COVER STORY (Spotlight Weekly)

Preparing For Fresh Elections?

A cardinal rule of parliamentary democracy is that whenever the ruling party is unpopular, the job of the opposition is to force the government to seek a fresh mandate from the people. But the CPN-UML is single-mindedly focused on forcing Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala out of office. If the main opposition party is serious about its allegations against the Nepali Congress government, it must stop playing unconstitutional politics and demand fresh elections.

By KESHAB POUDEL

"We will not allow Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to enter the parliament building if he doesn't resign. We will stall the session until he quits," said Pradeep Nepal, powerful CPN-UML standing committee member. (In a hitherto undenied report in Kantipur daily, January 25, 2001)

"The CPN-UML will stall the session of the House of Representatives until Prime Minister Koirala resigns. The UML will launch a street agitation to force Koirala out of office. Analyzing the role of the Nepali Congress in current politics, our meeting concluded that the government has failed to control violence, killings and anarchy. Even the investigations of Public Account Committee reveal that the government was involved in massive irregularities in the Lauda Air deal. Under these circumstances, the CPN-UML has decided to ask for the resignation of Nepali Congress government. (The decision of the UML standing committee meeting published in the CPN-UML-friendly Budhabar weekly, on January 24, 2001).

PM Koirala (second from right) with his colleagues : Tough teerrain ahead

The UML is demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, criticizing his Nepali Congress for failing to deliver the goods and for not being able to restore law and order. The UML says that as long as the Nepali Congress remains power, the country will face many troubles.

Interestingly, UML leaders led by main opposition leader Madhav Kumar Nepal went to the residence of another senior Congress leader, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, on January 25 asking him to take the leadership of the government. The unanswered question: If the Nepali Congress has failed to deliver, as the UML charges, how would the replacement of Koirala by Bhattarai or Sher Bahadur Deuba make a difference.

Strategy to Divide Congress

What if Prime Minister Koirala visits UML leader K.P. Sharma Oli and asks him to dislodge Nepal from the party leadership? Is this the brand of democracy the UML believes in and propagates? If not, on what grounds did the party leaders go to Bhattarai's residence? "It is clear that the UML's campaign is to depose Koirala under a sinister design," said a political analyst.

If the statement of the UML is any indication, it is pretty clear where Nepal's politics is heading in the forthcoming parliamentary session, which starts from February 9.

The constitution has specified several ways in which the prime minister can be changed. It is difficult to understand why the main opposition party is choosing an extra-constitutional method to do so.

Opposition's Demands

The opposition can demand the resignation of the prime minister because it is their privilege. But they cannot use extra-constitutional ways to force prime minister to resign. "It is the prerogative of the opposition to ask for the resignation of the prime minister and other ministers. It happens in other countries, too. I take this in a very normal way," said Congress MP Dr Ram Sharan Mahat. "Going by their statements that they will resort to extra-parliamentary methods -- such as forcibly stalling parliamentary proceedings -- for the resignation of the prime minister, this is a wrong practice," he said.

Then what prompted the main opposition party to make threats of street action and disruption of the house to bring down the democratically elected government? There may be another hidden agenda. As the local bodies elections is approaching, the UML knows that it cannot defeat a united Congress.

"There are constitutional ways to influence the policies of the government and to build pressure on the government," said Dr. Mahat, who has maintained neutrality on the rifts within the Congress.

Stalling the parliament session and organizing street protests would only invite a constitutional deadlock. In a parliamentary democracy, the opposition has the obligation to criticize the government and to provide an alternative government through elections. Thus, the main opposition is known as the shadow government, which prepares programs keeping in mind that the electorate at any time might ask them to provide a better administration.

"We are shocked by the UML's present posture. We thought that despite being communist the UML had matured into a responsible parliamentary opposition," said a Western diplomat, speaking on condition of strict anonymity. "We have been proved wrong and we will have to reconsider our opinion about them."

Added another diplomat from a neighboring country which has a long tradition of parliamentary democracy: "We also have had a communist opposition, but they have never been so irresponsible. If the communist opposition continues in this way, it will have no future."

