Panorama
Imperative to form a new government in Nepal
NEWLY elected President Ramboron Jadav of Nepal invited the Maoist CPNM to demonstrate its majority in the Constituent Assembly (CA) within a week and, thereby, form the next government. Election to the CA was held in April, so why the delay in forming a new government? The answer lies in the result.
It was a surprise when the Maoists staged a stunning victory by becoming the single largest party in the 601 member CA. The Maoists won one-third of the seats, with the Nepali Congress (NC) and the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxists-Leninists (CPNUML) trailing behind.
Although the Maoists did not get the majority to form the next government, they are set to do so by forming a coalition. They will play a major role in drafting a new constitution, which will demonstrate new Nepal's commitments to multi-party pluralism, representative government, fundamental freedoms and human rights.
So the invitation to the Maoists seems to be a logical step. Already three months of the two-year period set to draft the constitution have been wasted. But, whether or not the Maoists would be able to form the government is still a matter of speculation because of the currents and cross-currents of Nepali political dynamics. In this context, what are the prospects of the formation of a Maoists-led government in Nepal, and why is it so imperative for Nepal of have a new government?
However, any peaceful transformation from an armed-conflict situation to constitutional politics has always been fraught with difficulties. The task is even harder when vested interested groups foresee the ushering of a new political order that would challenge the status quo, and try their best to dilute such endeavour if not prevent it altogether. The post-conflict scenario, a mixture of both hope and despair, in Nepal is no exception to it.
One cannot but appreciate the historic transformation of Maoist militarised politics into a "peaceful revolution," and its willingness to work through constitutional politics in order to change the structure and nature of the Nepali state. Their decision, after 10 years of armed struggle, to join the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) movement against the king and subsequent decision to join the peace process, has been commendable.
The role of Prime Minister Koirala in this regard has also been historic. The peace process has been murky, but all parties concerned agreed to deal with fundamental issues like unitary vs. federal, Hindu state vs. secularism, proportional representation vs. first past the post system and monarchy vs. republic.
As a matter of fact, a number of consensus agreements have made everybody hopeful. In 2005, a consensus agreement on realising "full democracy" was the beginning of rapprochement between the Maoists and the SPA. It was followed by a comprehensive peace agreement in 2006, an interim constitution in 2007, election to CA in April 2008, and abolition of monarchy in May 2008. The period between each historic development was full of leaks, breaks and de tours, but each time the conflicting issues were resolved and desired compromise was reached.
The election to the CA, which was postponed twice, seems to be culmination of all endeavours, especially because it is a fully representative body with 34% Janajatis, 33% women, 20% Madheshies, 9% dalits, ad 3% Muslims. But since the Maoist's victory the old guard, who have stakes in the status quo, seem to be working against the formation of a Maoists-led government.
The first contentious issue was the office of the president. The Maoists were obliged to accept the electoral mandate that rules out Pusha Kamol Dahal, the Maoists leader, from occupying the offices of both head of government and head of state, but they were not willing to accept Koirala as the president.
Next were the rules of functioning of the CA, including the proposed passing of no-confidence with one-third instead of two-thirds majority. The Maoists were suspicious on both counts. In the case of Koirala's proposed presidency, they apprehended that it would give rise to a parallel centre of power; and the rules regarding the no-confidence motion caused suspicion with regard to the future of any Maoist-led government.
They refused to even try to form the government without conditions. After a period of murky politicking, a solution was found. It was decided that the CA would elect the persons to the offices of president, speaker etc., and it would also change the rules of functioning of the CA. Subsequently, Ramboron Jadav, an SPA candidate was elected as the president. But passing of the Fifth Amendment has been stalled for nearly two weeks by the Madhesh-based political parties, who are demanding an "autonomous" Madhesh province.
From the above scenario, it is evident that there are difficulties in forming a new government. The unfortunate fact is that the whole situation has evolved not because of any foreign meddling but because of the roles played by the internal actors. In the meantime, the country is slowly and steadily slipping into lawlessness and anarchy. Various interest groups are resorting to violence and demonstration to express their grievances, and that has become part of daily routine in Katmandu.
There are media reports about the Maoist Young Communist League's (YCL) continuing coercion and highhanded behaviour. They need to be made accountable through a democratic order, but the task can only tackled by a mandated government. In the absence of such a government, one can only condemn such behaviour of the YCL.
Another area is reforms in the security sector. Nepal faces the twin problems of dealing with both the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the Royal Nepalese Army (RNA). First is the question of professionalisation of some 19,600 PLA and their integration into the mainstream army. Second is the question of "down-sizing" the RNA.
The first issue can be addressed through the passing of the Fifth Amendment, which provides the modus vivendi to integrate the PLA with the professional army. But the process has been stalled due to the delay in passing the said amendment in the absence of a new government.
As far as the second issue is concerned, it is common knowledge that democratic civil-military relations become operational only when a democratic government is in place. Another critical issue, which may arise in the absence of a new government, is the polarised politics. So far, despite the pitfalls, the possibility of working through a consensus process to draft the new constitution has not been vitiated by the polarisation of politics, but this may not last for long.
CPNM has agreed to form the government, with the condition that the president would not allow the vested forces to destabilise the new government within two years of its formation. The Maoists want such reassurance in the context of the prevailing political gridlock. They have held talks with the CPNUML, and claim that they the gap that developed during the presidential election has been closed, and there is a consensus between the two. The well-wishers of Nepal only can hope that the new government is formed without any further delay.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments