When the Constituent Assembly (CA) elections were first held in 2007, it was presumed that a new constitution would be drafted within the next two years. Eight years later, the promulgation of a new statute continues to dominate the political discourse in Nepal.

CPN-Maoist’s agenda

There is no doubt that the Nepali Congress first proposed the agenda of Constituent Assembly during and after anti-Rana struggle of 1949. But it was given up by the Congress leadership in exchange of a parliamentary election held in 1958. After that, writing the constitution through elected representatives of the people was not pushed forward as a political agenda by the political parties for the next four decades. It was only after the erstwhile CPN (Maoist) revived the demand that the first CA election was held in 2007.Therefore, it would not be wrong to claim that the CPN (Maoist) was largely responsible for reestablishing the agenda of writing a constitution through a CA in Nepali politics.

But the first CA (2008-2012) in which the CPN (Maoist) emerged as the single largest party was dissolved without accomplishing the task of writing a new pro-people constitution. After that, the second CA election was held under a government of ex-bureaucrats headed by the sitting Supreme Court chief justice.

By then, the former CPN (Maoist) had already split into five groups. Among them, only UCPN (Maoist) took part in the second CA election while the other four parties boycotted it. The UCPN (Maoist) has completely abandoned the ideological, political and strategic line of the former Maoist party. It has turned into just another status-quoist party like the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Rastriya Prajantra Party. Thus, the UCPN (Maoist) no longer represents the Maoist party which waged and led the historic people’s revolution in the past (1996-2006) and emerged as the largest single party in the first CA election. Consequently, the current CA lacks the presence of the Maoist party in the real sense. And this is unfortunate. Apart from the ‘Maoist party’, many other small and big political parties had also boycotted the second CA election.

As any CA needs to represent all the forces present in society, only the former CA met this criterion. The current CA is thus incomplete. Therefore, the effort of the handful leaders from the three parties—Congress, UML, UCPN (Maoist)—to promulgate the constitution is an exercise in futility. Recent protests against the draft constitution also indicate that the majority of the Nepali people will definitely not take ownership of this process nor the constitution prepared by a few leaders.

Reasons for failure

Even so, like the swindlers working day and night to prepare new clothes for the emperor in the satirical tale ‘Emperor’s new clothes’, a handful of leaders continue to claim that the new constitution will be promulgated by the end of Bhadra. There are many reasons which indicate that they will not be able to declare the new constitution as planned.

First, the CPN-Maoist along with other parties and groups that boycotted the second CA election has taken to the streets and is protesting against the retrogressive draft statute. They demand that the current CA be dissolved. Second, some major parties within the CA are also ready to take joint action against the retrogressive draft and their joint committee has already declared a programme of protests. Of late, even CA members have begun to rotest. Third, the President has expressed concerns about the constitution becoming a document of dispute and disagreements instead of a document of consensus. Fourth, the CA members along with some leaders of the ‘major parties’ have expressed discontent with regards to the decision of the ‘supreme leaders’ and some of them have even protested publicly. Under these circumstances, it would be suicidal for the major parties to declare the new constitution.

However, if the major parties do not declare a constitution within the speculated date, they will be considered incompetent by the comprador, bureaucratic capitalists and feudal class, I/NGOs and their foreign masters. This may cause the parties to even lose their support. So, there is a chance that the three parties might still declare a new constitution at midnight. That is why the situation is still confusing.

If the retrogressive draft constitution is not withdrawn and if there is no effort to reach an agreement with all the dissenting parties and groups, there is now a real possibility that a new wave of protests will pave way for a new conflict. And if that happens, most of the people will hold the ‘supreme leadership’ and the policy of the ‘major’ parties and their accomplices responsible for this situation. The only good outcome of such a turn of events will be that the bad people will be exposed. The revolutionary forces might also take to the streets to against the retrogressive and reactionary forces.

The other option

The major parties hurriedly signed the retrogressive 16-point agreement to promulgate a regressive constitution for mainly two reasons. First, they thought that a mass movement cannot be launched and sustained in the rainy season. Second, as the devastating earthquake has caused great distress to various sections of the Nepali people, they would be safe from public anger. But the rains have stopped and the ongoing protests in various parts of the country and the unity among various disgruntled forces have proven their assumption wrong.

This CA has already been exposed and it is clear that it will neither promulgate a pro-people nor progressive constitution. So, it has become necessary to consider the other option: dissolution of the CA and the formation of an all party convention which should be authorised to draft and promulgate a pro-people constitution while simultaneously dissolving the present anti-people government and forming a new national unity government.

Gajurel is Vice-chairperson of the CPN-Maoist party