Nepal in a state of uncertainty

Internally, Nepal’s immediate priority in 2015 is the promulgation of its constitution. If it does not succeed, the country may encounter prolonged chaotic conditions. Nepal’s political parties are aware of the potential problems in the event of failure to promulgate the constitution on time. If the May 2015 deadline is missed, Nepal might have to wait for it till 2017. Externally, improving relations with India will be an important issue.

In 2014, there wasn’t much progress in the country’s constitution-making process. The second Constituent Assembly (CA) of Nepal began to hiccup immediately after its election in November 2013. The political parties did not learn much from the past.

Though almost all the parties had agreed to produce the first draft of the constitution by 22 January, 2015, they took almost a month to decide who had the legitimacy to call the Constituent Assembly and wasted six more months to form the Council of Ministers – and still, the CA is not complete.

It is impossible for the political parties to produce the draft of the constitution by 22 January. It is in the interest of all the political parties to forge broader consensus on the contentious issues and promulgate the constitution on May 28 – the Nepalese Republic Day. However, looking at the rigid stand of the ruling parties, it’s a Herculean
task to forge consensus among the major political parties in such a short period.

So far, Nepal has had six constitutions, at different points in time, and the debate to get an acceptable constitution for long-term social peace and stability, continues. All previous constitutions failed to bring peace and deliver to the aspirations of the citizens because it had not taken all the political actors into account. Hence, there was demand for a new constitution via the Constituent Assembly that could be implemented through consensus. If the NC and the UML try to get it passed via majority votes – which is unlikely as their Madeshi/ Janajati leaders have announced to oppose party orders – it would not be successful. The Madheshis and Maoists are uniting and are gaining ground despite multiple splits. Simultaneously, such undemocratic acts would invite polarisation in the ruling alliance (NC and UML) and opposition (Madheshi/Maoist/ Janajati parties).

If all political parties fail to come to any agreement in January, the general public will lose trust in political actors. The situation might get more fluid and difficult to handle. The ruling alliance will start fighting over who will become Koirala’s successor.

The UML had supported Koirala in 2014 on the condition of getting the reins back in 2015. Netra Bikram Chand, who broke away from the CPN-Maoist (Baidya faction) to complete the remaining task of ‘people’s war,’ would gain support among the radical communists while Kamal Thapa would demand for a ‘Hindu state’ and the ‘role for monarch’.

Similarly, Madhesi activists like CK Raut would capitalise on the dissent, frustration and absence of government in the Tarai plains and plop up even more untenable demands.

The Modi government in India also poses fear among the Nepalese political parties who stand for a secular and republican Nepal. They think India might support pro-Hindu parties to fight for a Hindu Kingdom.

By: Pramod Jaiswal