[“The Nepali Congress
thinks that if they accept the demand of the opposition parties, that is going
to disintegrate the country,” said Lok Raj Baral, executive chairman of the
Nepal Center for Contemporary Studies in Katmandu. “But if they do not address the
demands of the minority groups, that is also going to harm the country.”]
By Bhadra Sharma
 |
| Maoist opposition leaders in Nepal threw chairs at members of the governing parties at a meeting on Tuesday. |
KATMANDU, Nepal — Maoist opposition
leaders in Nepal threw
chairs and microphones at members of the governing parties on Tuesday at a
meeting of lawmakers working to draft a Constitution on deadline. Three
lawmakers and about a dozen security guards were wounded.
Hours later, the Maoists,
who won only a small fraction of seats in electionsfor the
Constituent Assembly in 2013, strictly enforced a nationwide strike that shut
down traffic, schools and markets.
The opposition alliance,
which is led by the Maoist faction of the Communist Party, wants the new
Constitution to carve provinces in Nepal along ethnic lines, a provision the
governing coalition adamantly opposes. Regional parties representing members of
the Madhesi ethnic group are seeking to declare the southern plains a separate
province.
During the fracas on
Tuesday, opposition lawmakers attacked leaders from the Marxist-Leninist
faction of the Communist Party, who are part of the governing coalition. The
coalition, led by the Nepali Congress party, commands more than two-thirds of
the 601-member assembly, providing sufficient votes to push through a draft of
the Constitution. But such an agreement would be tenuous and short-lived,
analysts say.
“The Nepali Congress
thinks that if they accept the demand of the opposition parties, that is going
to disintegrate the country,” said Lok Raj Baral, executive chairman of the
Nepal Center for Contemporary Studies in Katmandu. “But if they do not address
the demands of the minority groups, that is also going to harm the country.”
The Nepali Congress won
the largest share of votes in 2013, followed by the Marxists-Leninists.
Dividing the country into smaller political units remains one of the most
contentious issues surrounding the new Constitution.
 |
| Anti-government protesters marched in Katmandu on Tuesday. Niranjan Shrestha/Associated Press |
“There are no words to
condemn such an act,” said Subash Nembang, the speaker of the Constituent
Assembly.
The deputy prime minister
and home minister, Bam Dev Gautam, said voting would go ahead despite the
obstruction from opposition parties.
“To promulgate the
Constitution is our target, and we will make it a success,” he said.
The Maoist opposition
leader, Giriraj Mani Pokharel, defended the actions of his party.
“We have already pushed
for consensus,” Mr. Pokharel said. “The Constituent Assembly chairman’s push
for majority process invited confrontation.”
Mr. Pokharel said the
opposition would continue to impede voting unless the governing parties agreed
to continue negotiations on the Constitution.
Bhadra Sharma reported
from Katmandu, and Nida Najar from New Delhi.
@ The New York Times
IGNORING INDIAN ADVICE, NEPAL PLUNGES INTO POLITICAL CRISIS
By Prashant Jha
*
IGNORING INDIAN ADVICE, NEPAL PLUNGES INTO POLITICAL CRISIS
[In a statement, the Ministry of External Affairs said that it
was their ‘expectation’ that Nepali leaders would work together ‘in the final
stage of the peace process, in drawing up a constitution that honours past
agreements and understandings as well as the mandate of the CA elections’.]
By Prashant Jha
When Prime Minister Narendra
Modi visited Nepal in November during the SAARC summit, he had two pieces of
advice for the country’s leaders – draft the constitution ‘on time’, and draft
it ‘based on consensus’. If Nepal is sliding into a political crisis in the run
up to Thursday’s deadline for a new constitution, it is because the leadership
has chosen to disregard this well-meaning advice. India, on Tuesday, reiterated
this broad suggestion with a carefully constructed fresh statement.
Nepal is deeply polarized. The ruling parties – Nepali Congress
and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) – wished to initiate a
process that would enable voting on contested constitutional issues like
federalism, form of government, election system and judiciary. The opposition –
led by Maoists and Tarai parties – insisted on working towards a consensus,
rather than a vote. On Monday, the Maoist members vandalized the Constituent
Assembly, disrupting proceedings. On Tuesday, the opposition followed it up
with a nation-wide strike. A constitutional draft - let alone a new
constitution – is now impossible.
In
a statement, the Ministry of External Affairs said that it was their
‘expectation’ that Nepali leaders would work together ‘in the final stage of
the peace process, in drawing up a constitution that honours past agreements
and understandings as well as the mandate of the CA elections’.
India’s
approach carries weight. The original understanding between the political
parties and Maoists in 2005, which saw the onset of the peace process, was signed
in Delhi. Modi has elevated the relationship with two visits to Kathmandu.
Instability in the northern neighbour will have a direct impact on India, given
the open border. The failure of the constitutional process will threaten
prospects of democratic consolidation, strengthen right and left wing
extremists in Kathmandu, and jeopardize the upswing in bilateral relations.
India cannot remain silent.
Without
taking obvious sides, Delhi has adopted a nuanced approach. It recognizes that
the CA elections have thrown up a particular mandate – which is what the ruling
parties are using to push a vote. But it has taken the longer-term view, and
warned Nepal’s polity that a constitution is a foundational document. It may be
possible to draft a statute through the majoritarian route, but this will not
be owned by key political forces or social groups. And such a constitution will
lead to only more conflict, which will add to India’s strategic concerns. Delhi
should use its leverage in Kathmandu to pull back Nepali parties from the
brink.
