Stands of Nepali Congress on Contemporary Political Situation in Nepal

Girija Prasad Koirala, President, Nepali Congress Party

Nepali Congress Party, since her inception, has been working for multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy in Nepal. It successfully struggled against the 104 years old oligarchy of the Ranas and also opposed to the party-less polity of an absolute King, in 1950 and 1990, respectively. In 1990, following people's popular movement- led by Nepali Congress, Nepal promulgated a new democratic constitution, which for the first time in the 221 years political history of Nepal, transferred the sovereignty of the nation, from monarchy to the people! Ever since the democracy ushered-in, Nepal made a significant headway in the areas of infrastructure for development[1] and fundamental rights of the people. Unfortunately, after 12 years in operation, parliamentary system of governance, the multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy is in jeopardy, as the King, violating the 1990 constitution in letter and spirit, has recently taken over the executive power of government as if the sovereignty of the nation has still been vested into him!!! In such a time of unprecedented constitutional crisis of the nation, it is imperative for Nepali Congress to speak about its stands politico-constitutionally.

Why Royal Step is Unconstitutional?

[1]. Nepali Congress firmly believes that the royal action of October 4, 2002 is unconstitutional.

[2] The preamble of the constitution has clearly stated "the source of sovereign authority of the independent Nepal is inherent in the people."

[3] The royal decree of October 4 and King's consecutive steps have attempted to deny this constitutional fact. The King has taken over executive power of the state absolutely and has not only nominated the Prime Minister- Mr L.B. Chand, of his choice but also has selected the members of the cabinet. It may be mentioned here that as per the constitution of 1990, the Prime Minister of the country must be the member of the House of Representatives.

[4] and Mr Chand utterly lacks this qualification, as he is the defeated candidate in the elections for the recently dissolved House of Representatives! These royal acts are contrary to the provisions of the popular 1990 constitution of the Kingdom.

Why Restoration of Parliament Only Solution?

1. Nepali Congress believes that the genesis of the present crisis started from the day of the House of Representatives was dissolved.[5] At a time, while grass-root level democracy was denied its periodical elections owing to utterly deteriorating security situation, the decision of the then government to go for elections for the House of Representatives, indeed, was not completely free from certain ill motives. Nobody believed that it was possible to hold the general elections in a peaceful and impartial manner.

2. Nepali Congress is of the opinion that the present constitutional crisis exists only because the parliament does not exist. Perhaps, the king could not have taken unconstitutional step if the parliament had been alive. One basic premise of the 1990 constitution is that the country must not stay without parliament beyond six months.[6] If, to elect a new parliament within six month is not feasible, the previous parliament-which was prematurely dissolved, must be restored. This thought has been subscribed by many constitutional experts of the country, including the chairman of the constitution drafting committee of 1990 constitution of the Kingdom.[7] The supreme court also delivered its verdict with the hope that the elections for the new House of Representatives would be held within six months.

3. The restoration of parliament is also important for resolving the Maoist crisis. Without solving this problem, it is unlikely that elections can be held in a free and fair manner in Nepal. If constitutional changes are required, in order to meet the Maoist demands, we essentially need the parliament. Therefore, Nepali Congress insists that the parliament must be reinstated if the burning problems of the country are to be addressed properly.

4. Once the Parliament is restored, the problem of forming of government-who and how, will automatically be resolved. Then, everything will take place in accordance with the provision of the constitution. We, on our side, are prepared even for a national unity government comprising of the representatives of all parliamentary parties with an objective to address the country's burning problems.

Why No To Chand Government?

The formation of Chand government is neither based on political ground nor is founded on legal basis. Firstly, this government is formed by the King repudiating the suggestion of six major political parties, represented in the dissolved House of Representatives, to form the government in agreement and participation of the latter. Actually, in the beginning, when there was no government and the king had assumed all power, Nepali Congress had not opposed to the idea of the formation of such a government. The reason behind giving a thought to it was owing to the fact that the 1990 constitution has established an insoluble existence and dignity of political parties and has made them accountable to the people since the former form the will of the latter. Such a government would make a recommendation for the restoration of the parliament. Unfortunately, the king did not lend his ears to this suggestion of political parties. Secondly, according to the 1990 constitution, a person aspiring to become the Prime Minister of country must be the member of the House of Representatives.[8] However, regarding the present Prime Minister L.B.Chand, one would wonder to know that he is not even the member of the dissolved Parliament.

