The UML has no qualms about staying in opposition

FEB 03 - Even as the President’s deadline to convene a consensus government expired on Sunday, the political parties, mainly the Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML, failed to reach an agreement. The exercise to form a majority government has now begun, though both the parties refuse to budge from their respective positions on power sharing. Meanwhile, top UML leaders—Jhala Nath Khanal, Madhav Kumar Nepal, KP Oli and Bamdev Gautam—are in a tussle over the post of parliamentary party leader and party chair. In this context, Bhadra Sharma and Darshan Karki spoke to UML General Secretary Ishwar Pokhrel regarding government formation, power-sharing deals with the NC and the party’s demand to elect a new President.

Where have talks between the UML and NC reached on power sharing?

The discussions are currently underway and party Vice-Chairperson Bamdev Gautam has been assigned the responsibility to discuss power sharing and other issues bilaterally with the NC. He has begun the process and has also informed us about the kind of proposal put forth by the NC. After going through the NC’s preliminary proposal, Bamdevji questioned the NC leaders on how they expected to coordinate with our party by tabling such a proposal.

What is the NC’s proposal?

It does not represent the mandate given by the people through the November 19 elections. Furthermore, it does not seem as though the NC seeks to discuss power sharing with us on an equal footing. I do not want to go into the details here but if this is true, it will be difficult for us to join the government. Nevertheless, we have only held preliminary discussions. I do not think that the NC’s final stand will stay the same.

What is the UML’s proposal to the NC?

First, we need consensus on the policy and principle of power sharing. We need to discuss power sharing regarding the posts of the President, Vice-President, various bodies within the Constituent Assembly (CA) and the government in totality. Saying certain posts are not up for discussed and that other posts should also follow the model we previously adopted will only create problems.

The Supreme Court says that elections to the post of the President can only be held by amending the Interim Constitution. This will require a two-thirds majority.

First, the Supreme Court verdict mentions the constitutional provision to retain the President and Vice-President until a new constitution is promulgated. But it has clearly stated that whether the President and the Vice-President should resign lies within the jurisdiction of the Parliament.

Is the UML demanding a change of the President to resolve internal power management issues?

Whenever there are opportunities to address a issue positively, it is natural to pursue that option for one’s organisational interests and gains. There is no need for outsiders to accuse the UML for doing so. It is all about capitalising on a favourable situation.

How do you plan to manage power politics within the party?

First, by electing the leadership through a democratic process. Since the party’s 8th general convention, we have a clear provision that the same person cannot occupy an executive position for more than two terms. We also have the opportunity to abide by the ‘one leader, one position’ framework.

How will you select the leader of the Parliamentary Party?

We will try to reach consensus on the issue. If not, there will be a vote on who should lead the party in the CA.

How hopeful are you on reaching an agreeable power-sharing deal with the NC?

I am optimistic because within the NC too, there are leaders who understand the fresh mandate given by the people and the changed context.  They must also understand the need for consensus to write a constitution within a year. If all these factors are taken into account, the differences between the NC and UML can be resolved.

Moving on, all the major parties have committed to writing a constitution within a year. It has already been over two months and parties are still busy with internal power management. How will a constitution be written within a year?

This should not be perceived that way. Just as a person has to do multiple tasks in a 24-hour period, the task of writing a constitution will take place alongside other activities. Writing a constitution does not mean leaving aside all other responsibilities. With regards to promulgating a new constitution, it should build upon the formal agreements from the last CA, not those which were only agreed upon politically.

Is that a possibility, given that the UML is still demanding a new President?

Shouldn’t the second CA endorse the President too? How can one keep sticking to a position when a new CA has already been elected? Moreover, periodic endorsement of leaders is an integral part of democracy. The Interim Constitution says that the President and the Vice-President will stay put until a new constitution is written. But to complete the entire process, electoral colleges will have to be made and new federal states need to be carved out. Otherwise, this would mean that the same people will continue as President and Vice-President for the next six or seven years. So the issue must be discussed with an open mind.

The NC has proposed that a constitution be written within a year and only then will it consider giving the President’s post to the UML. Do you see a possibility of agreement on this proposal?

Among the NC, UML and UCPN (Maoist), I do not think any single party holds the authority to hand out anything to other parties. Should the NC be presening itself as the provider and the rest as beggars? Instead, respectable discussions should be held on possible options of power sharing. Who is the NC to tell the UML that it is considering an option to ‘give’ the position of the President to us? What the Congress needs to understand is that the party only has 196 seats in the CA. The UML has 175 seats. The NC seems to be harbouring an illusion that it has 296 seats and that it only needs a few more seats for a majority through which it can arm-twist the other parties.

Does the UML actually mean it when it says that it is ready to stay in the opposition?

It depends upon the proposal put forth by the NC. If the Congress offers us a respectable deal, we will accept it. Or else, it can form a coalition with the UCPN (Maoist) and the Madhesi parties. We have no qualms about staying in the opposition. But if that happens, it will be very unfortunate for the country. If one party starts the numbers game in Parliament, others will also follow. If the NC does not offer us a respectable deal, then we will not go begging for posts. Even if the President is to stay, he must be duly endorsed by Parliament. This will help establish his legitimacy within the CA.

Labels: Interview