Street demonstrations have their limits in effecting change of government or policies. After a point, they bring political instability. Demonstrations and agitations only negate the real aspirations of the people.

But UML leaders are adamant. "When Prime Minister Koirala refuses to listen to the opposition and continues to be involved in corruption, there is no other way we can force him to resign," said UML general secretary Nepal in Rajbiraj. "As the CIAA established his involvement in the Lauda Air deal, Koirala must go. We will stall the house and organize street protests to force him out of office," Nepal added.

Democracy matures with the setting of one precedent after another. If the Nepali Congress follows the precedents set by today's opposition, what can the UML expect if it happens to hold the reins of power tomorrow? The main opposition party's plan to disrupt parliament is contrary to the principles and practices of healthy democracy.

If the policies of the government have failed to bring change, the opposition can bring a vote of no-confidence or censure motion in parliament and use other constitutional avenues. If they want to take an extra step, they can press the government to call fresh elections.

Rejecting such suggestions, Nepal said: "We are opposing Prime Minister Koirala, not the Nepali Congress."

Demand Without Alternatives

In a parliamentary democracy, the opposition always demands the resignation of the prime minister after they are in a position to form an alternative government. At a time when the combined strength of all the opposition parties is 91 out of 205 members of parliament, what benefits do they expect by dislodging the prime minister? Moreover, even if Koirala does resign, the parliamentary majority will still be with his Nepali Congress.

Khanal (left) with Nepal : Plotting to oust Koirala ?

In a multiparty system of government, it is the political party which is to be blamed for failures, not individuals. If we go through the statements of the leaders of the main opposition party, it is difficult to fathom who or what they are opposing -- the party or person.

If they are opposing the Congress government, they have to ask for fresh elections. If they are asking for the resignation of Prime Minister Koirala alone, the opposition parties are interfering in the internal affairs of the ruling party. The opposition, too, needs to follow the norms and ethics of political pluralism and representative government.

"We want to remove a corruption-tainted prime minister but not the party. If Prime Minister Koirala's involvement in the Lauda Air deal is established, he will have to quit," said Dr Prakash Chandra Lohani, MP and vice-president of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), which the UML is trying to enlist in its anti-Koirala fight.

The UML and the RPP also have a moral obligation to demand fresh elections when they see the government is unpopular. Interestingly, neither is making that demand.

Playing With Internal Politics

This raises a core political issue: Is it fair on the part of one party to seek the replacement of the leader of another? If the prime minister is corrupt, what does that say about the entire party? After all, the prime minister not only represents but is also working with the support of the entire party.

"If the prime minister is involved in corruption, there is no reason to blame the party as a whole," said the RPP's Dr. Lohani.

If members are honest, how can it be said that the prime minister is dishonest? How can a dishonest prime minister be elected by honest members?

By their actions and strident rhetoric, the main opposition party wants to split the Nepali Congress. After the Pokhara convention, Congress came out with a message of unity. The opposition began demanding the resignation of Koirala only after he was re-elected overwhelmingly as party president.

Under the arithmetic of the current parliament, the UML is in no position to form an alternative government. The main opposition party knows that the best hope of going to power lies in seeking a fresh mandate from the people. Will UML leaders ask the prime minister to call fresh elections?

Failure of Congress

The UML's demand for the resignation of Koirala is justified on the ground of the poor performance of the government. There are failure in leadership and the people are restive. Out of pessimism, some are looking to extra-constitutional and undemocratic alternatives. In another manifestation of popular frustration, violence is increasing.

The disenchantment of the people in the street is seen in those bouts of nostalgia for the balance of authority and responsibility that was maintained by the earlier political system. Today's system is responsible to the people, but who bears the responsibility for all these things that have gone wrong?

Unemployment is a major national problem. A large number of educated people want to leave the country in search of better opportunities in Malaysia, Gulf countries, United States and other destinations.

