I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
King acts, public support, parties oppose

Kathmandu: A Kantipur Online dated 10.24.02 survey polled among a total of 12,4555 respondents showed an 85.48% ( 10,646) support for the King's action. Strangely, uncovered in their own publication, this is adequate demonstration of the overwhelming public anticipation of corrections in the country to be done by none other than the constitutional monarch. This is also ample indication of the distance between Nepal's political parties ( only 14.33% did not agree to the sacking of Sher Bahadur Deuba and the assumption of the executive powers by the monarch), and the people they claim to represent which explains the political parties' floundering reactions ever since. Bordering on the ridiculous—the revival of the Article 128 included in the constitution for sake of legitimacy and continuity of the 1990 interim government—to that of semantics—the executive formed by the King is powerless because He has assumed executive authority in the Royal proclamation—the reactions emanating from the political parties, their affiliated organizations and intellectuals turn a blind eye to the obvious. The simple fact of the matter known very much to the public is than an elected Prime Minister who had, on threat of losing his majority in the House, dissolved parliament to conduct elections within six months as per the constitution, invoked the King to use His Residual Powers of 127 to extend his mandate for another year on grounds elections and the King on his part couldn't oblige solely on Deuba's behalf. This was because Deuba after dissolution of parliament was not only lame-duck but his party had split and obliging Deuba would have meant a partisan standpoint not in keeping with the constitution.

Of course, Deuba, his rival congress and the Opposition-the UML, all cry loud because the King ignored their claim to Executive powers on these same grounds. These parties, however, don't make public the salient fact that the choice of Lokendra Chand is product of tacit understanding on their behalf of an option that ignored their individual claims. Nor do they talk to the public of the many individual aspirants from their individual parties to share the perks of the Lokendra government. And so the strategy is clear.

It is to ensure that the responsibility of the coming actions may be fully dumped on the King that the Lokendra Cabinet is to be deemed bereft of executive powers. ( Lokendra is generally considered a non-performer and so the commonality of the choice). The parties are to make a public posture distancing themselves from the Royal step, opposing it and rendering it undemocratic and unconstitutional. This is to be accompanied with yet another long-term strategy to galvanize public support "for democracy".

There is yet another strategy. The King and his cabinet are being asked to state the schedule for elections. This demand emanates from the assumption, based on real facts that determining the dates makes it easy for the opponents to make sure that elections fail. The fact is that the five basic directives given the Lokendra cabinet are so interrelated as to make prerequisites for elections a priority in-order to enable the setting of the dates. Any early move to set the dates could be counter-productive to the election itself.

So blatantly partisan have the party standpoints been that the public at large appear oblivious to their demands in anticipation of the measures expected to render our awry democracy corrected. It is in this anticipation that real danger lie. The public outcry against corruption has set the anti-corruption movement afoot no doubt. But, this is a country where rule of law prevails and anti-corruption measures require for legal measures to be fulfilled. The delays thus accrues will be deemed compromising by a public wanting immediate blood. Opponents to the Royal measure will be an organized measure seeking to capitalize from the delay as much also as to interpret their falling into this anti-corruption net as part of the political strategy to victimize them politically on grounds of anti-corruption activities. Girija Prasad Koirala particularly has become irrationally more belligerent in his statements as part of this strategy.

Along with this high public anticipation regarding corruption is the other real threat to the Royal action. The public anticipation for government performance is real. A bureaucracy that knows that the executive must depend on it to deliver need not be too cooperative in the absence of their political patrons who nurtured them through corruption. An uncooperative bureaucracy politicized over the decade could endanger the public agenda as much as the political parties themselves.

And so the opposition has a higher agenda still.

The demands of the Maoists for a constituent assembly are being floated as a possible point of accord in the current seeming impasse. But, here too one question so commonly raised on the constitutionality of the King's use of Article 127 is strangely not discussed. Where in the constitution is the King to discuss the scrapping of this constitution and the conducting of election for a new constitution through a new constituent assembly? The King has so far only been asked constitutionally to use his powers under Article 127 to resolve obstacles in the current constitution—particularly the enabling of elections.

Chand cabinet: Constitutional or unconstitutional?

Kathmandu: The government led by Lokendra Bahadur Chand is in a fix.

Mr. Chand, to recall, during the days of the erstwhile regime used to be called as Mr. Clean. During the democratic years he was dubbed as a man who is a non-performer.

None of the major political parties have so far recognized this set up to the extent that Lokendra's own party—the RPP—is yet to spell out its decision regarding the government.

To recall, most of the political parties instead of awarding recognition to the new cabinet have dubbed the government as to have been formed unconstitutionally and stood as an undemocratic set-up.

Poor Prime Minister Chand is leaving no stone unturned to enjoy recognition from other friendly parties but has remained so far unsuccessful.

