| eNepal |
Posted
on 11-Apr-03 06:17 PM
The next important point is that the Maoists themselves are saying that neither they could defeat the army, nor the latter could defeat them. Therefore, the ceasefire has been declared in no win no loss situation. Then, the question arises, is the army alone the decisive factor in respect of selecting a political system of a country? What about the peoples power? Can they not play the deciding role to change the regime? Is this not the underestimation of the might of the people? Then how can a political party, which does not believe in the power of the people, be a democratic party, which they are claiming to be? India was not liberated from the mighty British by the army. Nelson Mandela had not defeated the apartheid with the help of the army. In our own country, the thirty year-old Panchayat regime of the King was not defeated by the peoples army. It was rather defeated by the peoples power. Do the Maoists think that UML, NC and other political parties cannot take back the power seized by the King on October 4 by means of the peaceful movement? It will be a great political mistake to view UML and NC as the spent forces.
People and political parties around the globe have fought for decades and have lost the lives of millions to get this type of democratic constitution. And history shows that such constitutions have solved the political problems of these countries for good. Nepal had itself got this constitution after the struggle for 30 long years. Therefore, the need was to improve upon this constitution to make it representative of all the people as the Maoists are pleading for. Because the basic features of this constitution ensure the democratic political system. Then, is it necessary to dismiss it to make a new one? Is it not logical to give priority to preserve it first and then discuss to make improvement upon it? Therefore, the people have doubt in their mind about the Maoists emphasis on invalidating the present constitution first and then making a new one. No one understands why they are so much anxious to bring the Nepali politics back to square one? One point to note in this regard is that even if the King is defeated in the Constituent Assembly election, he will not remain passive and even if he wins in that election he will not intervene unless the situation is arises. Therefore, the Kings move will largely depend upon how the government performs. The political parties and particularly the ruling party should always be aware of this point.
Another important point in this regard is that the present constitution was promulgated on Kartik 23, 2047 and the Maoists had started their war since Falgun 2052. During that period of about 5 years only two parliamentary and one local bodies elections were held and four annual budgets were implemented. The Eighth Plan commenced after the first parliamentary election was still under implementation. Then, had the constitution got enough time to produce the desired result? Even a sectoral policy needs minimum 10 years time to produce full results let there be the constitution of a country. Till then some of the provisions of the constitution were not even put into practice. And at the time when the Maoists started their Peoples War, the economy was growing at un-precedentedly higher rate and there is every reason to believe that the growth rate could have continued had the Maoists not started the war. The Maoists are now saying that this constitution must be declared a failure because, instead of solving the national problems, it rather aggravated during the last 12 years. It is totally wrong. Because from their point of view this constitution had failed 7 years ago or after 5 years of its introduction, not now when they had started the Peoples War. In fact the constitution was denied of opportunities to produce its results. Therefore, five years period is too short a period for the document like the constitution of a country to be declared a failure. Even the undemocratic Panchayat Constitution had taken 30 years to fail. And another important point in this regard is that even the Maoists have not alleged that this constitution is undemocratic. They have just said that this is inadequate. If so, can we not make it adequate through amendments?
|
| eNepal |
Posted
on 11-Apr-03 06:17 PM
Some hard questions to Maoists
By DR GOVINDA BAHADUR THAPA
One thing that has confused the mind of the people is that the King apparently seems to share some power that has been devolved in 1990 on the one hand and the Maoists want to go beyond that on the other, if we go by their words. And the Maoists say that they want to achieve the objectives through negotiation. Then, the question arises, do the Maoists believe that the King and his establishment will devolve power, which they are so much hungry for, from the negotiating table? This does not seem at all likely and nobody excepting the Maoists themselves is prepared to believe this. In addition to this, the political parties, particularly the Nepali Congress (NC), the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and the Nepal Sadbhawana Party (NSP), are dead against going beyond 1991 constitution. They in general and NC in particular have remained unmoved by the UML proposal and persistent pressure in and out of Parliament to make any reform and amendment whether it is in the present constitution or in any other aspect of the society. And NC is the unignorable political force in Nepal however defamed it might have been now. Then do the Maoists believe that NC will dance in the tune of the Maoists?
The Maoists are also saying that the present constitution has already been dead. Did they not play the crucial role in killing it if it is at all dead? This constitution has not seen the natural death, it has rather been murdered jointly by the Maoists themselves on the one side and the King on the other. Because if the election had taken place in the scheduled dates, the King would not have got a chance to seize the power. But the Maoists threatened that they would not allow the election to be held successfully and for this they spread the rumour that they would conduct Ukaa, Kakaa and Kaakaa programme, meaning chopping the candidates and government employees who go to conduct the election and the party workers to force the political parties to postpone the election. And to materialise that programme, they had written threatening letters to some candidates. In this background the decision regarding the postponement of the election was taken. Therefore, now how can they say that the constitution has been dead? This has rather been murdered if it is at all dead. And the people also clearly know how the surprising unanimous verdict of the Supreme Court had come against the reinstatement of the dissolved parliament and also why had the Election Commission remained shamefully indecisive in those crucial days?
|