Agriculture, the traditional backbone of the economy, has also been facing a major crisis because of rising prices of fertilizer and low prices for crops.

The price of fertilizers have risen by 100 percent over the last 10 years. Increasing costs of cultivation and decreasing rates of return have pushed the subsistence-level life of the average Nepali below the poverty line. In some places, starvation has become a looming threat.

In the midst of this national crisis, everybody looks towards the government and the prime minister. The government, however, looks at what the prime minister likes to look at. The power of the people to change the government is blocked by the five-year fixed tenure of parliament. On the other hand, because parliament has a fixed tenure, the prime minister is always insecure and is unable to discipline members.

Senior Congress leaders, too, are criticizing the inefficiency and lackluster performance of the government. "There is economic depression in the country and the government cannot find relief by citing the world-wide recession. The government must bring clear policies to eradicate poverty and end unemployment," former prime minister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai told reporters at the Congress Central Office.

The opposition has to learn to press the government through constitutional ways. If the opposition does not see any hope in the current government, let the country go for another election. This would be much better than to paralyze the government of the day.

"The law-and-order situation is deteriorating and there is no sense of governance. We need to have a powerful government to deal with various problems," said Dr. Mahat.

In a parliamentary democracy, the majority party must rule and the minority must criticize. In the name of criticism, however, the opposition should not walk on the path of anarchism and obstructionism. "How can you visualize a political scenario in which the main opposition party obstructs the functioning of the government from within parliament and from the streets?" an analyst asked.

Insecure Prime Minister

The present government inertia has its roots in the insecurity that has gripped the chair of the prime minister. A person in the prime minister's chair always feels insecure and shaky because he does not have the power to discipline his ministers and supporters in parliament. At the same time, he does not have the power to keep the opposition at bay by threatening to hold fresh elections. The result is a weak prime minister.

Even a decisive person like Koirala has proved to be weak because he has not been able to assert the authority of his office. The changed interpretation of the constitution has weakened the role of the prime minister. There is no consensus among politician that the prime minister needs to have the right to dissolve the house.

No one wants to restore this right because the opposition believes it can bargain with a weak prime minister on every issue. An effective prime minister needs strong authority to run parliament in accordance with the provisions of the constitution.

All these negative factors have gripped the country's politics. The fortunate thing in Nepal is that the opposition knows everything about governance because it has had stints in power.

It is difficult to run the government in a society where the per capita income is under US$ 200 and more than half of the people are illiterate. But is it correct to destabilize the process just to capitalize on the resentment of the people?

The opposition should have confidence in the political process and the patience to wait and explore the possibilities within the constitution.

If you start blocking the prime minister from entering the house, who will listen to the members' criticism? Who will reply to their arguments? The people have every right to know from the government what programs it has for the nation's welfare? At the same time, the people have the right to know from opposition leaders where they intend to lead the country to.

Although Koirala appears to be influenced by bad advice from his family members, his daughter was rejected by an election officer he nominated. It seems the prime minister did not want to interfere in the election process. This is something unique in Third World democracies.

The core question: why has Koirala failed even with such a long experience in politics. In his first term, when he was inexperienced, the country suffered much. Because of a weak position, today even a strong prime minister fails to deliver the goods. Koirala knows the ins and outs of the country. He does not have the power to be assertive. He always has to compromise with opposition parties and members of his own party. That has turned politics ugly and unhealthy.

Has parliament become so irrelevant that the opposition has to go out on the street? Has parliament outlived its utility and failed? If so, the prime minister must have the courage to go to the people. He should not squander his authority just to remain the prime minister. He is morally and duty bound to the oath he has taken under the constitution.

At the same time, the opposition must not play politics in the affairs of another party. It must develop itself as an alternative to the government. If opposition leaders think things have become so bad, they should stop giving ultimatums to the prime minister and demand fresh elections? The opposition parties can demonstrate their solidarity by introducing a resolution in parliament urging the prime minister to dissolve the house and hold fresh elections. Expectations of joining a coalition government may benefit a few, but they are certainly not going to help democracy.

