 |
||
|
||
POLITICAL DEBATE |
|
||
|
||
POLITICAL DEBATE |
Conspiracy Against Constitution Congress leader Koirala
shows that he still holds the real power by intervening and thwarting efforts by a small
coterie to kill the present constitution By KESHAB POUDEL Nepali Congress (NC) president Girija
Prasad Koirala still wields unchallenged authority in his party. The octogenarian
leader’s intervention against the clamoring calls for constituent assembly by a group
of his party workers - who are conspiring against the present constitution - halted a
week-long restless efforts to push the centrist Nepali Congress party and the Nepali
politics towards uncertain course. At his last leg of five decade long
political career, former prime minister Koirala took an uncompromising stand against
rising wave generated by media and asked his party workers not to raise the populist issue
like constituent assembly without realizing the pros and cons of such demand. Like his
brother late B.P. Koirala, junior Koirala also seems to be heading for gradual isolation
within the party as far as this demand is concerned.
Just a few hours after his arrival
from his hometown Biratnagar, 500 kilometers east of Kathmandu on Sunday (June 13),
Koirala sensed that the situation was spinning out of control with the district presidents
of the party publicly raising the demand for constituent assembly and several elements
fanning the demand. Koirala immediately summoned an informal
meeting of district party presidents and reprimanded them seeking clarification regarding
their recent statements on constituent assembly. “You are playing into the hands of
some mysterious external and internal elements who want to push the country and democracy
to more chaotic situation by demanding election for constituent assembly. I don’t
want to sacrifice my five decade long political career by following this mysterious
design,” Congress president Koirala reportedly told the district presidents. “If
necessary, I will fight the cause to activate the constitution alone.” Koirala also told his party workers and in
case the opinion for constituent assembly is built, the King might proclaim an interim
constitution. “What will happen then?” he warned his workers. The present statement will make his close
coterie angry but Koirala will be popular among the masses that support his opinion.
Staying at the residence of his nephew Dr. Shashank Koirala, he has nothing to lose at
this juncture. But he can gain popular support by speaking the voices of people. Although they do not have any popular
backing and their voices are in minority, small coterie within the Congress party is
working hard to change the fate of the country’s widely accepted constitution as well
as to influence the principle of their own party. There is a very small number of individuals
who belong to that group but they seem to have power to influence the party to change the
established principle – which was framed by party’s conventions.
Tested by the people in three
consecutive general elections in 1991,1995 and 1999 and two local elections in 1993 and
1998, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 –which lays down sovereignty on
the people – was formulated following the successful people’s movement in 1990. Country’s two major political parties
NC and CPN-UML – which have contested all the elections – received the
legitimacy of being the two biggest parties through the present constitution. Until a few weeks ago, country’s major
political parties including the ruling Nepali Congress (Democratic) were together in the
street agitation demanding the activation of the Constitution. Following the appointment
of Deuba as a prime minister, mysteriously a small coterie in Nepali Congress have started
to make demands for the replacement of the present constitution through constituent
assembly. Surprisingly, not only the coteries in the
political parties like NC, NC (Democratic), CPN-UML and RPP, but a powerful group reported
to be close to Royal Palace also have demanded the abrogation of the present constitution
through the constituent assembly. Changing the constitution through holding
the election for constituent assembly seems to have become a common meeting point among
the regressive, progressive and even the insurgent forces. “Since the present constitution has
already lost its credibility, the time has come to go for Constituent Assembly,” said
Narahari Acharya, member of Nepali Congress and one of the proponents of the idea. Five
years ago, Acharya had raked up a controversy by demanding that there should be direct
elections for the post of prime minister. Nepali Congress’s Constitution clearly
spells out that the constitutional monarchy, multi-party democracy and the sovereignty on
the people are the three fundamental principles of the party. The present constitution
upholds all these principles and has made them un-amendable. Majority members in
CPN-UML’s also hold the view that this constitution is still good and that some
amendments in it through constitutional means can accommodate other political forces. “Our party holds the view that the
present constitution can be amended to accommodate almost all demands put forth by the
