Internal Political Developments

Some Rays of Hope in the Statute Drafting Process; the Dispute Resolution Sub-Committee “Settled” almost all Contentious Issues in the New Constitution: In a dramatic manner, the Dispute Resolution Sub-Committee (DRSC) under the Constitutional Committee (CC) of the Constituent Assembly (CA) has said on December 30, 2011 that the committee, in principle, has settled almost all contentious issues in the new constitution, including forms of governance.

It is said that the sub-committee had endorsed a report prepared by the taskforce formed under it, and decided to forward the report to the CC meeting. In fact, the new development helped leaders to meet a key deadline in the revised CA calendar endorsed by the CA earlier this month. According to the calendar, all contentious issues will be resolved by the sub-committee by December 30, 2011 and they will be forwarded to the CC for endorsement within January 5, 2012. “We will submit the report to the CC meet which will take place tomorrow,” the sub-committee convenor and Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal told reporters after the meeting. If the parties maintain the current pace, it is possible to promulgate the new constitution in the remaining five months of the CA, CC Chairman Nilambar Acharya said.

It is said that the compromise would not have been possible if Maoist leader Dev Gurung had been present in the meeting. Gurung, who is an invitee member of the sub-committee, is a hardliner who opposes Dahal's compromises on constitution drafting. Gurung had challenged the compromises made by Dahal on several issues and vowed to reverse them. That is why Dahal had to promise to other party leaders that Gurung would no longer be invited and none of the agreements reached in the subcommittee would be reversed. However, the hard-line faction of the UCPN-M, led by Vice-chairman Mohan Baidya, has once again vowed to overturn all the decisions made by the DRSC. Speaking at the Reporters’ Club on December 31, 2011, Vice-Chairman Baidya said the decisions made by the subcommittee headed by Maoist Chairman Dahal would be reversed. According to Baidya, Dahal has worked against the party’s ideology in the name of agreements, and that is why, “all the decisions made by the subcommittee would be invalidated”. People’s revolution is the party’s basic ideology, so how can there be unlimited ownership of property?” Baidya questioned. Claiming that the constitution would be promulgated by the CA rather than the subcommittee, Baidya claimed that the agreements would be scrapped in the CA anyway.

In the meantime, Nepali Congress (NC) reiterated that the new draft of the constitution is impossible before the conclusion of the peace process. Addressing a program organised by Press Union Udayapur on January 1, 2012, Central member Shekhar Koirala said that the UCPN-M is trying to promulgate the constitution without concluding the peace process. “If the constitution is not possible now then let it be. The Maoists are trying to promulgate the constitution without concluding the peace process and again win the election with arms,” said Koirala.

Supreme Court Issued an Interim Order to Stay the Government Decision to Recruit Madhesis Youths in Nepal Army: Recent Cabinet decision to recruit Madhesi youths into the Nepal Army (NA) has generated further controversy once again after the Supreme Court (SC) of Nepal had issued an interim order to stay the decision on December 26, 2011. In accordance with the 4-point agreement among the Madhesi parties and United Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-M), the Cabinet on December 20, 2011 had decided to recruit 3000 Madhesis in the NA in the name of making the national army inclusive. However, single bench of the apex court led by Justice Baijanath Upadhyay had held the decision not to be in consonance with the existing provisions of the Interim Constitution, 2007.

In fact, the decision was taken by the Court after conducting an initial hearing on the writ filed by two representatives of the Chure Bhawar Party-- Bhumi Raj Niraula and Lawmaker Badri Neupane--on December 23, 2011. While giving the verdict, Justice Upadhyay has pointed out the need for promulgation of new act as per the Article 144 (4A) of the Interim Constitution to make the army inclusive, which he ruled that the Cabinet decision was at odds with. Instead of bringing a new law, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai led government had endorsed a Policy Paper 2068 proposed by the Ministry of Defence, and decided to fill those vacant posts in the NA with the Madhesis.

In the meantime, Tarai Madhes Loktantrik Party Chairman Mahanta Thakur accused the SC of being biased over the issues concerning Madhesi youths' recruitment into the Nepal Army and the national dress. Speaking at the TMLP's fourth anniversary at the party's central office on December 28, 2011, Thakur said the party will continue its struggle until the government shows willingness to address demands of the Madhesi community. According to him, his party would continue peaceful protest from the parliament and the streets.

Supreme Court Bags Mixed Reactions as It Refuses to Register Government Petition on Constituent Assembly Term Review: The SC's refusal to review its ruling on term extension of the Constituent Assembly has generated mixed reactions from the legal and the political fraternities. It was the SC, which refused to register the petitions separately filed by the Legislature-Parliament and the Cabinet on December 27, 2011, seeking a review on the November 26, 2011 verdict of the SC that put a cap on the extension of the Constituent Assemble (CA) term, which expires on May 28, 2011.According to the November 26 judgment, the SC had ruled that the CA term would be automatically dissolved after the end of the ‘final’ extension even if the parties failed to draft a new constitution within the extended period.

