Clear the air on constitutional amendment

Nepal's political landscape is abuzz with calls for constitutional amendments, a process that has become mired in controversy and party disputes. The incumbent government established a panel, chaired by Prime Minister Balendra Shah's political advisor Asim Shah, to explore potential changes to the national charter. Initially, this panel included representatives from most federal parliamentary parties.

“

So did the CPN-UML, the third biggest party.

However, the process quickly fractured. The Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML, two of the largest parties, withdrew to develop their own amendment proposals. Later, four other parties, the Nepali Communist Party, the Loktantrik Samajbadi Party, the Janata Samajbadi Party, and the Rastriya Janamorcha, also disassociated themselves. They accused Shah's panel of aiming to rewrite the constitution rather than merely amend it, questioning its scope and the inclusion of the preamble and fundamental structure in the debate. These parties argued that the current government lacks the mandate for such a significant overhaul.

“

They accused Shah’s panel of seeking to rewrite the constitution rather than just amending it.

Instead, the dissenting parties urged the government to convene a parliamentary meeting to build national consensus. They stressed the need to clearly identify specific provisions requiring amendment and the rationale behind them. While acknowledging that an parliamentary initiative would have fostered greater ownership, the article notes that withdrawing after three months of deliberation appears unjustified. The parties' suspicion regarding the government's commitment to federalism and inclusion fuels their reluctance. However, the article suggests that walking away is not the solution; continued participation is crucial to prevent changes that could undermine achievements from years of deliberation in the Constituent Assembly. The Rastriya Swatantra Party's proposals to scrap provincial assemblies and depoliticize other government bodies have further alarmed federalism advocates, highlighting the deep-seated tensions surrounding the constitution's foundational principles, which emerged from a decade of insurgency and popular movements.

“

The parties are suspicious of the government’s commitment to core features of federalism and inclusion as it engages in the amendment process.