Major parties have pledged to take ownership of CA-I

FEB 10 -Nearly three months have passed since the November 19 election to a second Constituent Assembly. The two largest parties in the CA—the Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML—seem to have finally made some progress over power sharing but there are a number of potential flashpoints, not least the long-term status of President Ram Baran Yadav. Today, the House will elect a new prime minister and that will lead to talks over government formation. Anil Giri and Pranaya SJB Rana spoke to the leader of the NC’s talks team, Ram Sharan Mahat, about negotiations with the UML, the constitution-writing process and the NC’s modus operandi.



It is nearing three months since the election was held and a government hasn’t been formed yet. As part of the NC’s talks team, what are specific outstanding issues between the UML and the NC regarding power sharing?
This delay is not just because of power sharing. There were a number of reasons, including the problem created by the Maoists after the election results started coming out, the delay over proportional representation (PR), the constitutional requirement of the President’s appeal for consensus and the election of the prime minister through voting. These time-consuming procedures are not normal in parliamentary practice. But this does not mean that the political parties are not to blame. A power-sharing deal between the NC and UML should have been done much earlier. We should have been discussing ministerial portfolios, the House speakership and parliamentary committee chairmanship. But the UML brought the issue of a Presidential election upfront, which was a surprise to us. This, in our view, is extra-constitutional. A new Presidential election will require amendment to the constitution. We should be concentrating on writing a new constitution instead of amending the old one. Second, during the whole election campaign, the issue of a Presidential election never came up. Third, we cannot use the President in the power-sharing bargain. His office is above party politics.


What kind of challenges lie ahead for the NC President Sushil Koirala?
It is definitely not easy for Koirala. Negotiating with the UML has shown us that it will not be a cakewalk. We thought it would be an easy negotiation but it has not been so. Their demand for an election to a new president and vice-president, which was not on the table before, shows how new things come up during the course of negotiation. Then there is the issue of internal party management. This is certainly a challenging and testing time for his leadership. But I am confident that all these things will be sorted out in time.


How confident are you that the constitution will be written in time?
I am hopeful, provided that all parties show real commitment. But take the case of the CA rule and procedure committee. The previous rules were too elaborate and complicated so we wanted to simplify them to facilitate constitution making in one year. But there has been a delay in forming the committee itself because even parties with one or two CA members are all demanding a position on the committee. If this is allowed, it will be a jumbo-sized committee.


Will the new Assembly own up the achievements of the previous CA?
As a sovereign body, the CA is not bound to accept what was agreed in the previous CA. But the political parties that will be playing major roles in the constitution-making process have already pledged to take ownership of the agreements reached in the previous CA. If there have been formal agreements, we are ready to take ownership to that. That is part of the inter-party agreement we made and also part of the election manifestos of all three major parties.


But there’s also a school of thought that since more than 85 percent of the current CA are new faces and that they have no obligations take ownership of the previous agreements?
Yes, there are new faces but of the same party. Unless the parties change their positions, new faces will not make a difference. If parties are committed to what they agreed in the past, the faces will not matter. Furthermore, there have been few agreements in the previous CA. The only formal thing that the previous CA passed by the full House was a federal democratic republic. In some committees, there were unanimous reports. The Natural Resources and Economic, Financial Resources Committee, of which I was a part, had a unanimous report. Why do you want to reinvent that? If you want to reinvent everything then it might not be possible to complete the constitution-making process in one year. Of course, this does not rule out the possibility of fine-tuning if there are concrete reasons for doing so. Also, if some parties do not agree with what was agreed before, they have the freedom to oppose it while voting.


Let’s talk about the new government. Will you be part of the Cabinet?
We have not yet decided this. It is for the prime minister and the party president to take the decision on whom to include in the Cabinet and in what capacity.


What will be the priorities of the new government?
The immediate priority is to help the constitution-making process. There is a general perception that the government will make the constitution but this is not true. The government will only create enabling conditions to complete the constitution in time. The second priority is to improve governance through rule of law. There is too much indiscipline and anarchy in our system. You need to have a strong government to ensure rule of law. We will fight corruption and ensure stability in administration. The third priority is the economy—create a proper environment for new investments, revive economic activities and create a business-friendly atmosphere to push economic growth. We saw during our election campaign that everybody is concerned about development. You have to meet the aspirations of the people through higher growth, more development benefits going to the people and generating economic activities.


What we have seen from the NC so far seems reminiscent of the 90s when the party was mired in intra-party conflict, which greatly affected the functioning of the government. How will you ensure that this doesn’t repeat?
Internal party management is a difficult job. When there is no consensus, an election needs to be held. That is what happened recently and we settled the issue of Parliamentary Party leader. As far as your fear about a repetition of the 90s goes, I hope that will not happen. Leaders have become more mature and we have seen that the people are sick of frequent changes in government. We pledged to the electorate that we will provide stability. The people will not spare any party that creates instability. In the recent election, we saw what happened to the Madhesi parties, which have a notorious record of splitting. They faced the music of the electorate. This time, national parties have emerged as major actors. They have led the nation in the past and have learned.


One crucial aspect of the peace process remains incomplete. The formation of two committees—of the Truth and Reconciliation and the other for the disappeared. How will you take this in parallel with constitution-writing?
We have no choice but to comply with the directives of the Supreme Court to make the TRC and Disappearance Commission bills in line with international practices. The Maoists will have to accept this too. If you believe in rule of law, you have to accept the Supreme Court verdict on these matters. Eventually, this issue will reach the Parliament. The Maoists are insisting that the TRC bill be made as soon as possible. A Maoist member made a case for this in the House just the other day. So a fresh bill will need to be made and passed through the House. 

Labels: Interview