At India’s door

 Article 138 of Interim Constitution upholds those commitments in a way. “Accepting the aspirations of indigenous ethnic groups and the people of the backward and other regions, and people of Madhesh, for autonomous provinces,” says the Article, “Nepal shall be a Federal Democratic Republic.” But it also accords power to decide federal structure to the CA. “The Constituent Assembly shall determine the number, boundary, names and structures of the autonomous provinces and the distribution of powers and resources, while maintaining the sovereignty, unity and integrity of Nepal… The final decision relating to the structure of state and federal system shall be made by Constituent Assembly.”

Mahabir Paudyal

Similar agreements have been made with Tamangs, Tharus, Limbus, campaigners of undivided Far-west and Brahmin/Chhetri and Dashnami community, each contradicting the provision of the other.

None of the agreements, nor Article 138, says anything about number, boundaries and names of the federal provinces. They accept CA’s supremacy and accord it power to settle federalism issue and put sovereignty, national unity and territorial integrity above all else. All that the agreements say is that provinces shall be autonomous, which is no statement because every province in federal system is autonomous by nature. Agreements are silent about which districts should be incorporated into which provinces—the major bone of contention among the parties.

Invoking one agreement will drag other into a mess. For example, you cannot address Limbus’ demand for Limbuwan (with Jhapa, Morang and Sunsari) and Madheshis’ call for incorporating them into Madhesh province at the same time. Nor can you agree to Tharuhat province without violating agreement made with undivided Far-west advocates. Implement one agreement and it will open a can of worms.

“Political agreements are not binding in constitution making,” notes constitutional expert, Bipin Adhikari. “Save for the process, even CA is not obliged to follow Interim Constitution, let alone past agreements. It can chart its course according to its mandate.”

On hindsight, all these agreements were meant to diffuse one after another violent protest escalating across the country in the name of identity. To escape the trap the government of the day would form talks team and had the agitating parties sign agreements to maintain peace, at least for time being. The biggest challenge in 2007 was to conduct Constituent Assembly election (already twice postponed) in 2008. It had become a competence issue for late Girija Prasad Koirala. He had signed the deal with Madheshi forces for the same purpose. He is said to have expressed ignorance about federalism even after he had agreed to it.

Bipin Adhikari
http://myrepublica.com/opinion/story/27789/at-india-s-door.html
http://myrepublica.com/opinion/story/27789/at-india-s-door.html
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Related Posts