gototopgototop

Alliance for Social Dialogue

:: Nepal in Transition Monthly Updates
Monthly Updates

भुवन केसी/ तिलक पाठक

सत्तारुढ दल र प्रतिपक्षी दलहरुबीच विवाद हुँदा प्रिबजेट छलफलमा ढिला भयो । सत्तारुढ दल र प्रतिपक्षीबीच सहमति भएपछि भने संसदमा नीति तथा कार्यक्रम ल्याउने वातावरण बन्यो । यसअघिका मुख्य घोषणामा झै सरकारले नीति तथा कार्यक्रममा पनि संविधान निर्माणलाई प्राथमिकतामा राख्यो । सभासद्हरुले निर्वाचन क्षेत्रलाई पाँच करोड रुपैयाँ बजेट विनियोजन गर्नुपर्ने भन्दै दबाब जारी राखे । संविधानसभामा रहेका दलहरुले संविधान निर्माण प्रक्रियालाई सहज बनाउन संविधानसभा बाहिर रहेका नेकपा माओवादीलाई समेत समेट्ने प्रयास गरे । पार्टीको नवौं महाधिवेशनले गर्दा प्रमुख प्रतिपक्षी दल नेकपा एमालेमा तीव्र धुव्रीकरण भयो । धेरै समयदेखिको एमाओवादीको विवाद भने तत्कालका लागि साम्य जस्तै हुन पुग्यो ।

सर्वोच्च अदालतमा आठ जना स्थायी न्यायाधीश नियुक्तिका लागि न्यायपरिषद्ले गरेको सिफारिसलाई लामो विवाद र बहसपछि संसदीय सुनवाई विशेष समितिले अनुमोदन गर्यो । गम्भीर आरोपसहित न्यायाधीशहरुको सुनवाई हुनु तर तीमध्ये एक जनालाई पनि नरोक्नुले संसदीय सुनवाईको औचित्यमाथि प्रश्न उठ्यो । उता, संविधानसभा पहिले भन्दा संविधान निर्माण प्रकृयामा बढी केन्द्रीत भयो । अघिल्लो संविधानसभामा विभिन्न समितिले तयार पारेका सहमति र असहमतिका बुँदाबारे सभासद्हरुले संविधानसभामा छलफल गरे । तर, विभाजित मुद्दाहरुमा उनीहरु अघिल्लो संविधानसभाको भन्दा खासै फरक रुपमा प्रस्तुत भएनन् । पहिले झै राजनीतिक दलहरुको अडान अनुसार सभासदहरुले धारणा व्यक्त गर्दा स्वामित्व बढ्ने बाहेक थप उपलब्धी हुन सकेन । संविधानसभामा निर्वाचनबाट तेस्रो पार्टी भएको एकीकृत नेकपा माओवादीमा विवादका कारण भाँडभैलो सिर्जना भयो भने संविधानसभाको दोस्रो ठूलो दल नेकपा एमालेमा महाधिवेशनको सरगर्मी बढ्यो ।

नयाँ संविधान जारी गर्दा संविधानसभा अध्यक्ष र राष्ट्रपतिको भूमिकालाई लिएर सत्तारुढ दल नेपाली काँग्रेस र नेकपा एमलेबीच विवाद भयो । मुख्य राजनीतिक दलहरुबीचको विवादले संविधानसभाको संविधानसभा नियमावलीले अन्तिम रुप पाउने ढिला भयो । तैपनि संविधानसभा नियमावली पारित हुनु, संविधान निर्माणमा भूमिका निर्वाह गर्ने संविधानसभाका समितिहरुमा नेतृत्व चयन हुनु र अघिल्लो संविधानसभाले गरेका कामको स्वामित्व लिएर अघि दलहरु अघि बढनुले संविधान निर्माण हुनेमा आशा भने थपियो । तर, बैठक बस्न गणपुरक संख्या समेत नपुग्दा संसद समेत आलोचित भयो । उता, राजनीतिक सहमति जुटाएर २६ जना सभासद चयन गर्न पनि सरकार असफल भयो ।

Wednesday, 05 March 2014 12:25

No All-Party but Majority Government

Bhuwan KC/ Tilak Pathak 

Only about three months after the elections to the CA II, a majority government under Congress president Sushil Koirala was formed. Congress attempted to form an all-party government with the parties in the CA, but it was not successful and formed a majority government with UML and other parties. However, relations with UML showered right in the beginning with issues of power distribution. The dispute between Congress and UML regarding the Home Ministry portfolio led to delays in expansion of the Cabinet. A few issues related directly and indirectly to the drafting of the constitution were accomplished in the meantime. But these moved in very slow speed. The demand for election of the president raised by UCPN (M) and UML died down slowly with time. UCPN (M) which had been alleging institutional vote rigging in the CA elections and demanding a probe could not raise the issue effectively in the parliament as well.

Bhuwan KC/ Tilak Pathak

After the political parties had selected CA members under proportional representation and submitted their list to the Election Commission, a dispute arose on whether the chairperson of the Council of Ministers Khil Raj Regmi or the President Ram Baran Yadav should call the first sitting of the CA. after a long delay, the chairperson of the Council of Ministers called the meeting at the end. Though the major political parties tried to take ownership of the decisions taken by the first CA, the proposal did not get into the CA as there was no consensus among all the parties in the CA.

Bhuwan KC/Tilak Pathak
The parties which had claiming rigged elections finally agreed to sit in the Constituent Assembly after several attempts. Amidst extensive protests and dissatisfaction, the political parties were able to finalise the list of candidates for the proportional representation. At the same time, this also created internal rifts within the parties. In addition, a dispute arose about whether the prime minister or the President should call the meeting of the Constituent Assembly. Nepali Congress and UML could not agree in principle on a power-sharing deal according to the new mandate. In the name of consensus, the list of proportional candidates could not be finalised in time, which further postponed the CA meeting. without consensus among the parties and delay in CA meeting, new government could not be formed. In the absence of timely consensus among the parties to take the process forward, public excitement seen during the CA election began to wane.

Thursday, 05 December 2013 13:08

Second CA Election Concludes, Changes in Power

Bhuwan KC/Tilak Pathak

The second CA election concluded one and half years after the first CA was dissolved when it failed to draft a constitution. The elections this time went ahead despite extensive protests from the Vaidya-led CPN (M) and smaller 33-party alliance. However, there was few human loss compared to the previous election. After the election, the previously largest party UCPN (M) was limited to the third place, and the previously second largest party the NC became the largest party, while the previously third largest party UML succeeded in becoming the second largest in the new CA. However, after the defeat in the election, UCPN (M) and other parties demanded investigation into the election, raising questions about the election process. They also threatened to not submit the list of proportional candidates and not joining the CA.

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  5 
  •  6 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »
Page 1 of 6