 DAMBAR K SHRESTHA |
Are you satisfied with the constitution-writing process?
Dal Bahadur Thapa (Nepal Magar Association): The CA members should not have been given dual responsibility for parliament and the CA; that would have prevented them from indulging in power games. They don't act on their words. If they are not earnest, the new constitution won't be written and even if it is, it might not be of much use to the people.
Narsingh Chaudhary (Tharu Welfare Council): Political leaders seem confused themselves. They don't have confidence. Their misunderstandings, arrogance and power politics have disrupted the constitution-writing process. Indigenous people, Janajatis, women, Madhesis, Dalits and marginalised communities are worried.
Badre Prasad Alam (National People's Front): Political parties ignored the politics of consensus. The constitution can still be written only if consensus is reached. The decision of federalism was taken in haste. I don't think the new constitution will be in favour of oppressed and marginalised people. However, it is better to have a constitution than not to have one.
Basanta Shrestha (UCPN-Maoist): The party leadership failed to internalise the Jana Andolan and the people's mandate. It's now clear who wants to write the constitution and who doesn't, who is only interested in completing the formalities. It's not that we didn't have a constitution already, the question was what kind of constitution and for whom. A new consensus should be reached to complete the historic task. The public should keep prodding them from time to time.
What kind of federal state suits a place like Rupandehi, where there is a settlement of mixed communities?
Bharat Pokharel (UML): The federal state should not be based on ethnicities, as this might lead to ethnic conflict. The interim constitution talks about a democratic federal republic, not ethnic states. National sovereignty should come first in deciding federal units.
Hemraj Aryal (NC): We've never supported ethnic or creed-based federalism. Federalism should be based on equality.
Badre Prasad Alam: Federalism will ultimately break up this country no matter how the provinces are carved out.
How have you taken the One Madhes Prades demand?
Surya Saru Magar (Siddhartha Bus Entrepreneur Association): My humble request to political leaders is to save this country first. I am not in favour of an ethnic-based federal state. There are 1.6 million Magars living from east to west but the Maoists have restricted them to five districts by announcing the Magarat state. This is wrong, and this is the same for all ethnic groups. It's not rational.
Narsingh Chaudhary: Creating federal units is not like cutting a birthday cake. Giving certain communities special rights will curtail the rights of other communities. One Madhes Prades is unacceptable. Tarai Madhes should be autonomous but with multiple states.
Rupandehi has seen communal unrest in the past. What should be done to avoid it in the future?
Sanjay Kumar Gupta (Society for Justice of Conflict Victims): We should expel all discriminatory feelings from our minds. The distinction between Pahadis and Madhesis should be dissolved and there won't be any communal conflict.
Sun Maya Gurung (Pashupati Multiple Campus): It's the state's responsibility to cultivate tolerance in society. But political parties have turned a deaf ear to communal violence. The open border makes things worse here.
READ ALSO:
Constitution 2010, Nepali Times coverage of issues related to writing the new constitution
