Tuesday , September 25 2018
Home / Political News / Editorial / National Government?

National Government?

Yes. Comrade Prachanda is right. The constitution is threatened if a national government is not formed. He is a politician, though. He wants the national government to be formed under his tutelage. Yes. Comrade K.P. Oli is right as well. If a national government does emerged from the legislature, he will resign (since the formation makes sure that he will have lost his majority in the house). He too is wrong when he says that he will not resign is the national government is not formed (despite his loss of majority ion parliament). Yes. Sher Bahadur Deuba is right when he says that democracy needs an opposition bench in parliament. He is wrong in insisting that he will remain in the opposition if a national government is formed since such a government will not be a national government. These are clear as crystal to the lay person. So, why such inconsequential statements from our new Rajas? The answer, as clear to us by now, is that such statements are jousting utterances to retain the political initiative. Oli successfully dangles the Maoist-Center’s support in government to get his budget through. The Maoists would want to lead government after the budget is through. The Nepali Congress as tried previously would want the Maoists to back out of government and place Deuba in the government’s seat. This has been happening almost every budget session for the past two decades as we have been pointing out. The musical chair for government is a perpetual exercise that, Constitution or not, has ruined Nepali democracy and constitutionalism. This has been our contention throughout.
Analysts and critiques of this obsession with government rightly point out this error in Nepali politics. They, however, in their exclusionary approach that is the most harmful to our democracy, forget the fact that what these parties are calling national government cannot be the national government they talk of unless the exclusion is corrected. The Terai parties are virtually out of the political process. The ethnic organizations have condemned the constitution. The monarchists and Hinduists all disagree that the constitution takes their opinion seriously. And those that do not want federalism are increasing the tempo of their opposition. Clearly the damage to the constitution has already been done and what the exclusion is doing is widening the schisms in Nepali politics and increasing the tempo of opposition to the constitution. The whole purpose of the national government that is being flouted is thus self-defeating. On our part, we say that the defeat of constitutionalism is what is at fault and a national government would be the need in order to correct the flaw. The monopoly of centralized political leadership in all the major parties is so designed as to retain the political initiative that is evinced in the flawed constitution unless this is broken and the real opinions on the constitution spreads over from the shackled legislature to the free streets, n o national government of worth can be in the making. What ever the government to preserve e the current constitution, it will be flawed. The correction has to be in the direction of restoring constitutionalism in the country and so we must go back to the beginning.

Check Also

Nepal: Partying

The Nepali population has found the decade expensive. Our leaders have long run out of …