Failure of Party or PM?

If the prime minister of a majority government is unable to work, his cabinet colleagues also bear the responsibility. In totality, it is the failure of the party as a whole. Parliament is not divided between Prime Minister Girija Prasad and UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal. It is divided between the Nepali Congress and the UML. Let the UML make the Nepali Congress answerable for the prime minister's failures.

Unfortunate precedents were established in the past. The moment the prime minister sought the dissolution of the house, the leaders of the opposition knocked the doors of the palace arguing that they should be given the opportunity to form an alternative government. In the present scenario, if the opposition leaders have an alternative, let them demonstrate it. If they do not have alternatives, let them demand fresh elections. If they are not prepared to form the government or ready for new elections, they should not invite chaos on the street.

"Don't provide an excuse to the government to say that they were unable to deliver the goods by the obstructionism of the opposition," said a political analyst.

When the opposition prefers the street to parliament, people may be confused in the process. They might stop seeing the difference between democratic and non-democratic forms of government. Opposition to democratic and non-democratic governments are two different things.

Earlier, there was an undemocratic government. Today open and democratic elections are held periodically. Very soon, the elections to local bodies are going to be held. The time has come for the opposition to prepare for those elections and try to defeat the ruling party.

Two main leaders of the opposition party, including opposition leader in parliament, were members of the panel that drafted the current constitution. If they themselves are in no mood to accept the preamble of the constitution, what can they expect from future generations.

Historical Hangover

Every party in Nepal has a history of agitation against undemocratic systems. Nepalese parties do not seem to have been able to break free from this legacy even in today's democratic set-up.

The constitution has given a clear role to the political parties to participate and activate their desired role through peaceful means. However, today's opposition parties are caught in a time warp. They think they can oust a democratically elected government through the same methods they adopted to dislodge the Panchayat system.

The bad precedent of protests and violence to bring political change has come to haunt today's politics. If today's politicians start setting some good examples, tomorrow's leaders might be able to enrich the quality of politics.

How long are we going to say that our parliament is modeled on the British pattern? Will there ever be a model of Nepalese parliament democracy that we can take pride in?

Many people in Nepal and outside wonder when our politics starts getting some stability? Don't the opposition parties think they have a responsibility in this direction? If they do not change their brand of politics, their commitment to the parliamentary process will always be viewed with suspicion.

'We Are Going To The Street To Sensitize The Government'

-- DR PRAKASH CHANDRA LOHANI

Dr. PRAKASH CHANDRA LOHANI, vice-president of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party, is one of the prominent parliamentarians representing the opposition bench.

Are you demanding the resignation of the prime minister? What about the entire Nepali Congress government?

The country is in a chaotic situation now, as the law-and-order situation is getting worse, the administration is politicized and the community feels insecure. Corruption is rampant. The government has not been able to deliver the goods or restore law and order. The overall situation of the country is totally frustrating. The morale of the country is so low and the leadership of the Congress party has failed to respect the people's aspirations. Instead of doing something to improve the situation, the Congress leadership is working against the spirit of the constitution. Instead of doing something for the common people, the government is misusing national resources to strengthen the party.

As a leader of an opposition party, what do you think needs to be done?

There needs to be honesty on the part of the government and Congress leaders. They must do what they promised to the people. By trying to do something for the people, they can prove their efficiency. Unfortunately, the Nepali Congress is totally incapable of providing relief to the common people and to control corruption. There is corruption within the party and almost every minister is tainted.

Do you think you can remove the prime minister through your agitation?

There is a way to remove the prime minister through the constitutional process. We can change the prime minister thorough a no-confidence motion. Street agitation has its own limitations. When the government ignores the voice of opposition, we have no choice but go to the street. Democracy after all is a system where the voices of people must be heard. It is a political order that defines the working relations of different institutions. In democracy, checks and balances are very important. But the Nepali Congress government has destroyed very concept of checks and balances. The provision of impartiality is violated during elections and the concept of decentralization is ignored. The system has not been operating because the ruling party has not respected the rule of democracy.

