MIN RATNA BAJRACHARYA

The political parties have already reached an understanding on the structure and content of the new constitution. The 12-point understanding of the past and the interim constitution 2007 have helped build a template for the new constitution too. So it's wrong to say that we don't have a framework.

Governance structure, justice system and election process are secondary issues. If the question of federalism is settled, rest will fall in place. During the first two years communal forces, anti-nationalists and foreign interference almost led the country to the path of disintegration. So the delay in constitution-making had its material reasons. As far as the legality of the extension is concerned, I can say that the Article 65 which deals with the CA's term is amendable like other clauses.

The problem today is the political validity of the CA and not constitutional.The parties should provide a sufficient basis to win this validity. There have been talks about going to fresh polls at this moment. But would that solve anything? Is it an economically feasible option for a poor country like ours? Would not the same people be re-elected after the new polls too? And then people have also been talking about getting a panel of experts to draft the constitution. But our experience of the 1990 statute has already proved that this is a wrong idea. The best option is to continue with the present CA.

Bhimarjun Acharya in Nepal, 22 May

Those who are arguing for the extension of the CA despite its incompetence and unconstitutional proceedings are only trying to drive the country towards failure.

The argument that constitution could not be written due to time, resources, ideological differences or other constraints is just a farce. The fact is that the CA's term was made to expire deliberately by people who are benefitting by selling the name of constitution. For the first seven months, CA meetings could not take place because the house was brought to a halt. A high level task force had been set up to settle contentious issues in the constitution. And it had successfully resolved 130 out of 230 contentious issues. If only this task force was allowed to work for few more weeks, all disputes could have been settled. But for reasons unknown, the task force was dissolved abruptly. If it had not been dissolved, most likely we would have had a constitution by now.

The only option now is to write the constitution. The parties and leaders should face the consequences if they can't write the constitution. Why should people take any responsibility for this? The unconstitutional assembly cannot be continued after 28 May. A committee can be formed from among the parties representing in the CA which can form a draft constitution with the help of experts. After that, fresh polls should be conducted. The elected body can then amend the draft and move forward. This is the only legitimate and viable option.

Read also:
Lumpen proletariat