Due to the dispute in implementation of past agreements between main political parties, the work of the parliament was obstructed completely. The agreements also created problems among the ruling coalition as well. Despite continuous discussion and dialogue on constitution-drafting, there was no sign of agreement on main disputed issues. Ruling UML and opposition parties UCPN (M), RPP and others got entangled in minor disputes. The state visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought new energy to Nepal-India relation. The Council of Ministers initiated the much-delayed process to appoint 26 Constituent Assembly members.

Parliament Obstructed Due to Problems in Implementing Agreements

After the budget was tabled in the parliament, opposition parties stressed on the implementation of the 4-point agreement between eight parties including the ruling Congress, UML, UCPN (M) last December. The agreement had then decided to form a committee composed of heads of main political parties to assist in the conclusion of the peace process and constitution-drafting.1 The third largest party in the Constituent Assembly after the elections, UCPN (M) wanted to form the committee with its chairperson Pushpa Kamal Dahal as its coordinator. However, Dahal claimed in public forums that it was not his objective to become the coordinator of such a mechanism.2 UCPN (M) had wanted to include Tarai-Madhes-focused parties as well. The Tarai-Madhes-focused parties who had been marginalised after the Constituent Assembly elections and smaller parties wanted to fulfil their roles in the committee because they had been expressing dissatisfaction at the discussions among the three parties and their agreements. The ruling Congress and UML were not in favour of forming the high-level political mechanism once they were in power. They kept refusing UCPN (M) proposal to form such a mechanism and for its chairperson.

The ruling parties wanted to discuss the constitutional issues through Political Dialogue and Consensus Committee of the Constituent Assembly rather than through a high-level mechanism. They argued the mechanism was not necessary as issues related to constitution-drafting discussed in the Committee. Congress and UCPN (M) leaders were not in favour of giving additional role to UCPN (M) chairperson Dahal. They were also aware that constitution-drafting would be outside the Constituent Assembly in such a political mechanism and they were opposed to formation of such a mechanism. Even if such a mechanism was formed, they did not want to give the leaders to UCPN (M) permanently but rather wanted a turn-by-turn leadership. They were taken aback after UCPN (M) wanted to take the leadership in a permanent manner. Congress at times appeared flexible towards formation of such a mechanism. Prime Minister Sushil Koirala was positive towards formation of such a mechanism after concluding that the constitution cannot promulgated in time if Dahal is not given any meaning role.4 However, UML took a strong stand against it. Then, UCPN (M)-led Federal Democratic Alliance gave a 24-hour ultimatum to the Congress and UML to implement the 4-point agreement.5 After the government did not address their demands, the opposition obstructed the parliament. Speaking in the Constituent Assembly, UCPN (M) chairperson Dahal said that they were forced to obstruct the parliament after the agreement was not implemented even after a long time.6 This disrupted the discussion on budget bill. The ruling coalition accused the opposition of throttling the public by obstructing the parliament. After the both sides stuck to their position, the obstructed parliament could not resume.