How do you see the role of the main opposition party, which is demanding the resignation of the prime minister, instead of asking for the resignation of the entire government?

One reason why democratic systems fail is because of docile opposition. In a democratic order, the opposition has a major role to play. When the main opposition is opportunistic in its behavior, the democratic order always suffers. Here I must say that the behavior of the CPN-UML is opportunistic. Past experience has shown that the UML even joins the government if it can find the benefits. They joined the government in 1998 and took all the benefits from Congress in the general elections. It showed its unique character by joining the government, leaving the field of the main opposition party empty. This kind of behavior encourages the Nepali Congress to act irrationally and irresponsibly. In that sense, the behavior of the CPN-UML is unprincipled and opportunistic. Strong alertness on the part of civil society and the public is needed to strengthen democracy. Except in a few urban areas, civil society is non-existent. So democracy always is in danger of being misused.

How do you see the decision of the CPN-UML to call street protests to dislodge the government instead of pressing the matter in parliament?

Street agitation is also a part of democracy. Even in the most advanced democratic countries, political parties use this method. When the Nepali Congress is unable to fulfill the aspirations of the people, when the government ignores the voice of the opposition in the parliament, street demonstrations are an alternative. I don't think we are trying to disregard the boundary line set by the constitution. We know there are provision in the constitutions for replacing the government, so we will not go beyond those limits. If the government does not show sensitivity to the opposition and does not listen to our voice in parliament, the street can be used as an alternative. We have a government which thinks that the majority is enough to rule the country. In that situation, opposition can call street agitation. We are going to the street to sensitize the government and pressure the government.

But some leaders of the main opposition party are saying that they will not allow the prime minister to enter parliament and want to replace the government through street agitation. As a leader of the second alternative democratic party, how do you look at this?

As far as the prime minister's entering the house is concerned, that come under the procedures of the parliamentary practices as he has right to enter parliament. The parliamentary game has to go on and we cannot just disrupt it. If such precedent is set, other parties may use similar tactics when you are in the government next time. We will try to avoid such things.

But your party is joining hands with the CPN-UML on the issue of the prime minister's resignation. How do you distinguish yourself from them?

In case facts establish that the prime minister is linked to the Lauda deal, the opposition has the right to demand his resignation and the right to stall parliamentary activities until he resigns.

As long as Nepali Congress continues to back Koirala as its leader, how can you force him to resign?

When Tarini Dutta Chataut can resign, what wrong in Koirala doing so?

What do you plan to do if the prime minister agrees to step down.

Congress has a majority in the parliament. We are not saying that we want to change the rules. The party that enjoys majority support forms the next government.

‘We Will Face The Opposition Unitedly’

— DR. RAM SHARAN MAHAT

Congress leader and MP Dr. RAM SHARAN MAHAT believes that opposition needs to play consitutional game. He holds the view that it is the party which can decide who will lead the government. Dr Mahat spoke to SPOTLIGHT on various issues. Excerpts:

Opposition parties are demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. As a member of the ruling Nepali Congress party, how do you see that demand?

In a parliamentary democracy, the opposition party can ask for the resignation of the prime minister. Going by news report and rumor, they want to stall the parliament to force the prime minister to resign. If that is so, it is not a healthy practice in parliament. If opposition is not satisfied with the functioning style of the prime minister, they have every right to ask for his resignation. It happens in other parts of the world also. But the opposition in Nepal has started a wrong practice by trying to force the physical obstruction in the parliament. It will be very unprincipled practice. Such actions help only those forces who do not believe in normal parliamentary practices. Whatever they do, the opposition parties should do within the ambit of established parliamentary practices and norms.

Does this challenge concern only Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala or is it targeted against the Nepali Congress also?

It is both. The prime minister is also leader of the parliamentary party of the Nepali Congress. At present, the country is facing many problems and the Nepali Congress is the only party which can give the nation a proper direction. It has to forge unity among the rank and file. The present situation is that the Congress is not a very united party. Perhaps the opposition wants to take advantage out of the situation.

