Nepal debates on form of government
The peace process in Nepal has been stuck at a point where the political parties and pundits have not been able to decide which governing system should be country adopt. The constitution making process has come to a complete halt due to opposing supposition on form of government.
The ruling UCPN proposes a directly elected powerful president and parliament-elected ceremonial prime minister while opposition Nepali Congress says parliament-elected powerful prime minister and state-parliament-elected ceremonial president. The third largest party CPN UML proposes for people-elected powerful prime minister and state-parliament-elected ceremonial president.
The debate on form of government is not so intensive among political parties since they currently are busy in bargain sale on how to dismantle the Maoist military. The ruling UCPN seems to be bargaining on powerful president threatening that the peace process would not go ahead unless this demand is accepted.
The debate of form of government has recently been shifted to media. Two bigger media houses run against each other on what form of government should Nepal has. Kantipur- the oldest and most popular daily advocates for powerful president while its splinter Nagarik advocates for English parliamentary system. Kantipur, where major investment is from left-aligned NRN founder Upendra Mahato, advocates the lessons that Nepal learnt from failure of parliamentary system in the last several decades give way for the country to shift to a new system. While Nagarik presents instances from US where President Obama has not been able to implement his plans due to his party being in minority at the parliament.
This is interesting debate. The onus for determining the form of government is on political parties who have received mandate from people. However, the debates are more intensive outside the parliament. The parties are silent.
Both the systems have good and bad aspects. Whichever is accepted, it all depends on sincerity of the parties to work for the good of the country and people. Considering the fact that parliamentary system failed in the last two decades, presidential system will obviously give stability to Nepal. The first election after the constitution is promulgates will bring dozens of parties in the parliament and this will invite the same pull and push game played in last two decades. However, this will not come out flawless and clean. The single president, if opposition party secures majority in parliament, will remain ineffective for his/her whole tenure.
The immediate solution of multi party parliament, of which current Constituent Assembly is an instance, and unstable government is people-elected powerful president. It does not matter, which form of government Nepal adopts once instability returns. It is evident that Nepalese constitutions remains open for amendments and 3/4th majority of communists in parliament will certain invoke for amendment of the constitution.
The history of Nepali Congress does not give any hope for Nepalese people to get a stable government. This is a big pushing factor for communist majority in Nepal. The failure of democratic party Nepali Congress to act in accordance to the democratic norms and values is the cause for failure of democracy in Nepal and rise of communists.
Read More
Sudheer Sharma in Kantipur
Ameet Dhakal in Nagarik
Binod Chaudhary in Kantipur
BBC debate
Krishna Khanal in Nagarik
Krishnajwala Devkota in Nayapatrika