National 2 (Spotlight Weekly)

Media Debate

Even as the country’s major political parties are yet to officially affirm their stand, media has hugged the debate on constituent assembly in a strange manner

By KESHAB POUDEL

At a time when country’s leading media are trying to build the opinion generating a debate over the constituent assembly, major parliamentary parties are yet to agree on the agenda.

From ruling Nepali Congress (Democratic) to Nepali Congress and CPN-UML to RPP, the overwhelming number of party members have already endorsed their party’s stand that the constituent assembly is not their first choice but an option.

Newspapers : Agenda for debate

Presented to the NC president Girija Prasad Koirala, a report prepared by a high level committee has proposed that the first option should be to activate the present constitution through the revival of the House of Representatives. Congress wants the House of Representatives to decide on issues like referendum, constituent assembly or the amendment of constitution. (See box 1)

“Our first demand is the revival of the House of Representatives. Our party president Girijababu has clearly said that only after the revival of the House of Representatives, the possibility for the amendment of the constitution, referendum and constituent assembly will open up,” said Govinda Raj Joshi, joint secretary general of Nepali Congress who won all the last three elections for the House of Representatives. “All the solution must be found through the present constitution.”

CPN-UML has clear policy on the constituent assembly. CPN-UML holds the view that in case of national consensus the party does not have any problem in supporting the constituent assembly. (See box) Rastriya Prajatantra Party, too, has clearly stated that they can consider making new constitution but not constituent assembly.

From big parties like Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and ruling Nepali Congress (Democratic) to smaller ones like RPP, People’s Front and Nepal Peasant and Workers Party (NWPP), all want the constituent assembly in case of national consensus.

“Our party’s central committee has given a clear mandate on this. We want to settle the present Maoist problem through the amendment of present constitution. According to the recent decision of our party, in case of consensus among all political parties to solve the present national problem like Maoist insurgency, UML is ready to go for any democratic alternatives including the constitution assembly,” said CPN-UML leader Bharat Mohan Adhikary, who won all the last three elections for the House of Representatives. Constituent assembly is alright but we do not want to lose the present constitution.”

As the country’s major political parties are still hesitant to decide on the constituent assembly, country’s major media, unknowingly or intentionally, are harping the cause of constituent assembly highlighting the opinions of minority groups of different political parties.

Koirala : Decisive and determined

Those who have strong political base are condemned as tainted figures while the opinions of some individuals - who are interestingly nominated and promoted by the allegedly tainted figures – receive the prominence. “This is a tragedy of Nepalese politics. If the leaders are tainted, how can their nominees and close coterie be persons of clean image?” asked a political analyst.

Even Congress leader Girija Prasad Koirala has often complained that media distorts his opinion. Addressing a mass meeting, Koirala recently declared that the revival of the House of Representatives needed to be revived to take any decision including amendment in the present constitution, holding referendum or going for the constituent assembly. Koirala clearly indicated that the constituent assembly is not the priority at this juncture.

Within all major political parties, few individuals hold the view that the constituent assembly is the need of the hour and that the present constitution should be scrapped. Interestingly, most of the members of the mainstream parties who are demanding the constituent assembly do not have any experiences of facing the elections.

One of the prominent figures of the Nepali Congress pressing for the constituent assembly is Narahari Acharya, who has never contested the direct elections of the House of Representatives in the last three general elections. Instead, Acharya was nominated to the National Assembly by party president Girija Prasad Koirala.

Likewise, Chakra Prasad Bastola had won the last two elections by a very thin margin and had lost the first one. Had the Supreme Court allowed recounting of the votes, Bastola would have retired much earlier. The case of Mahesh Acharya, too, is similar. Acharya was picked up from Morang and nominated to National Assembly. He won the last elections.

Similarly, Pradeep Giri of ruling NC (D), too, has a similar history. He lost the two general elections and won one. CPN-UML leader Bamdev Gautam and CPN-ML C.P. Mainali, too, have similar cases as both of them have lost the last general elections.

Although the number of those who are pressing the demand for the constituent assembly is small, they seem to be powerful and more influential than their own leaders. When the Congress party and CPN-UML opened the conditional debate, these leaders minced no words to press for constituent assembly.

“If the constituent assembly can solve the Maoist problem and restore normalcy in the country, there is nothing wrong for Nepali Congress to it,” said Chakra Prasad Bastola.

Confused and misinformed, common people have very difficult time understanding what the constituent assembly is all about. In the last five decade long history, this is for the first time that the country’s powerful media community – which enjoys unprecedented freedom through the present constitution – is supporting the cause of CA.

“The present constitution can meet all demands except its own destruction. Like elections for CA, those interested for amending or changing the Constitution must, at the outset, get elected to the House of Representatives,” said a constitutional lawyer Surya Dhungel, (See Spotlight June 25-31). “Can anyone explain to the fellow Nepalese citizens what the constituent assembly or referendum is going to add in the Constitution that it cannot provide through amendment.”

Political leaders who have contested the general elections in the last 14 years and who hold the real power within the party seem to be less interested on the constituent assembly.

CPN-UML’s View

To settle the Maoist problems, CPN-UML has opened the options for amendment of the constitution, referendum and any democratic alternatives including Constituent Assembly. CPN-UML can accept any solution including the constituent assembly and other democratic alternatives in case of national consensus.

Nepali Congress’s View

The Congress has been stating that it first wants the revival of the House of Representatives, which alone, according to it, can decide on such issues as constituent assembly, referendum of amendment.

The party has stated that it wants to progressively amend the current constitution through the revived House of Representatives in order to give the completeness to the sovereignty vested on Nepalese people – an achievement of the 1990 people’s movement – and to address the issues raised by the Maoists. The party wants to go to elections after restoring peace.

Secondly, the party wants to exercise and experiment the sovereign rights vested upon the people, and go for referendum to bring about changes in the constitution.

Thirdly, the party has also stated that in order to strengthen the sovereignty vested upon people, Congress might prefer to go for the constituent assembly but only after making the present constitution as the basis.