Nepal’s parties mustn’t allow the issue to linger
It is good that the three major parties of Nepal — the Nepali Congress, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-leninist) and the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) — have agreed to accelerate the pace of discussions over the shape of their country's new Constitution. It makes sense for them to sort out the less contentious issues first and thereby create an atmosphere of mutual trust and achievement. This will help in the resolution of the most problematic one: The precise nature of the federal structure that the Constitution must envisage.
This is not to say that the other matters can be resolved at the drop of a hat. The form of governance, for instance, is an issue where there are serious differences of opinion between the ruling Nepali Congress-CPN(UMl) combine and the Maoists. Former Prime Minister and senior Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai has often reiterated — like he did during his recent visit to India — that the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy is a sham and that it keeps out marginalised sections of society from the political decision-making process. Decades ago, he had lashed out at the parliamentary system India follows. He wants a different model for his country.
While there are many people in Nepal who share his opinion, there are equally as many that are comfortable with the present system and believe that it can be made better with some tweaking. Moreover, the pro-Westminster model groups argue that this is not the appropriate time to mess around with the governance system, since there are several issues pending to be sorted out.
On other points, such as more robust and independent judicial and electoral systems, there may not be much of friction, as it would suit all the parties — especially the Nepali Congress which is ever fearful of the Maoists returning to the path of violence in a bid to topple elected regimes — to have a mechanism that will protect and promote the democratic culture. While the decision to bring forward the discussions on the Constitution is welcome, it would be nice to see the parties bind themselves to a time-line. After all, the talks cannot go on forever. The more time the uncertainty continues, the more opportunities it provides for mischievous elements and disruptionists to stoke the fire of unrest. These people come from all parties.
While there is hope that most issues will be taken care of in the coming weeks, the federal structure will be the major stumbling block. The Constitution cannot be accepted in bits and parts; all elements including the nature of federalism have to be there in black and white. The Maoists and their allies, the Madhesi parties, are determined to have their way in the creation of States that are ethnically-determined. The Nepali Congress and the Marxist-leninist party are equally vehemently opposed to the idea. A middle ground has to be found to break the impasse. Else, violence is always a call away.