite the coalition and he had to make an abject surrender. In a statement he apologised to those hurt by his action and promised to focus on working towards integrity, prosperity, national unity and welfare of Nepalis. A public apology of this kind from a Vice President is unthinkable. The Vice President should have stood his ground. The protests were however withdrawn after the apology. No body ever pointed out that in the previous government Maoist minister Matrika Prasad Yadav did not take his oath in Nepali.
Another avoidable crisis was created when the cabinet decided that G.P.Koirala with a 35 member delegation would attend the SAARC summit meeting at Colombo. This was strongly opposed both by the UML and the Maoists. The UML suggested that only the President should go as Koirala was only heading a care taker government and thus has no right to represent Nepal. The UML was joined by the Maoists also. In fact a resolution to this effect was about to be passed in the assembly but better sense prevailed. Koirala had to accept his mistake of not consulting other parties on such important foreign policy matters before he was allowed to go but with a reduced entourage of only ten persons that included his daughter Sujatha Koirala. Thus, an international embarrassment was avoided. It is a pity that other parties did not have the grace to let the old man attend an international meeting in his official capacity which perhaps would be his final one! Barring Bhattarai there is no living person like G.P. in Nepal who has suffered and done so much for bringing democracy to Nepal.
President Raj Baran Yadav began his consultations with various parties on the formation of the next government. Prachanda objected to the President making active efforts to form the government which he said is beyond his brief. His contention was that the post of President is purely ceremonial in nature and has nothing to do with inviting parties for forming the government. In a way he is right as the fourth amendment to the interim constitution spells out clearly the role and powers of the president.
When President Yadav invited the Maoist party being the largest to form the government on 29th July, Prachanda accepted the offer with alacrity despite his earlier objections. He has been busy in discussing a “concept” paper prepared by his colleagues Mohan Vaidya and Dev Gurung. The concept paper deals with nationalism, federalism, relief package for the people, peace process, management of PLA and its integration and other socio economic policies.
It may take a week for the Maoists to come up with a definite programme after consulting other parties.
The trend we see now is that the Maoists and other leftist parties including the UML are forming an informal leftist grouping in the days to come. The idea will be to isolate the centrist Nepali Congress. The MJF is seen to be in a kind of wilderness and not sure of the direction they are to take except to talk of Madhesi rights in every forum and in every meeting.Home | Papers | Notes | Forum | Search | Feedback | Links
Copyright © South Asia Analysis Group
All rights reserved. Permission is given to refer this on-line document for use in research papers and articles, provided the source and the author's name are acknowledged. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes.