The position paper received mixed reactions in the mainstream and social media. Not surprisingly, it irked the opposition which is calling it an arm-twisting strategy by the ruling coalition against them. The document was discussed briefly at the dialogue committee’s meeting on Tuesday following which Chairman of the committee Baburam Bhattarai abruptly called off the meeting stating that the document must be discussed at the highest political level for consensus.
Given their political calculations, the opposition was expected to find fault in the document, but there is no reason why they can’t treat it as a talking paper.
On the contentious issue of form of governance, the proposed document leaves a room for negotiation by acknowledging that Nepal’s parliamentary practice has bred political instability. This, weighted against the risks of authoritarianism or a paralysing standoff between directly elected executive and the legislature or the judiciary, experienced by many countries, opens up a unique opportunity of arriving at a model that best suits our own needs.
Similarly, the document proposes a separate constitutional bench within the apex court instead of a constitutional court to resolve disputes over jurisdiction between constitutional bodies or those related to interpretations of the constitution. The parties must now rationally decide if a separate bench is sufficient to deal with the volume of cases involving the provinces, union government and the constitutional bodies, and not make it a matter of contention.
As expected, the trickiest part is related to federalism. But there is room for debate here as well. To begin with, the Madhesi parties could argue in favour of retaining some parts of Jhapa, Morang and Sunsari in the proposed Tarai (Janakpur) province, unless the ruling parties can give proper justification or the rationale behind lumping huge swathes of the plains with the proposed hill province of Kosi. Similar arguments could be made on the possibility of retaining the lower belt of Tharu dominated Kailali and Kanchanpur with the proposed Lumbini province. Beyond political and economic calculations, the Tarai’s regional autonomy from the hill administration may help to heal its historical grudge against Kathmandu mending the ruptured social fabric between the Pahades and the Madhesis living in the region.