The political class now faces its final challenge
For over six decades, Nepal's democratic, left and ethnic movements have waited for this day — when a popularly elected and representative Constituent Assembly would usher in a new social contract for its diverse peoples. But the country's date with history on Sunday, when the term of the CA expires with the possibility of extension ruled out, could swing either way. At midnight, true to Nepal's political tradition, major forces could strike a last minute deal and promulgate a federal democratic republican statute. Equally, the country could be staring at a political and constitutional crisis with the CA dissolved, without a constitution having been written. Not only would this be a betrayal of the long political struggles where thousands have lost their lives, it could well push the country into years of instability and multiple ethnic conflicts.
The uncertainty comes from a fundamental political divide about the nature of federalism, and what should be incorporated in the final constitutional text. While the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), Madhesi parties, and Janjati (ethnic) MPs across party lines stand on one end of the spectrum, the Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) represent the other pole.
The latter two forces are in favour of promulgating the constitution, while postponing the issue of state restructuring. The federal model, they argue, can be determined by the transformed legislative-parliament which will continue to exist if the constitution is done. The Maoist-Madhesi-Janjati combine has rejected this. Instead, they seek a constitution with specific agreements on the names, numbers and territorial boundaries of the new federal structure. They have demanded a firm commitment that the 14 state model, prepared by the CA committee on state restructuring, or the 10 state model, recommended by the State Restructuring Commission, should be clearly mentioned as the basis for federal demarcation. Both these models have two provinces in the Tarai plains, and demarcate boundaries in a way where ethnic communities will have a demographic advantage in several hill provinces. NC and UML have termed it ‘ethnic federalism', and said it would be unacceptable.
Many argue, logically, that it would make sense to preserve the achievements and work of the CA by framing a constitution and leave contentious issues for later. But the trust deficit is so deep that marginalised communities do not have faith in assurances. A Madhesi Minister told The Hindu, “There is already an in-principle commitment to federalism in the interim constitution. The entire rationale of the CA was to restructure the state. Both the 10 and 14 state models are products of constitutional mechanisms. If we can't get federalism now, the elites will conspire and stall it forever.”
All sides are also under pressure from their respective base. Maoist chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda' has already been warned by his more radical party colleagues that if he gives up on identity-based federalism, they would split away. The Madhesi street is radical, and the parties know that if they compromise, their own political survival will be at stake. The NC and UML have their own constituencies, predominantly hill upper castes who seek to resist federalism at all costs.
If Nepal is to have a constitution by Sunday night, the real challenge is in bridging this trust deficit and balancing these multiple constituencies. Madhesi and ethnic politicians will have to understand that in the remaining one day, they cannot possibly get a full-fledged federal structure. They could instead negotiate hard on principles and guarantees that the transformed parliament will indeed deliver federalism within a specified time-frame, and the next elections would be held both for the national and provincial legislatures. At the same time, Nepal's two older parties must wake up to the new political dynamic and movements. The aspirations of excluded communities cannot be brushed aside; identity has to be recognised as a key element of federal restructuring and the recommendations of legitimate constitutional bodies on federalism cannot be discarded. If they do not relent, and the CA collapses without a constitution, it will lead to the irreversible radicalisation of Madhesi and ethnic politics.
Nepal's political class, which has shown great maturity in transforming the country from monarchy to republic, war to peace, and from a Hindu kingdom to secular state, now faces its final challenge: summoning all the statesmanship at its command in order to have a new federal, democratic republican constitution on May 27.




Let me address all the conflicting mentality. Right from Ancient
times, Brahmins and Chetteri's have been into education as a part of
their profession, therefore they were in all higher and political
posts. Which is bound to change in near future though, because of the past/recent past where all ethnic groups are indulged in good and higher education the scenario will change. Please don't mistake the procedure of reaching the height is based on division on country based on ethnicity, rather is should be entirely based of potential of any indivisual be it Woman/man/disabled/any ethnic group. The core criteria should be based on potential of justifying any posts be it MP or Minister. This whole desperation of division of country based on ethnic group will only bring conflict in country and degrade social-Harmony, that Nepal is Known for all round the globe. "IF SOMEONE DOESN'T HOW TO FISH, DOESN'T MEAN GIVE FISH FOR FREE AND TAG THEM OF 'FISHERMAN', RATHER TEACH THEM HOW TO FISH! "
Why haven't the promoters to ethnic based federalism approached Bahuns and Chettris to support their movement? If they are really far-sighted and bend on providing justice to all, they should also seek support of Bahuns and Chettris in the movement. So far, all ethnic groups have done is fan hatred and made their struggle more radical. This is not the way to go. It's hard to see Nepal prosper if they continue to go down that line.
Now any one in Nepal can preach. This analysis itself lacks in good understanding of Nepal's situation. Here the issue is NOT federalism. Everyone accepts it as an enabling mechanism to bring politics and development closer to the people. What is fiercely debated is "ethnic federation." Could someone tell, why Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madya Pradesh, Chhatttisgad, Arunanchal etc. has no ethnic names? Nepal is an ancient country of minorities-each minority having its own distinct cultural identity. It holds a history of more than two thousand years. According to the treatise of Kautilya, Maghad Desh used to import wool form Nepal. It has been ruled by Gopal, Kirat, Licchavi, Malla and Shah-Rana dynasties-each dynasty having . It is the country in South Asia which resisted both the expansion of the Chinese and British empires in 17th and 18h centuries. In 1704 Italian missionaries visiting Kathmandu wrote: the king had appointed a Muslim to look after the foreign affairs.
Democratic Constitution is based on equal value and equal dignity of every citizen, therefore, any clause that violates the dignity and value of the individual or prevents him/her from participating freely in the democratic process should not be included in the new Constitution whether it is single ethnic identity-based or multi-ethnic identity-based federalism. Recent unpleasant incidents have amply demonstrated how weak has our social fabric and bondage become. Hence the single ethnic identity-based or multi-ethnic identity-based federal constitution can only be accepted if it does not create division among the Nepalese people, respects the rule of law, fundamental rights and procedures that ensure individual freedoms and guarantee the individual's participation in the political process.
Brahman and chhetri (the upper class Hindu castes) constitute about 30% of total population, who have almost exclusively ruled over lower caste Hindus and non-Hindu ethnic groups which constitute 70% of total population of Nepal, for about 250 years. Things are changing now. Socio-economic awareness among the 70% mass is developing fast and may reach a critical level soon to tilt the traditional balance of power. The current event look like an early symptom of the rising power of the low caste Hindus and a number of non-Hindu ethnic groups. Nepal, a state of traditional Hindu Kingdom is on its way to transform, albeit slowly, into a state of federal democratic republic like many other nations of the world including India.
Dividing a country based in ethnic lines is a solution for long-term
chaos. That is the primary reason why civil society, and congress/UML
did not want to go with the Maoist's proposal. Your article is not
very informed. This constituent assembly, with Maoists in the
majority, was created 4 years ago. The term was 2 years. They haven't
been able to do anything for 4 years and now want to create a crisis
in the last moment and push through an plan that nobody has even had a
chance to review. The public is not in any mood for this. Why does a
small country like Nepal need 600 people in this constituent assembly
if they were not able to do the one thing they were supposed to do in
4 years. The best thing now would be re-election to get contemporary
public opinion.
Please Email the Editor