Maoists. We have opened the door for all the democratic options including the constituent
assembly in case of national consensus to resolve the Maoist problem,” said CPN-UML
standing committee member Bharat Mohan Adhikary, who is one of the original drafters of
the present constitution. “I still believe that the present constitution is flexible
enough and almost all its articles can be amended except its basic structures that include
multi-party democracy, constitutional monarchy and sovereignty of the people.” Whatever these parties’ conventions
have endorsed, small coteries within all the major parties seem to be gaining power and
influence. Supported by the country’s major newspapers – whose right to
information and freedom of _expression could be curtailed soon after the dissolution of
the present constitution – the demand for constituent assembly is snowballing as the
main agenda in the major political parties. The behavior and mentality of Nepalese
people as observed by Brian Hudgson, first resident representative of Britain to Royal
Court of Nepal – who was here during the infamous Kot Massacre of 1847 A.D., seems
still valid in the present context. In his memoir “Life of Brian Hudgson”, he
describes, “these barbarians (Nepalis) do not know where their real interests
lie.” The dramatic turns and recent trends
vindicate that Nepalis are still unknown where their interests lie and who is speaking in
favor of Nepal’s interest and who is conspiring against them. From extreme right to left and some
extremists within the so called moderate political parties all are taking the side of
constituent assembly by ignoring the fact that the present constitution was also written
by accepting the spirit of popular movement of 1990. Almost all major political parties of
today were the part of that movement which gave the mandate to draft the constitution that
vested the sovereignty to the Nepalese people. In its preamble, the constitution states
“In keeping with the desire of the Nepalese people expressed through the recent
people’s movement to bring about the constitutional changes, we are further inspired
by the objective of securing to the Nepalese people social, political and economic justice
long into the future.” “This constitution was not drafted by
only the nine members of the drafting committee nor had the King handed over sovereignty
to people at his will. The constitution reflected the voices of millions of people
expressed through the popular movement,” said Bharat Mohan Adhikary. Nepali Congress leader Koirala has made it
clear that there is the need to activate the present constitution and has rejected the
idea of constituent assembly. “There is ample room to amend the constitution and to
improve it through the participation of the Maoists as well. Our aim must be to activate
the present constitution,” said Koirala, addressing a press conference at his
hometown. Interestingly, some of his party members
contradict his stance. Just a day after the comment of Congress supremo Koirala, five
district presidents of Nepali Congress openly challenged Koirala’s opinion urging
party leadership to accept the Constituent Assembly. “We must prepare to go for constituent
assembly,” said Madhu Acharya, district president of Kavre district and husband of
former state minister Kamala Panta. Acharya is said to be close to former deputy prime
minister Ram Chandra Poudel and former finance minister Mahesh Acharya. President of
Nuwakot district congress and brother of Congress spokesman Arjun Narshing K.C also was
vocal in favor of constituent assembly. Backed by former deputy prime minister
Poudel, Congress central committee member Narahari Acharya, Chakra Bastola, Arjun Narshing
K.C and Mahesh Acharya, the small coterie is pressing the demand for Constituent Assembly
ignoring where the country will go in case the King announce interim constitution to hold
the elections of constituent assembly. In the Nepali Congress (Democratic),
Pradeep Giri, Narayan Khadka and others have already declared that his party would accept
the constituent assembly. In CPN-UML Ishwor Pokharel has supported the move. “When I read leading daily newspapers,
I found completely distorted news. In our closed-door meeting, only 10 district presidents
demanded the constituent assembly out of 75. I don’t understand the purpose behind
this distortion which indicated overwhelming support in favor of the demand,” said a
district president of Nepali Congress on condition of anonymity. Interestingly, Nepali Congress is still
pursuing the street agitations with the one point agenda of activation of the
Constitution. From Singha Durbar to Durbar Marg, thousands of demonstrators have poured
their blood supporting the demand to activate the constitution. “What about the blood
of Chhayadevi and other hundreds of party workers who poured their blood to activate the
constitution?” asked a central committee member of Nepali Congress. Surprisingly, some Congress leaders like
Poudel, Narahari and Mahesh, Arjun – who never tire of talking about the need to
protect the spirit of People’s Movement – are demanding new constitution
ignoring their own commitments. “There is a grand conspiracy being
hatched against the constitution of Kingdom of Nepal 1990. A coterie of conspirators are
