Interview Narayan Kaji Shrestha

DEC 23 -
Even as other parties are busy preparing their list of proportional representation candidates for the Constituent Assembly (CA), the UCPN (Maoist), the third largest party, has refused to take part in the CA unless consensus is reached on a number of outstanding issues, including on leadership of the High-level Political Committee (HLPC), the to-be-formed truth and reconciliation commission and the tenure of the current Constituent Assembly/Parliament. Darshan Karki and Kamal Dev Bhattarai spoke to UCPN (Maoist) Vice-Chairman Narayan Kaji Shrestha about the road ahead for the parties, ways to bring the CPN-Maoist into the political process and his party’s concerns about the Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML backtracking from earlier commitments.

How can the parties ensure promulgating a constitution within a year?

All the parties that have signed the 12-point agreement, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the Interim Constitution, and who were together in Janaandolan II as well, should move ahead by forging consensus. They should institutionalise the changes till date by writing as quickly as possible a new progressive constitution, which will complete the peace process and end the transition.

The UCPN (Maoist) has expressed concerns that other parties might backtrack from the commitments made in the 12-point agreement and the CPA. What gave rise to this fear?

In the last CA, a two-third majority could not be attained without our party and neither could it be achieved by keeping the NC and UML out. But in the new CA, a two-third majority can be achieved without the support of the UCPN (Maoist). The Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal (RPP-N) has also emerged as a new power. The RPP-N supports the revival of the monarchy and is against secularism and federalism. Given this context, we have  doubts, rather than fears, that there could be problems in institutionalising the gains made in the past. After holding multiple consultations with the NC and UML, our doubts have lessened. A certain level of agreement has at least been reached, particularly on institutionalising republicanism, federalism, secularism and proportional inclusion in the new federal republican democratic constitution.

On the opposite end, there is also concern that your party, because of your reduced strength and leverage, might not cooperate in the constitution-drafting process.

The UCPN (Maoist) is completely committed to the peace process as well as the constitution-writing process. We want to complete a new constitution regardless of the changed circumstances. One part of the peace process was integration of former Maoist soldiers. While the technical and military component of the peace process has already been completed, the political aspect of the process is writing a new constitution as per the people’s wishes and institutionalising the gains made through their sacrifice. A third component of the process is to establish a transitional justice mechanism. We are currently working on both the incomplete components of the peace process: primarily constitution-drafting and the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and a Disappearance Commission.

Which party’s stance currently worries you the most, the NC’s or the UML’s?

We do not want to indulge in any kind of blame game. We had certain doubts and concerns, which, in the process of discussion, are gradually being removed. Our party is definitely the one that led the struggle and proposed the CA, federalism and secularism. So if we had secured more seats

in the recent elections, it would have helped us institutionalise the progressive changes in their entirety. But a positive atmosphere is currently being created to safeguard those changes.

What kind of agreement is being sought among parties regarding constitution-writing?

We had some differences in the past and there are some even now. But there is a misunderstanding that the UCPN (Maoist) is trying to seek consensus on those issues before even taking part in the CA. That is not true. For instance, we have differences with other parties regarding the structure of federal states. While discussing, we will do our best to reach consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, we will follow due procedure. What we are saying is that federalism has already been agreed upon. It was promulgated by the first meeting of the last CA under the provisions of the Interim Constitution. This has to be established in the new constitution. So an agreement has to be reached on the issues of federalism, secularism and proportional inclusion. Our party wants all signatories of the 12-point agreement, the CPA and the Interim Constitution to agree upon the aforementioned issues and express their commitment in writing with regard to institutionalising them in the new constitution.

On a different note, do you see any possibility of reunification with Mohan Baidya’s CPN-Maoist?

The party divided due to differences in political ideology, though there were some institutional reasons as well. The differences between the two parties have become even more clearer in recent times as per Baidyaji’s latest statements. Nevertheless, the UCPN (Maoist) is of the opinion that the division of the party was wrong in the first place and that it would be good if reunification took place, though I do not see that happening any time soon. We are trying to work out a plan in coordination with other parties to include Baidyaji in the constitution-writing process. I had said that keeping the CPN-Maoist out of the election would be a historical blunder. I believe that that claim has been vindicated as the parties are now discussing ways to include the CPN-Maoist in the constitution-writing process. It would have been a lot better if this discussion had taken place earlier with the same degree of seriousness.

So what would be the best way to bring the CPN-Maoist into the constitution-writing process?

It would be best if the political parties can form a mechanism that both Baidhyaji and the rest can be part of without undermining the new CA. Discussions about the foundations of the new constitution can take place there. But the mechanism should be able to formally direct the constitution-writing process through the CA. If that is done, consensus can be reached among the political parties and endorsed through the CA, a body of the people’s representatives. By doing

so, a new progressive constitution can be written while also ensuring the participation and ownership of the new constitution by all and bringing the slightly derailed political process back on track.

Is expansion of the HLPC an option?

Expanding the HLPC might not be a good option. This HLPC can work until the CA formally begins its work and a new government is formed. But it might not be democratic to continue with the HLPC after that. However, it makes sense to form a mechanism that includes all the major parties plus new forces, including those that stayed out of the election.

Moving on, you openly argued against your party’s call to amend the Interim Constitution for consensus and also criticised some of the party’s decisions post-election. How certain are you about being able to guide the party towards successfully writing the constitution?

As a revolutionary party committed to the people, the UCPN (Maoist) cannot escape from its responsibilities. The party has a clear line, which is to successfully complete the peace process by writing a constitution and ending the transition. The only thing that the UCPN (Maoist) has been saying is that it has concerns about electoral fraud. Let an investigation be conducted and the facts presented to the people. This will ensure faith in the electoral process and strengthen democracy. It should not be linked to our loss in the election.

With so many issues yet to be resolved, do you think it is possible to promulgate a constitution within a year?

Two things can happen. Either a constitution will be written within a year or this CA will not write a constitution at all. This is because we have reached an agreement on foundational issues. And parties already know the matters on which they differ with the others. So there is no other task left other than to seek consensus on matters where differences exist and if that is not possible, find other ways to reach an agreement.

To conclude, some leaders, including outside your party, have you been suggesting that as a senior leader of the party, you need to be a part of the CA process.

Under normal conditions, I don’t think it suits one to join the CA after being defeated in the election. Second, I don’t think it suits a person of my post either. I do not see the need for it. But if the country thinks in a new way and I receive a formal proposal, I will give it a thought.   

Labels: Interview