National 1 (Spotlight Weekly)

Foul Play

Inconsistency and contradiction have become the watchwords of politicians

By KESHAB POUDEL

If politics is a game of inconsistency, Nepalese leaders have proven their proficiency with distinction. From major issues like amending the constitution to pulling down the government, political leaders do not mind making the most frivolous comments or forging the tawdriest alliances. If they believe that their petty interests can be served, ideology takes a distant back seat. Every experiment is possible in Nepalese politics.

In the race to score points and undercut rivals, some politicians seem to have lost their capacity for rational thinking. Some senior leaders in the ruling and opposition parties are saying they want to amend the constitution now just to prove that parliament has the right to do so.

Nepal (left) and Koirala : Politics sans ideology?

"I am proposing to amend the constitution to demonstrate to the country that the House of Representatives has the prerogative to do so," said Nepali Congress leader Girija Prasad Koirala, addressing a meeting of party workers this week. "If we amend the constitution, we can prove the irrelevance of the Maoists' demand for a constitutional assembly," he added.

Analysts are at a loss to explain why the chief of the ruling party and responsible opposition leaders want to stress the obvious. "Since the constitution has laid out a clear and precise provision for amendment, Koirala's arguments are hollow," says a constitutional lawyer. "If he wants to amend the constitution simply to prove that parliament can do so, then it only betrays the defeatist mentality that has come to grip him lately."

Few understand how opposition leaders could ally themselves with a person they were calling "corrupt and immoral" until a year ago. The people still remember how the main opposition CPN-UML stalled the entire winter session of parliament last year and called a three-day general strike pressing for the resignation of Koirala as prime minister for his alleged involvement in the Lauda Air scandal.

"People have to sacrifice to gain something more valuable. We are compelled to organize three-day general strike to pull down corrupt government led by Girija Prasad Koirala," said chief whip of the CPN-UML Bharat Mohan Adhikary, justifying the three-day Nepal Bandh. (See SPOTLIGHT Interview, 18-24 May 2001).

When it comes to political inconsistency, Rastriya Prajatantra Party president Surya Bahaduar Thapa is not far behind UML leaders. Thapa, who declined to meet Koirala at the height of the protests last year, is now serving as the Nepali Congress chief's leading adviser. The National People's Forum, Nepal Peasants and Workers Party and United People Forum, too, were part of the oust-Koirala campaign. Although they have not been so blatant in changing their stand, it is clear enough whose side they are on.

Koirala evidently bought the UML' support by endorsing the main opposition party's proposal to amend the constitution. As prime minister, he spoke resolutely about defending the political process and refused to resign as long as he could ward off the pressures. Today, he has no qualms about going against the constitution.

Contradictions have become another hallmark of today's political leaders. Koirala and opposition leaders say they want to restore the prime minister's right to dissolve the House of Representative by amending the constitution. In the same breath, they insist they would oppose any move by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba to call fresh elections as a way of pulling the country out of its woes.

At a time when contradiction and inconsistency have become the rules of the political game, no one is prepared to predict the kind of alliances the country may have to see in the days ahead.