National 2 (Spotlight Weekly)

War Of Words

Girija Prasad Koirala and Sher Bahadur Deuba are fighting a proxy war neither is destined to win

By KESHAB POUDEL

"Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba should not use the king to shield himself. Our party believes in constitutional monarchy and is ready to pay any price to protect it," thundered Girija Prasad Koirala, president of his faction of the ruling Nepali Congress, expressing displeasure over the prime minister's recommendation to King Gyanendra to dissolve the House of Representatives.

Koirala's caustic comments to party delegates at the Birendra International Convention Center† prompted his supporters to direct their acrimony against Deuba for dragging the constitutional monarch into controversy.

PM Deuba : On the offensive

Be they aspirants for prime ministership and party leadership like Ram Chandra Poudel, Shailaja Acharya and Dr. Ram Sharan Mahat or so-called ideologues like Narahari Acharya, Koirala's tirade provided his loyalists with a new mantra to train their guns against the prime minister.

Deuba, for his part, has no shortage of people who know how to provoke Koirala. The following day, the prime minister urged his one-time guru not to criticize the monarchy for discharging his constitutional responsibilities. "The king is performing his constitutional role, so there is no reason to drag the institution of monarchy into controversy," Deuba said in an address to party workers in Biratnagar, Koirala's hometown.

From opposite ends, Koirala and Deuba seem to be playing the same game: dragging the monarchy into political controversy to serve their narrow purposes. Constitutionally, the king cannot be a shield for anybody. The prime minister is supposed to be the shield of the constitutional monarch. But constitutionalism seems to be the last thing on the minds of politicians.

King Gyanendra has followed constitutional precedents and practices set by his late brother - King Birendra - including those relating to Koirala's recommendation in 1994 to dissolve the House of Representatives. But Koirala loyalists have found a point to muddy the country's political waters.

In the absence of well-accepted norms to guide the political process, the country has had to see political battles often take odious turns. The fight is not really among the leaders. They are just front men for their ambitious political advisers. But this does not absolve leaders of responsibility. They should have found advisers capable of offering purposeful advice.

"Advisers and consultants misguide their leaders and give opinions in accordance with their convenience," says a political analyst. "So there is not much difference in the decision making procedures of political leaders. Whether it is a leader with a long history of struggle or one with a relatively new background, they are guided by similar thinking."

Koirana : Inflexible

In reality, official advisers have limited influence over their leaders, whose decisions are influenced more by outside maneuvering. Two years ago, political scientist Krishna Khanal resigned as principal political adviser to then-prime minister Koirala, complaining that he was not consulted on political affairs. This is a typical case of how formal institutions are ignored.

Whenever Nepali Congress leaders need advice and consultations on certain political and legal issues, they summon experts. In most cases, consultations are sought from those who deliver opinions that suit the interest of the leaders.

If the consultative process were allowed to proceed in its natural way, the situation might have been entirely different. Once a clear system of seeking and giving advice is established, it would correct many of today's anomalies. Most importantly, such a system would offer little space for dark-room maneuvers.

Had Nepalese leaders benefited from precedents like those in the United Kingdom, India and Sri Lanka, Koirala, Poudel, Mahat and Acharya would not have been caught in such confusion on issues concerning the constitutional system.

Political controversies have appeared in the past because of unnecessary intervention in the political process. Despite clear-cut constitutional provisions and systems, there is a tendency to derail the political and constitutional process. In the case of the dissolution of the House of Representatives, four prime ministers got four different results. In the party, too, there is no demarcation between the party and government.

The longer such political games continue, the greater the possibility of the emergence of unconstitutional and extra-constitutional forces bent on derailing the political process. In the maddening race to score political points, nobody seems to be concerned about building a system to change the chaotic situation.

"The political wisdom of the dissolution [of the House of Representatives] was not the king's concern, since he was the umpire, not the captain," says a political analyst. "If the king functioned as a captain and had sacked Deuba, would it have been constitutional?"

The skirmishes between Deuba and Koirala would not have reached such levels of bitterness if the political process were allowed to take its course. That Koirala and Deuba could drag the king into their political battle while the monarch was on a state visit to China speaks volumes on the degeneration of Nepalese politics.

The Supreme Court is to give its verdict on the petition challenging the dissolution of the House of Representatives on August 6. Deuba and Koirala will probably continue to use derogatory language against each other even after that.

Both men are prisoners of their coteries and neither is in a position to use his own mind. Surrounded by party general secretary Sushil Koirala, joint general secretary Govinda Raj Joshi, spokesman Arjun Narsingh KC and former foreign minister Chakra Prasad Bastola, Girija Prasad Koirala has found another ally in former deputy prime minister Ram Chandra Poudel.

Deuba, too, has many hawkish insiders including Minister of Tourism and Civil Aviation Bal Bahadur KC, Minister of Information and Communication Jaya Prakash Prasad Gupta and central committee members Pradeep Giri and Bimlendra Nidhi, who know how to provoke Koirala.

As Koirala unleashes hostile statements against traditional forces and the western democratic world that are committed to political stability in Nepal, Deuba, too, goes to the hilt in criticizing his principal rival as undemocratic. Both know that their proxy war is in the interest of neither. The unfortunate part is that they cannot desist from fighting.