2. The present government is neither accountable to the parliament[9] nor is to the political parties. Rather, the government is directly responsible to the King, who has formed it.

3. As the king holds the executive authority of the state, including making and unmaking of the cabinet and nomination of its members, he is participating in the day-to-day affairs of the country. It has obviously involved the King in controversies, which is against the principle of Nepali Congress, as it would be detrimental to the revered institution of society.

4. P. M. Chand has been indulged in promulgating many new ordinances and regulations with an objective to enhance the king's role in financial matters, civil administration, foreign affairs, army, police etc. thereby making the latter engaged with disputes.

5. In the absence of the House of Representatives, the normal parliamentary functions are supposed to be performed by the Upper House of the Parliament, which is a Permanent body.[10] But the King does not want to call the meeting of this house simply due to the fear of being outvoted, as the National Council- upper house of parliament, is largely constituted by members of Nepali Congress and United Marxist and Leninist parties.

Why Broader National Democratic Alliance Needed?

Ever since the promulgation of 1990 popular constitution, the anti-democratic forces have been active to defame the multiparty democracy in Nepal. In the recent past, such a phenomenon has been noticed distinctly. In view of growing threat to the parliamentary system of governance, multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy, Nepali Congress has initiated the idea of Broader National Democratic Alliance (BNDA). The aim of BNDA is to safeguard the achievements of 1990 popular movement, which guarantees multiparty system, sovereignty of the people, constitutional monarchy, independent judiciary, human rights and fundamental rights of the people. In this connection, Nepali Congress has been organizing various meetings and workshops throughout the kingdom, in cooperation with the pro-constitutional forces, in order to mobilize the support of people to protect and preserve the 1990 constitution, develop the culture of political pluralism and enhance understanding among political forces of society. This endeavor also aims at attaining national consensus among all political forces of the Kingdom on the issues of national interest. In the face of the categorical stand of the Chief of the army Prajwal Shamsher J. B. Rana, who on record denied that the security of the royal palace was the responsibility of the military,(11] the task to protect and preserve the constitutional monarchy- which has been the symbol of national unity of the country, has now become the responsibility of the elected government directly accountable to the sovereign parliament.[12] Besides, in order to make the institution of constitutional monarchy more respectable in consonance with the 21st Century, the royal titles of Shree 5, should be confined to the King, Queen and Crown Prince.[13] Therefore, the present constitutional arrangements, which have debarred the democratic government from the responsibility to look after the management of palace, should accordingly be amended. Such a constitutional arrangement is imperative in order to guarantee the security and well being of the Crown in future.

In Sum:

Nepali Congress Party is convinced that the country has been beset by Maoist terror and unconstitutional royal steps. Nepali Congress upholds the idea of the restoration of the parliament - in which the gracious presence of monarch is must as it is a King-in-parliament system.[14] It would help extricate the country from the present constitutional morass, caused by the royal address of October 4, 2002, and be able to give a solution to the Maoist problem of the Kingdom. In view of growing insecure security situation and development of new political situation, sheer change and formation of governments- accountable to the King, might not address the current crises of the country. The nation, at this juncture, requires a government directly responsible to the people, which would focus its attention to address the Maoist problem. Such type of government can only be formed through the parliament. Therefore, Nepali Congress firmly stands for the restoration of the untimely dissolved legislature,[15] which would not only settle the current constitutional impasse but also would make sincere efforts to solve the Maoist problem of Nepal.

The king should not undermine the status, role and significance of the political parties in society. It is only with the mutual cooperation and understanding between the king and the national political parties, the present crisis, including the Maoists problem, can be resolved. Nepali congress sincerely wants to avoid a situation of mistrust and confrontation between parliamentary political parties and the king. If the latter continues holding the executive power, an unfortunate situation is likely to arise in the country. Nepali Congress, which believes in constitutional monarchy since her inception, wants to build an atmosphere of better confidence and understanding amongst parliamentary forces of the Kingdom. Now, it is a high time for the King to act in the positive direction to address the current constitutional as well as Maoist, crises being faced by the nation instead of pursuing a dithering policy.

February 27, 2003.

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