If efforts are on to abolish the present constitution, it will be suicide for the monarchy. The king's close aides know that, which is why they are inclined to continue with the current one. If it is abrogated, a new constitution will be needed to rule the country. But the people are not prepared to accept a new constitution created alone by the king. And there is a danger that a constitution prepared by the people may not include room for the monarchy.
As for Tulsi Giri's words on the constitution, they might have been his personal comment and they are not surprising. It is quite natural that a staunch supporter of the undemocratic, partyless Panchayat system vent his ire on a democratic constitution. What more can one expect of a person who indulges in politics under the blessings of the palace?
It would not be unusual for people to assume that whatever the second man in the government says is in line with the king's wishes. But if this is what Giri thinks about this constitution, he should not have accepted his present job and taken an oath to abide by the constitution. If the king wants to retain the present constitution, he should not let Giri continue in his present position.
One needs to realise that the constitution did not come about just because the king and the political parties backed it. It was possible only because the people were for it. It is for this very reason that the parties support the present constitution. Personally I believe this constitution has given the political parties more than what they had aspired.
I fail to understand what kind of new, inclusive constitution people are talking about. Has the present one excluded any community or class from any constitutional process? If intentions are good and clear, all the nation's goals can be achieved through the present constitution. I don't believe that a new constitution with whatever new provisions will be able to solve all the existing problems.
There should not be a caste or communal-based constitutional system created in the name of inclusion. That would create rifts between the Nepali people. Such a constitution would not favour Nepal's social stability and development.