[lg policy] Nepal's political process derailed, again by ethnicity issue

[Harold Schiffman]

Nepal's political process derailed, again

After years of delay, critics blame Nepal's dominant Maoist party for
the impasse, in an attempt at ramming through a more radical
constitution.

By Bikash Sangraula, Correspondent / May 29, 2012



Binod Joshi/AP


Kathmandu, Nepal

Nepal’s lawmakers failed to agree on a new constitution, reducing the
government to caretaker status and with it the possibility of an end
to a lengthy and tumultuous political transition this week.

The popularly elected constituent assembly was dissolved Sunday, after
it failed to meet a deadline for passing the constitution. This was
the latest of several extensions given to the assembly throughout the
past four years, in an attempt to help rebuild the nation scarred by a
decade-long Maoist insurgency that left more than 17,000 people dead.

Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai called for fresh assembly elections
Nov. 22 to complete the constitution and announced he would be head of
an interim government until then. But critics question the legality of
his announcement, the legitimacy of his government after Sunday, and
the utility of electing another assembly that could possibly meet the
same fate given a poor track record of Nepal’s political forces.

Analysts say that Maoists have used the peace process as a path to
capture state power after having failed to defeat the state army
during the insurgency, but it is backfiring.

“The [new election] is clearly meant for state capture,” says senior
journalist Yubaraj Ghimire, who is a former editor-in-chief of The
Kathmandu Post. “But the Maoists haven’t taken into account the
erosion of their credibility and loss of face in the past years.
Contrary to being in an advantageous position, I think the Maoists are
now isolated and cornered,” says Mr. Ghimire.


Nepal’s Maoists fought state forces from 1996 to 2006 demanding a new
constitution and an end to monarchy. The now-dissolved assembly was
elected to address these demands. The assembly successfully abolished
monarchy at its first sitting on May 28, 2008. This year, the parties
were also able to disband Maoist former fighting forces. But a key
sticking point to a new constitution has been whether to give regional
power based on ethnicity.

Rival political parties, including major ones such as the Nepali
Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist),
have termed Mr. Bhattarai’s call for elections unconstitutional and
have demanded he step down to allow formation of an all-party
government to decide a future course for the country.

Following the assembly’s dissolution and announcement of election,
three coalition parties in Bhattarai’s government have quit.

And now, with their party vice-chairman at the helm of a government
that does not have to face parliament’s scrutiny, the Maoists are
counting on their ability to influence the new election to win a
two-thirds majority and thrust a radical constitution on the country
to achieve their long-term goal of state capture, say analysts.

But Maoist chairman Prachanda seemed unperturbed by unfolding events
when he told a press conference in Kathmandu Monday that he was
confident his party would win a two-thirds majority in the coming
election. “And I am happy that I did not make compromises during
discussions over a new constitution on my party’s agenda,” he added,
referring to its support for a pro- ethnicity-based federalism.

Narayan Wagle, former editor-in-chief of Nagarik daily, blames the
failure of the assembly on Maoists.

“They distracted political forces for more than three of the
assembly’s four-year tenure by letting the issue of settling the
future of former combatants dominate discussions. And when the
assembly finally got down to work on a new constitution after the army
took charge of the combatants in April this year, the Maoists again
hijacked the assembly by throwing the ethnicity card,” he said.

In the last few weeks of the assembly’s life, political parties were
sharply polarized over whether or not to divide Nepal into federal
provinces based on ethnicity. The Maoists, who were backed during the
insurgency by many marginalized ethnic groups who provided them with a
steady source of committed fighters, refused to budge from their stand
that the basis must be ethnicity.

But rival parties, who fear ethnic conflict in the event a handful of
ethnic groups are given special privileges in a country that has more
than 100 ethnic groups, could not agree. This unresolved issue led to
the assembly’s dissolution.

Legal experts say it will be difficult to bring the country’s
political process back on track.

“The call for fresh elections is procedurally flawed as the prime
minister bypassed the parliament in taking the decision,” says
Bhimarjun Acharya, a constitutional expert.

“The only way out of this mess is to form an all-party government to
hold parliamentary election. There cannot be another election for a
constituent assembly as announced by the prime minister because the
interim constitution does not allow the holding of assembly elections
twice. A newly elected parliament can be given the authority to
finalize the remaining issues related to new constitution,” he said.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2012/0529/Nepal-s-political-process-derailed-again

-- 
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

 Harold F. Schiffman

Professor Emeritus of
 Dravidian Linguistics and Culture
Dept. of South Asia Studies
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305

Phone:  (215) 898-7475
Fax:  (215) 573-2138

Email:  haroldfs at gmail.com
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/

-------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list