National 4 (Spotlight Weekly)

‘We See No Reason To Recognize Thapa As Prime Minister’

— GIRIJA PRASAD KOIRALA

Nepali Congress president and former prime minister GIRIJA PRASAD KOIRALA is leading the five-party agitation against the Royal move of October 4. Koirala spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on various issues. Excerpts.

How do you view the appointment of Surya Bahadur Thapa as prime minister? Do you see any difference in his status from that of his predecessor?

We have already issued a statement saying that the constitutional status of both prime ministers appointed by the king is similar. We don't see any reason to recognize him as prime minister. So, the five political parties have decided to continue their joint agitation.

But Prime Minister Thapa has said that his government is invested with executive power and the new ministers will be appointed on his recommendation. Is this government not different than Lokendra Bahadur Chand's?

Although I am not a constitutionalist, there is no provision in Article 127 to appoint the prime minister. There needs to be a political solution. This is a political problem, not a constitutional one. It shows that the King can choose anyone as prime minister by exercising Article 127. The exercise of Article 127 has made other articles defunct. We cannot solve the present problems without parliament. As the Maoists are putting the agenda for a round-table meeting, they don't have any modality. Who can summon the round-table meeting, who will set the agenda and who will endorse the conclusions? Only the reinstatement of the House of Representatives can change the status of the government and prime minister. How can the King grab the executive authority and hand it over to the prime minister as per his wish? According to the Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal 1990, the people are the source of power and sovereign rights can be exercised through them. Whatever prime minister Thapa has said, he is the kind of prime minister his predecessor was.

This means your agitation will not end unless the King appoints a prime minister at the recommendation of the five parties? Is your agitation just for the replacement of the prime minister?

This reasoning is completely wrong. The five parties are not launching the agitation just for the sake of prime minister. Of course, we have nominated CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal as our consensus candidates for the post, but the five political parties have given him some conditions to fulfill as soon as he is appointed. Had Nepal been appointed as prime minister, his first priority would be to recommend the reinstate the House of Representatives and to form an all-party government. The House of Representatives is required to reactivate the constitution. We don't have any other interest to confront with the King. If he agrees to give up the rights of the people, the five political parties will call off their agitation.

What may have prompted the King to reject your candidate then?

By rejecting the candidates supported by five political parties that represent more than 80 percent of parliament, the King has shown his unwillingness to hand over authority to the people. I am not interested in becoming prime minister. I will be more useful staying out of power. I strongly recommended the name of CPN-UML general secretary Nepal on behalf of the five political parties. I will lose my influence once I am an appointed prime minister. Then King asked us to choose a consensus candidate. I told the King that there is very difficult to choose the consensus candidate without any basis in democratic system. So, we decided to take the strength of the previous parliament as the basis. Those who have got two third of majority should be given the opportunity.

Do you see any ground for rejection of Nepal's name?

Despite the majority Nepal commands, the King nominated Surya Bahadur Thapa. This is against the norms and values of democracy. The constitution needs to be activated. If we decide to build a new constitution, it will bring another phase of destabilization. So, there need to be continuity of the present constitution. The present constitution safeguards the rights and position of the King as well as multiparty democracy. If we want to make another progressive constitution, we can amend it. This constitution needs continuity to provide stability to the institution of monarchy and multiparty democracy. If this constitution is abrogated, there will be a threat to the monarchy. I don't think any political solution can be found just by changing the prime minister. The parliament is needed to activate the constitution. We can bring the constitution on the right track once the House of Representatives is reinstated. I am arguing for the continuation of the constitution keeping in mind that it will guarantee the stability of the country and the political system.

Since the Maoists are demanding elections for the constituent assembly, will they accept the continuation of the present constitution?

The constitution cannot be changed with the wishes of the Maoists alone. You cannot tear the constitution under the threat of the gun. We have strong democratic forces in the country. If somebody wants a new constitution, they must exercise the authority of the present constitution. Who will endorse the new constitution? There needs to be a parliament to endorse the draft constitution.

If Prime Minister Thapa were to recommend the reinstatement of the House, what would your reaction be?

I will welcome it. I will not comment on a hypothetical basis, but I will definitely be first politician to welcome it.

In case the House is reinstated, would your party join the government?

Again, I don't want to comment on the hypothetical scenario. Our party will take the decision in accordance with the changing political situation. If parliament is revived, all the forces will be involved in the political process.