The SC’s decision has engendered mixed reactions inside Nepal. Most of the political leaders argue that the court cannot dictate the term and mandate of the legislature. They state that the issue was entirely political and beyond the SC’s jurisdiction. Minister for Law and Justice Brijesh Kumar Gupta remarked to media at the Reporter's Club that the court’s intervention in affairs of the legislature is beyond its jurisdiction. He put forward a question asking whether the court will share the blame if the constitution cannot be made within six months and some additional time is required. Even the Dispute Resolution Sub-committee (DRSC) led by UCPN-Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal expressed concern over the apex court’s decision and stressed the need for upholding the supremacy of the parliament. During the meeting of DSRC, CA Chairman Subas Nembang told party leaders that promulgation of the constitution within the May 28 deadline would be the “best and intellectual option” to avert the looming crisis. Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist and Leninist (CPN-UML) Chairperson Jhala Nath Khanal termed the court's refusal to register the revision petition as 'unfortunate' and an attempt to deny justice. "The court is a place of worship for anyone having faith in judiciary. It should always keep its doors open," said Khanal at the meeting of the DRSC under the CA on December 28, 2011. "If the court shuts down its doors, it is unfortunate," he said. However, Vice Chairperson of the CPN-UML Bidhya Devi Bhandari has said that it was pointless and unnecessary to comment on the SC’s verdict. Talking to media persons in Ilam on November 29, 2011, Bhandari accused the political parties of trying to impose authoritarianism by giving unnecessary comments against the SC decision. She said political parties should draft the new constitution within the next six months. “If the parties fail to draft the constitution in the stipulated time frame, there is the need to go for a fresh people's mandate”, she stated. Also, Nepali Congress President Sushil Koirala said his party respected the court's move.

Interestingly, many in the legal fraternity claim that if the parties believe in the constitutional supremacy they cannot grumble about the court ruling that calls for timely promulgation of the constitution. “There is no ground to criticise the court for not allowing them to extend the CA indefinitely”, lawyers argue. Chairman of the Nepal Bar Association Prem Bahadur Khadka maintained that if the parties believed in constitutional supremacy they should abide by the court's decision. “If the parties have accepted the court decision on CA extension, they should abide by it and not panic for the refusal to overturn the ruling,” Khadka said. Constitution lawyer Bhimarjun Acharya said both the legislature and the government tried to intimidate the court by forwarding review applications through the Speaker and the Prime Minister.

Foreign Relations

Relations with India

Nepal-India Agree to Reinstate the Highest-Level Joint Commission: Nepal and India, after a decade-long hiatus, have agreed to hold a meeting of the Joint Commission in early March, 2012. It is the meeting of highest-level bilateral mechanism formed in February 1991, during the Nepal visit of the then Indian Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar, and the first meeting of which was held in Delhi in the year of 1991 itself. The purpose of forming such a high-level task force was to preparing a programme of cooperation between the two countries.

It is reported that the Indian side made separate requests to the Prime Minister's Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs last week about convening the meeting in mid-February. Citing inadequacy of preparations, Nepal had proposed that the meet be deferred by one month. It is said that the meeting is expected to review the entire gamut of bilateral relations and also pave the way for the visit of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Nepal in near future. Also, the meeting is expected to discuss the status of bilateral issues of economic cooperation, trade, transit, industries, water resources and any other concern of mutual interest. More so, the committee is expected to finalise the terms of reference of the proposed Eminent Persons' Group to look into the totality of India-Nepal relations, seek a modality of working on a new Nepal-India Peace and Friendship Treaty, and finalise and sign the boundary maps, among others issues.

Relations with China

China is 'Positive' about Wen’s Nepal Visit: It is said that the Chinese side has expressed its willingness to convene the stalled visit of Premier Wen Jiabao to Kathmandu in near future. The message was conveyed to the visiting Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Bijaya Kumar Gachhadar who has returned back from his five-day visit to Beijing on December 30, 2011. In fact, Home Minister Gachhadar was in Beijing to lay the groundwork of Wen's visit which was postponed in early December.

The Home Minister held talks with State Councillor and Minister for Public Security Meng Jianzhu. On the prospect of the visit, Zhou responded positively and said it was delayed due to China's own internal reasons. In the meeting with Meng, the two sides reviewed the works of the security apparatus in their collaborative efforts to maintain security and stability in the border region and to take necessary measures against crimes of cross-border nature, and also agreed to further strengthen mutual cooperation and exchange to that end. Following the talks, the two leaders also signed Minutes of Talks between the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government of Nepal and Ministry of Public Security of the People's Republic of China, in which the two sides agreed to promote mutual visits and exchanges between the law enforcement agencies as well as to enhance cooperation in preventing and combating trans-national crimes of various natures. He also visited the Ministry of National Defence of China, where he met with State Councillor and Minister of Defence Liang Guanglie. It is said that the two defence ministers exchanged views on various aspects of defence cooperation and exchange during the meeting.

By Uddhab Pyakurel