JUN 26 -
For four years, the Constituent Assembly served as a constant reminder to the political class that there remained the unfinished task of transforming the state. It reminded them of their collective responsibility and obligations to the Nepali people. Now that the CA has expired, the attention of the political class is focused on the theatrical play it loves the most. It’s called, ‘topple the government’, and the tagline is ‘by any means necessary—constitutional or unconstitutional’. This play started before the CA expired, but back then, the political class was supposed to pay lip service to the task at hand. The toppling game had to be, for public ears at least, based on the promises of a new constitution.
With that thorn in the conscience gone, the play has found a new stage in Shital Niwas, the office and residence of President Ram Baran Yadav. Before May 27, to discuss forming and removing the government at the President’s parlour would have been unthinkable. It’s the same Interim Constitution that sets the rules of the game, then as in now, but the constitutional arena has collapsed, and the resulting vacuum has sucked the actors into that house of ambitions.
The key actors in the play are the following: Mohan Baidya ‘Kiran’ from the Maoist party, Sushil Koirala and Sher Bahadur Deuba from the Nepali Congress, Jhalanath Khanal and Madhav Nepal from the CPN-UML. The Madhesi camp is represented by Upendra Yadav and Sharat Singh Bhandari. Together, this group forms the opposition. From the government’s side, key actors are, Baburam Bhattarai and Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ from the UCPN (Maoist), and Bijay Kumar Gachhedar from the Madhesi Morcha. Of course, there’s the President, who listens, and invites actors to speak as necessary. He currently occupies two roles—that of the director as well as an actor. This is the front stage. There are other players who operate in the backstage but they speak in a secret language that is understood by only the players and few in the audience. The media is also there, armed with a loud speaker, amplifying some voices and drowning out others. In its sp are time, it takes up the role of the critic and reviews the play.
Like everyone else, I’m one of those critics of this play. So far I give the play C for plot. The plot is an imitation, it repeats the elements of another play— successful, but the critics were divided on its constitutional merit—staged for deposing a prime minister in 2009. It’s a big problem for the actors in opposition. The same plot doesn’t succeed in two different historical contexts; the audience gets bored, or worse, agitated.
First, a recap. In Act One, all the actors agreed to accept PM Baburam Bhattarai as the prime minister if the Maoists agreed to complete the peace process, which they then interpreted as the Maoists giving up their army. The voices calling for PM Bhattarai to step down started after 45 days. Luckily for him, the handover of the Maoist army was completed with deep reservation from the rebel quarters. In Act Two, voices calling for the PM’s resignation grew louder, but, given the thorn that was the CA, the actors decided to let PM Bhattarai continue until the compromise on constitution was achieved. They put that in writing in the five-point agreement on May 4, which said PM Bhattarai would resign before the constitution was promulgated on or before May 27, and let an NC-led government conduct the election. But as May 27 neared, the actors, rather than discussing the constitution, became busy with ways to overthrow the government. The result: no constitution, no CA, no p arliament, no resignation.
With that, we enter Act Three. The opposition voices have now become a chorus: out with Bhattarai, in with a consensus government. But there’s a problem. No matter how loud the chorus gets, there’s no constitutional way to remove PM Bhattarai. He got to his position through a democratic and constitutional process in the parliament. If he doesn’t voluntarily resign, the only constitutional way of removing him is through another parliament. There’s no other way, and PM Bhattarai knows this. His advisor, Devendra Poudel, said on Sunday that the PM is not going to relinquish power before the elections are held. After that, the parliament will decide.
Act Three nears its end. Parliament is the only option left if you believe in constitutionalism. But not everyone believes in that. There is another option the opposition actors have in mind, and that is to use the President’s hand to compel the PM to resign, and if that fails, to sack him. Immediately after the CA expired, the opposition actors pleaded with the President to declare PM Bhattarai a caretaker prime minister. The President obliged. There was no need to do so. With the dissolution of the parliament and the call for fresh election, the prime minister was automatically a caretaker one. Besides, if there was (or is going to be) any doubt about the constitutionality of PM Bhattarai’s position, the Supreme Court was (is) the place to seek answers, not the ceremonial President’s office.
Since then, the opposition actors have been continually inciting the President to take actions against the PM. Their call, a consensus government, nobody can argue with. But their method, urging a ceremonial president to “take steps” against a constitutionally-elected prime minister, makes a mockery of constitutionalism. Ultimately, if consensus doesn’t materialise, and PM Bhattarai refuses to resign, the chorus will demand that the President sack the PM. Mohan Baidya did exactly that on Sunday. But if the President obeys the chorus, it would be an unconstitutional way to force the PM off the stage.
Source: http://www.ekantipur.com/2012/06/26/oped/invitation-to-a-deposing/356176/
0 comments:
Post a Comment