PM race shouldn't encroach on CA agenda'

KATHMANDU, July 27: Heads of Constituent Assembly (CA) committees and a constitutional expert have seriously objected to the growing trend of dealing with critical issues directly related to constitution making as bargaining chips in the course of government formation.

They urged party leaders not to encroach on the CA´s jurisdiction by reaching any agreement among the political parties on issues that fall under the purview of the assembly.


They said the prime minister´s post should not be bargained over with provisions to be incorporated in the new constitution nor should there be any connection between government formation and the statute-drafting process.

The Madhes-based political parties, which have become a key factor in the formation of the new government especially after the third largest party CPN-UML decided to stand neutral, have set some conditions for supporting government formation.

UCPN (Maoist) and Nepali Congress (NC) candidates have held several rounds of separate talks with Madhes-based and other smaller parties to woo them with promises of addressing voters´ concerns.

The Madhes-based parties have said they would vote for whichever candidates is ready to guarantee an autonomous Madhes Province with the right to self-determination, among other things.

"Issues like forming an autonomous Madhes state and pluralism, among others, that are reportedly being dealt with as bargaining chips in the course of government formation shouldn´t be in the agenda for power sharing. These are purely issues to be decided by the CA," Nilamber Acharya, chairman of the Constitutional Committee of the CA, told myrepublica.com.

He said this growing trend is itself a worrying factor and it´s not just a particular political party or a specific case.

"The approach itself is wrong. Both the sides -- the major political parties that claim they would address the smaller parties´ concerns if they can bag the prime ministerial post and the groups that put forth the issues to be finalized by the CA as conditions for their support -- are wrong," he said.

Acharya was of the view that such bargaining can set a very bad precedent.

Lokendra Bista Magar, chairman of the CA Committee on State Restructuring, termed such dealings uncalled for and inappropriate. He said such activities can neither be constitutionally acceptable nor will they have any political legitimacy.

"Dealing with issues that fall under the purview of the CA Committee on State Restructuring as bargaining chips is unfortunate," he said.

Following dispute over the report prepared by the CA thematic committee, major political parties recently agreed to form a high-level state restructuring commission with an understanding that its report will be endorsed as final by the CA.

Also, noted constitutional expert Purnaman Shakya said the political parties cannot engage in any give and take over any of the agenda reserved for the constitution-making process. "The CA can challenge any decision that encroaches on its jurisdiction and the people can reject any closed-door deal signed without their consent," Shakya said.

Source: http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=21493