Can the opposition dictate who should be your leader?

Not at all. It is the sole privilege of the members of the Congress party. It is not the business of the opposition to choose a particular person as the leader of the government. If they are not satisfied with the functioning of the government, they can ask for the prime minister's resignation. They can also bring a vote of no-confidence in parliament. If they are not satisfied by the functioning of the government, there are various ways to check it. They can bring an adjournment motion, attention motion and motion on urgent public issue. There are many ways of drawing the attention of the government. If they follow the fair game, I don't have any complaints. If they play extra-constitutional methods, that will only strengthen the hands of forces who oppose the present form of government.

Opposition parties argue that the government has failed to restore law and order, curb corruption and control rising prices. How do you respond?

I agree with the fact that the present government has not been successful in tackle many challenges. The prime minister has not been able to fulfill the promises he made before coming to power last year. The law-and-order situation has deteriorated and good governance is only on paper. We have heard allegations of corruption such as the Lauda case. But if you go by the record of the last 10 years, it is the Nepali Congress which has made real accomplishments in the country. The country has achieved something under the leadership of three prime minister of the Congress. I personally worked under all the three Congress leaders. No party is as patriotic and as committed to Nepal than the Nepali Congress.

Do you see anything wrong in the Lauda Air deal?

There seem to be some wrong doing in the Lauda deal because no rational and sensible management could have signed that kind of deal. You cannot justify the deal in an economic sense. It will be total disaster for the RNAC. There was no proper discussion before the deal was made. There was no serious discussion in the management board. It looks so expensive. You will see after a year how much money RNAC will lose. In the last month or so since the aircraft arrived, the airline has lost corrores. It was a bad deal to justify. But until proven, you cannot pass judgment. Similarly, the Commission of Investigation of Abuse of Authority is probing the issue. There are other institutions working on it.

What strategy does the Nepali Congress have to face the opposition?

At the moment, I am not in a position to say anything. But we will face the opposition unitedly. If they come out heavily, we will unitedly oppose it. Although we are not happy with the functioning of the government, we will discuss it within the party. We will not give any opportunity for the opposition to attack our party. If they come in an unconstitutional manner, we will respond accordingly.

What message have Congress workers received after the Pokhara convention?

After the Pokhara convention, many things have settled down. It is now in the hands of Prime Minister and party president Girija Prasad Koirala to ensure party unity. The real test of a leader's success lies in the balance he can create in the party. The leaders must rise above the factionalism and prejudices. The prime minister has to strike a balance among various forces in the party. In every party, there are various power centers, groups and sub groups. The leader must reconcile with them. The leader has to create unity and mobilize the whole apparatus of the party to achieve declared goals. Unfortunately, that has not happened in the past. I hope the party president will give justice to various factions in the party.

'It Is Our Duty To Oust A Tainted Prime Minister'

— BHARAT MOHAN ADHIKARY

Chief whip of the main opposition CPN-UML BHARAT MOHAN ADHIKARY is one of the powerful leaders of his party. He spoke to SPOTLIGHT on various issues regarding the latest strategy of the CPN-UML. Excerpts:

Are you asking for the resignation of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala only or the entire Nepali Congress government?

Right now, we are asking for the resignation of Prime Minister Koirala on the ground that he is involved in the Lauda Air deal. Since Congress has a majority in parliament, the party can nominate their leader. How can a tainted person continue to be prime minister. We will also ask for the resignation of Nepali Congress government.

Is it a democratic practice to stall parliamentary proceedings?

If Koirala does not comply with our demand, we will not have any other option to stalling the house. As the main opposition party, it is our duty to free the country from a tainted prime minister. If Koirala resigns before the beginning of the winter session of parliament, we will allow the proceedings.

You party also says you will launch street protests seeking Koirala's resignation. Don't you think you can change the prime minister through parliamentary procedures?

We will use the street as well as parliament to press Girija Prasad Koirala to resign. In a democracy, street demonstrations can also be used as a method of oust the government.