Constitution: a piece of paper or more than that?

The 1990 Constitution celebrated its 14th year of drafting this week with many fanfares. Constitutional experts criss-crossed the implementation of the constitution during these fourteen years. As is usual, some vested interests on both the camps pushed their views in favor or against the constitution. The surprising part of the whole fanfare was that those who had drafted the constitution were absent but had to contend themselves by denouncing those who have now been handling the constitution. The fact is that those political personalities who were hiding at time of the drafting of the said constitution for obvious political reasons due to the change in the system that time around, were in the forefront this time in highlighting the gains of the constitution. The fact is also that those who remained instrumental at time of the drafting of the 1990 constitution were the ones who possessed scathing criticisms against those whom they consider that they have trampled the constitution mercilessly. Obviously, they were hinting at the monarch who some thirteen months ago sacked the then Deuba government by invoking the controversial Article 127 which allows the King to unknot the tangles, if any, through the use of that article 127. Since the use/misuse of the Article 127, a hue and cry is there in the Nepalese political spectrum that talks in favor or even against the use of that article. The target is the King who has used it and hence it is the King who is being told to correct his constitutional blunders committed some one a half years back. The King remains undeterred giving an impression to the now agitating political parties that what ever he did then was in tune with the constitution and that in doing so he did in no way violated his constitutional limits.

The agitating political parties, however, never utter that when they were in the corridors of power in the recent past, too had exceeded their political limits and more often than not they did neglect the provisions of the constitution when it came to their personal or party benefits. The fact is that the Nepali academia believes that the political parties who drafted the constitution during the 1990s apparently thought that unless the King’s powers were drastically cut there would remain a possibility of the King bouncing back to power and hence the 1990 constitution was drafted in such a manner that the King, once an active monarch, was made almost a rubber stamp who had to express his satisfaction to the wishes of the Prime Minister of the day. This is what happens in all constitutional monarchies. However, the drafters of the constitution then did not think that the Article 127 could ever come to its use. It is here that they did blunders. The fact is that a sort of constitutional crisis gripped the nation which was the doing of their own and hence when the King was told to unknot the political tangles, the King did so as per the advice of the then prime minister but with proper political finesse resulting in the continuation of the current state.

Neutral observers say that the constitution is nothing but a piece of paper if not taken seriously. But it assumes the form of a serious document which could determine the destiny of a nation and its population if implemented as stipulated in the said document. It is time that the political parties including the monarch should think as to whether they both have done justice with the constitution or not? By and large, it is these two institutions who have in the past implemented or protected the constitution. It is not the lay man who was ever in the scene either in its implementation or in its protection. The lay men albeit witnessed as to how the constitution was being misused.

Thus the burden of proving one’s innocence lies upon the two actors who have been told to implement and told to protect the constitution.

The fact is that in the Nepalese context, the constitution has many a times been interpreted by various political parties and actors in a manner that has suited them most. The fact is also that the constitution for majority of the population amounts to a simple paper which has yet to guarantee their rights and duties as well.

Headline | National | 5 Question  | 2nd Impression | International | Letter | Past