Reform In Nepali Congress
Why Not Limit PM’s Term Next?

By Prakash Rimal

ON Saturday, the ruling party’s jamboree in Pokhara endorsed major amendments in the Nepali Congress’s statute. The most important of these changes perhaps are the restriction of the tenure of the party President and the mandatory provision for the direct election of 50 per cent of the Central Working Committee (CWC) members. The other changes are no less revolutionary in spirit, but are politically rather less important. The at least One Woman One Constituency provision does increase the role, participation and involvement of the Nepalese women in the Congress’s decision making process, but that will take some time to bring about visual changes in the party’s overall functioning. Likewise, the provision that demands a compulsory representation of the Dalits or the oppressed class at every level of the party organisation — from ward to the parliamentary constituency — should also be taken as a first positive step towards the integration of the Dalits in the country’s largest political organisation. The party did have the Dalit voters, but their participation at the decision making level of the Congress party was virtually nil. The aforementioned and other provisions and changes made in the statute does take a positive message that a process of reform has begun in the party. These are few good examples.

Impact of Term Restriction

Since being elected to power in the first General Election of 1991, the Congress party has been at the helm of state affairs for the most part of the decade. Except for the closures and the bandhs, Nepal was having a smooth ride between 1991 and 1994, when suddenly the nation went to the snap polls. The economic growth those years was pretty satisfactory and, for the moment, it looked like the national economy was finally on the track. The mid term election of 1994 produced a hung parliament, which not only led to political instability, but also raised the political ambitions of many young leaders in all political parties, principally the main opposition Communist Party of Nepal (UML) and NC. The young leaders of UML successfully relegated their President to a mere figurehead, while their counterparts in the Congress party were apparently indulging in the creation of Second Generation Leadership. That strategy did work for a while, but the very leaders started splitting away from one another.

However, the Second Generation leaders of the Congress party did manage to continue to indulge in the inconclusive, protracted debate over the transfer of leadership. Ironically, they need the political backing of the first generation leaders one way or the other. The term limit has been the most appropriate decision the party has taken in view of the debate that has dragged on, but it still needs to be made full proof. According to what has been decided, any Congressman who has served two terms as the Party President cannot contest for the third consecutive term, but he or she is not barred from becoming the Party chief for the third term if the leader takes a break (or perhaps goes on holiday for one full term!). That’s rather funny and the Congress Party looks rather confused about what it wants and why it wants that. This very provision (skipping one term between their third and the fourth term as Party President) will remain the major impediment against the party’s decision this time to pave the way for leadership transfer. This provision may also keep the leaders engaged in subversive designs against the leadership. Even if the two-term President refrains from plotting against the successor, the "transfer of leadership" could prove to be only for a term. The best option perhaps would be to restrict the term of Party President to two terms even if the party happens have the best of President. The Nepalese political parties need to learn from others as well. Despite being marred by scandals Clinton could still be elected the President of the US for all that he did over the last eight years and they were other presidents who could have been elected straight to third term of presidency. But the thing called system checked that and that’s how leadership is passed on from one to another. We can always borrow good examples. And, the ruling party should go for that.

Younger & Newer Leadership

The Congress representatives must prove their maturity by electing untested hands to the CWC this time. The re-election of "prominent" leaders will be a big set back to the spirit of leadership transfer. The Congress workers should give a chance to new people with new ideas. That way, they can keep the corrupt ones at bay. The other issues the party’s newly elected leadership should not allow, at least from the next time, are making sure that the Speaker does not, or is not allowed to, contest for any official position in the party. The Speaker must keep himself off active party politics once he or she takes up the mantle of Speakership — irrespective of the "established" practice (as cited recently by incumbent Speaker Taranath Ranabhat in Pokhara). Clearly, one bad example can not and must not justify or set a bad precedence. Besides, the Congress decision to limit terms of the party President need as well to be extended to the Parliament — starting with the Prime Minister. Why should not the new leadership of the Congress party propose that, from now on, the Prime Minister’s term will also be limited to two terms? This will not only ensure the transfer of leadership of the government, but will also ensure political stability. Let massive political reforms begin with the end of the ongoing Congress jamboree in Pokhara.

Other Stories

• Girl Trafficking : Some Questions
• The Great Knack