It is said that some lawyers have filed a petition at the Supreme Court seeking a review of its earlier decision endorsing of the dissolution of the House. If the apex court endorses the dissolution once again, what would be the reaction of the parties?

If the court rejects the reinstatement of the House, the date for the elections must be announced immediately. The court, too, has to see the overall situation of the country and decide on the basis of the letter and spirit of the constitution. My main concern is the reinstatement of the parliament to activate the constitution. There must be a house either through elections or through reinstatement.

Prime Minister Thapa came to your house to discuss the current political crisis. On what issues did you focus your attention?

Yes. Prime Minister Thapa visited me, since we used to meet each other. It was just a courtesy call. Prime Minister Thapa requested our cooperation with his government by sharing power. I made it clear that we will not joint the present government. I suggested him to recommend the King to reinstate the House of Representatives. I had said the same thing to prime minister Chand. Once you are resigning, what is wrong in recommending to the King the reinstatement of the House through a cabinet decision? I suggested to Thapa that such a move would increase his stature among the people. If the King forwarded the proposal to the court and the court rejected it, the prime minister's popularity will still be high. I have told him that our social relations remained intact despite differences on political principles.

If he calls new elections, what will be your reaction?

I will be happy and will start campaigning. If the elections are held, we will contest them in any hostile situation. As a democratic party, it will be great privilege to contest the elections. So far as reality is concerned, the situation is not good to hold the elections. Unless we solve the Maoist problem, we cannot hold the elections. So we are calling for the reinstatement of the parliament. Since the Maoists have guns, we cannot hold the elections. This is the reason I am stressing the need to reinstate the House of Representatives.

Did the King reject Nepal's name because he is a communist?

I don't think so. Nepalese communists have only the hammer and sickle left. In reality, they are like all democratic parties that believe in multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy. When they joined the political mainstream in 1990, nobody raised questions. In the last 12 years, they have modified a lot in their ideology. The present communists are demanding the reinstatement of the House and democracy. We want to bring the Maoist in the national mainstream. All people have different visions but all believe in democracy. They are free to put their symbol, but people will judge their behavior and commitment.

How far can the communists, who blocked the proceedings of the House for 57 consecutive days a few years ago, change? Is there any sense in convening the House in the street when constitutionally it does not exist?

Our communist friends have realized the extent of their actions. I am happy that those who created hurdle in the House of Representatives have now agreed to call the meeting on the street. This marks the change in the behavior of the communists.

If Prime Minister Thapa agrees to reinstate the House of Representatives, will you join the government?

If he publicly announces such commitment, we can consider joining the government. We have already made it clear that we are not joining the government just for the sake of power.

Is all this the result of some foreign design?

I cannot say whether there is foreign hand or not but this government has been formed under a design. Speaking from my bitter experience, there has been always been a certain design. If the palace wanted to choose Thapa, the King didn't have to stage a drama.

In case the House is reinstated, don't you see possibility of the Maoists going back to the jungle?

Look. The future of Maoists is in peace talks. If the peace breaks, they will be losers. I have told this to Maoist leader Dr. Baburam Bhattarai when he visited me. I can assure you, the Maoists will not return to the jungle.

What is the basis for your confidence?

Since I have met many Maoist leaders, it is based on discussions with them.

Since you are talking about the need to strengthen constitutional monarchy and proposing ways of averting a political confrontation with the King, why isn't he taking your positive ideas?

I am not a psychologist so I cannot say anything.

Is there any possibility of bringing the Maoists into your agitation?

I am talking about the need to bring all the people. It will help to strengthen national unity and nationalism.

Why are you asking for the disclosure of the King's property?

This is simply because the family line has changed. Instead of going to the son, the crown has shift to the brother. So, people simply like to know what the status of the property is. Demanding this, I am not humiliating the King. That is not my intention. In United Kingdom, there is transparency in the property of the queen. One of the aims of the agitation is to restore the public faith.

You say you want mass participation in the agitation, but your student wings are calling strikes in public and private schools, irritating the masses. Will the actions of your students benefit your agitation?

Look. You must pose this question to the government also. There are some genuine demands raised by the students. If the government seriously takes the demands of the students, matters will be settled immediately. I read all the demands of students. I even gave suggestions to the prime minister on the demands of the students.