Most vocal among the political parties in deriding at the present government is admittedly the congress splinters led by President Koirala and the freshly deposed Sher Bahadur Deuba.

Deuba appears to have been shocked more by the use of the term "incompetent" by the monarch than sacking him from the Prime Ministerial chair and hence his "irritation" is simply understandable. But yet Deuba prefers to hurl criticisms against his former mentor Koirala and claims that it was Koirala who in effect "appealed" the monarch to dismiss the Deuba government in one pretext or the other. If Deuba's utterances were to be believed then what becomes clear is that President Koirala hinted the King to allow him to take over the charge of the chief of the country's executive. Koirala remains silent on this new allegation from Deuba.

President Koirala at the moment is giving an impression that he and he alone were the real and true defender of the constitution and the system and hence he would launch a movement in order to press the monarch for effecting necessary corrections by agreeing to what Koirala has been saying of late.

In Koirala's opinion, the King has exceeded his constitutional limits and thus rendered the 1990 constitution redundant. Moreover, Koirala says that if the King now uses the article 128 and revived the now defunct parliament would be a constitutional and democratic exercise.

Constitutional experts differ with Koirala's theory and maintain that the use of article 128 was meant only for jumping from the old to the new constitution and provide legitimacy to the 1990 movement. Koirala differs and claims that he and his party can't even dream of joining the Chand cabinet which is unconstitutionally formed.

A clever UML is not that vocal as is Koirala against the Chand Cabinet.

The general people opine that the King definitely has exceeded his constitutional limits but did so at a time when the people had already developed some sort of allergy with the political parties and its leaders for obvious reasons. They also maintain that the King apparently wishes to assert his role and also wishes to hint the political parties that his presence be felt and duly recognized by them all.

But for Chand, perhaps the courtesy calls paid by the Charge de' Affaires of India and by the Ambassador of China in his Singh Durbar office remained more significant that getting recognized by Nepal's political parties.

Fortunately, Chand was greeted by British Minister Mike Bryan, American Minister and very recently the delegation of the EU nations based in Kathmandu met him in person inside Singh Durbar premises. Unfortunately, the Western democracies whose diplomatic representation is in Kathmandu are yet to greet him individually. This means that countries like France, Germany, Denmark, and Finland and the likes have yet to spell out their position vis-à-vis this government which has been constituted through Royal Orders.

Unconfirmed reports say that the EU nations wish the declaration of the election dates, both parliamentary and the local levels, so that they would be able to work with an elected representatives of the people both at the higher and the local level. Sounds genuine indeed.

The process of seducing the other friendly parties by the present government is continuing-reports say.

Be that as it may, the government appears to be in the move.

The lay men appear less interested in ascertaining whether the Chand cabinet is a constitutional one or just the otherwise.  

Prachanda expects King to exhibit "magnanimity"

Kathmandu: Last Thursday Comrade Prachanda alias Puspa Kamal Dahal issued yet another statement wherein he has reiterated that his party was open for the talks provided the government came out with clear and sound agenda at the time of the talks.

The last statement possesses carrot and stick both for the government and more specially to the constitutional monarch.

Firstly, the Prachanda's statement clearly hints that the Maoists insurgency would wish to attend a talk wherein all responsible actors of the country have their participation including the representative of the King. This statement clearly not only elevates the ranks of the constitutional monarch but also hints all and sundry that in the given scheme of political things, the King's role can't be rejected for obvious reasons and hence the participation of the King's nominee were a must during the talks which is yet to begin.

However, the same statement also has few suggestions for the monarch.

"The monarch must be able to sacrifice in the name of the larger interest of the nation and the people", the statement says. However, what sort of sacrifices the Maoists need from the monarch is yet unclear. But yet intellectuals guess that the Maoists expect "greater" political concessions from the constitutional monarch.

It will have to be watched as to how the King will react to the fresh Prachanda's expectations from the monarch.

Secondly and very importantly, the Prachanda's statement outrightly blames the political parties for their Himalayan failures which ,according to the statement, brought the current political uncertainty.

Thirdly, the statement also warns that should there be any effort at undermining the "minimum gains" achieved through the 1990 movement by any quarter would be acceptable neither to the country and its history. This implies perhaps that any effort by the monarch to dismiss the gains of the 1990 would be taken as a challenge.

Interestingly, the Maoists have not only kept their doors open for talks but also have concurrently stepped up their violent activities to the extent that the other day  they planted bombs in places from where the Royal Palace premises were at a stone's throw distance. Should this be taken that they in doing so wish to hint that any place in Kathmandu was not beyond their approach? Or else it could only be a mere coincidence!

With the doors open and the government's declaration that it would constitute a special "cell" which will prepare grounds for talks with the Maoists what could be guessed is that the two warring rivals will meet soon.