here and they are making all out efforts to kill the present constitution,” said an
analyst. “I don’ think the elections for constituent assembly will be allowed
but a group of conspirators will be selected to rewrite the constitution.” Nepal has already changed five
constitutions in the last five decades paving the way for unprecedented phase of political
instability. Following the appointment of Sher Bahadur Deuba as a prime minister, the
demand to replace the present constitution has grown. Game of Coteries Every national political party has their
own constitution and method to adopt the resolution and amendment of their party’s
constitution. However, at present, instead of taking the issue to their own party’s
broader meeting, a bunch of coteries are conspiring from within a small group of members. Although Nepali Congress party does not
have more than a handful of central members who are against the present constitution, they
have strangely emerged as the most powerful lobby within it. When central committee
meeting chaired by Koirala formed a committee to present report on Constituent assembly,
former deputy prime minister Shailaja Acharya boycotted the meeting. She is one of the
most ardent opponents of constituent assembly. “The decision to set up a committee to
study on constituent assembly at this juncture is going to be suicidal act for Nepali
Congress,” thundered former deputy prime minister Shailaja Acharya. “We must
protect the present constitution - which guarantees constitutional monarchy
and multi party democracy.” “Poudel and Narahariji survive in
Congress politics whatever the stand they take. Former deputy prime minister Poudel
accused Nirmal Niwas (King Gyanendra’s former residence) for promoting the Maoists
but no harm came to his career. Likewise, Narharai Acharya was removed from the post of
party spokesman for his objectionable remarks against constitutional monarchy but he still
remains influential. Party workers cannot believe how they could retain their influence in
the party despite annoying the party president Koirala,” said a Congress Central
Committee member. So-called diehard democrats and communist
are not alone in the race against the present constitution. From right extremists to left
extremists, all want to scrap the present constitution. “We Still Think That The Present Constitution Can Settle The Present Crisis” — Bharat Mohan Adhikary
Bharat Mohan Adhikary
- former finance minister and a standing committee member of the Unified Marxist Leninist
(UML) – was one of the members of the committee that drafted the present
constitution. An influential leader of the party, Adhikary spoke to SPOTLIGHT on issues
related to the constitution amid demands for the constituent assembly by many. Excerpts: How do you see the present
political crisis? We require a national consensus. The
present challenge before us is how to protect the achievement gained during the popular
movement of 1990. The solution must be found keeping in mind that the sovereignty vested
upon the people needs to be protected. Some political leaders are
demanding the constituent assembly and are clamoring to scrap the present constitution.
How do you look at it? 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 constituent
assembly. Do you mean that the CPN-UML also
wants a constituent assembly? I have told you that all the democratic
options are open before us. But we still think that the present constitution can settle
the present crisis. But some forces including the
Maoists are saying that they want a constitution drafted by the people? How do you look at
it? Frankly speaking, the present constitution
was not drafted only by the nine members of the drafting committee. Rather, it was drafted
in accordance with the popular support of then agitators who carried forward the popular
movement of 1990. This constitution is a result of that popular movement. In the preamble
of the constitution, this is clearly mentioned. Maoists also want to solve the present
crisis by protecting the spirit of the achievements made by the Popular Movement of 1990. But they care demanding the
constituent assembly. How do you see it? Constituent assembly is all right but we do
not want to lose the achievements of the present constitution. There is a popular saying
that a bird in a hand is better than two in the bush. At present, we, at least, have a
constitution that guarantees the sovereignty of the people. Even if we want to have a
constituent assembly, this constitution need to be made the base. We would want a new
constitution by keeping the present one intact. Don’t you think that this
stand of the CPN-UML is confusing? We are open about all democratic options.
This does not mean that we will sacrifice the present constitution and put at peril the
achievements gained during the Popular Movement of 1990. In case of consensus, CPN-UML has
already agreed to go for the constituent assembly. We are not in a hurry. Our logic is
that this constitution has provision for its amendment and we can amend all the articles
except four fundamentals: multi-party democracy, constitutional monarchy and human rights.
CPN-UML will not support any move to establish one party system by anyone. |
Send your feedback to the
editor: spot@mail.com.np |