But the main question remains unanswered: As expected by the Maoists quarters, will the King exhibit his magnanimity? Will the King allow the negotiators to discuss matters related to the formation of a constituent assembly which would later draft an altogether new constitution as demanded by the Maoists? More over, does the constitution in force at the moment allows the King to do so? What about other quarter's reaction to the Maoists demand for a constituent assembly. And above all, will the monarch agree to further weaken his "authority" provided him by the 1990 constitution?

To recall, Prachanda's has hinted that the talks with the government will center mainly around the constituent assembly and the drafting of a new constitution.

Given the political fluidity, what turn the events will take is very difficult to fathom. It would be wise to wait till the politics of the country takes a formal and stable shape.

UN System wishes to broker "peace"

Kathmandu: Realizing perhaps the grave dimension of the ever deteriorating security situation of the beleaguered Himalayan Kingdom where the word peace has already become a rare commodity, the United Nations System based in Kathmandu has pledged to broker peace in between the "new" government and the Maoists rebels.

Albeit this proposition stands valid if the two concerned "rivals" give a "positive" nod to the fresh UN proposal.

It is for the first time that a world recognized body has advanced its proposal that it could proceed with the mediation efforts should the two sides wish their mediator role in this regard.

The fact is that the UN system suddenly advanced its proposal which has till todate not received any positive signals from the two warring rivals.

What is more than interesting is that the UN proposal has come at a time when the Lokendra Chand's new government  is awaiting due "recognition" from the political parties of the country itself.

Does this mean that the UN in furthering its proposal to the perusal of the Chand government has subtly hinted the other interested parties or for that matter friendly governments that the Cabinet in place headed by Chand enjoys their support and sympathy.

Dr. Henning Karcher, the chief coordinator of the UN System in Nepal, last Thursday forwarded this proposal while he was making a lecture on the eve of the 57th anniversary of the founding of the World body.

Coincidentally, it was this day when Prachanda—the Maoists insurgency supremo, too issued a statement wherein he said that his party was open for dialogue.

Dr. Krcher's gesture comes at a time when the nations of the developed West have yet to greet the Chand's caretaker government. Indeed, the countries of the developed West based in Kathmandu have met the Prime Minister under the aegis of the European Union. In effect, as individual countries, they have so far not met the Prime Minister which in itself is significant.

Be that as it may, Dr. Karcher's remarks must have "consoled" the "non-performing" prime minister at least to some extent given his penchant for a sort of recognition from the friendly countries.

All said and done, how the government and the Maoists quarters react to the UN proposal will have to be watched.

To recall, Dr. Karcher at the said ceremony almost took the sides of the Maoists insurgency when he said that "one has to go deeper into the root causes that forced a section of the population to join the insurgency". This amply means that the UN system believes that the insurgency must have also been caused by the utter neglect exhibited by successive governments formed in the past towards the burning issues of the people residing in remote parts of the nation.

Dr. Karcher's underlying message have got to be thoroughly studied by the government of the day prior to attending the talks which is already in the process reportedly.

President Koirala, to recall, was the one to have made quick reactions on Dr. Karcher's proposal. A reluctant Koirala, however, had to say that he would not dismiss the UN role in this regard. Other competent political parties have yet to make comments on this UN fresh proposal.

RPP stands divided

Kathmandu: The party of the former Panchas—the RPP—is divided over whether it should extend recognition to the government led by its own party leader or should toe the lines acquired by the rest of the five political parties.

Behind the dilly-dallying the recognition to Chand's government is the master brain of all time conspiratorial politician, Mr. Surya Bahadur Thapa—the party's chairman, who apparently wishes to push some bargaining chips to the perusal of his rival—Mr. Chand.

In effect, Chairman Thapa would wish a strong committal from his party leader and the Prime Minister Chand for his favorite nominee for the post of a new chairman of the party prior to extending the party's recognition to the government of Chand.

Thapa's chum is talked to be Dr. Prakash Chandra Lohani if he is denied a third time chairmanship of the party he now heads. The RPP has already declared that its convention would be held in the mid of December.

While apparently Dr. Lohani is Thapa's wish, Chand prefers Pashupati Rana instead of Lohani.

Chand too has his cards under the sleeve. In case Thapa declines to award recognition to his government, Prime Minister Chand will in all probability use his government resources to bag victory for his nominee that is Mr. Rana.

Thapa knows about this possibility and hence is in a dilemma as to whether he should proceed ahead by totally neglecting Chan'd possible intervention at time of the party elections or should oblige Chand and secure vistory for his candidate.

Perhaps it is this dilemma that is causing delay in extending recognition to a government which is being headed by its own party leader.

The RPP under Thapa is also mindful of the consequences that his party will have to face in the comity of Nepal's political parties after it recognizes the Chand government.

As of today, the party has neither annoyed the rest of the five parties nor has honored its own party government.

National | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past