Amid a host of concerns registered by people during the two-day public consultation on the constitution draft, four issues took the centre stage: demarcation, forms of government, secularism and citizenship.
These contentious issues are the ones which led to the dissolution of the first Constituent Assembly without delivering the constitution in its four-year tenure.
After the second CA missed its January deadline to promulgate the constitution, four major parties signed a 16-point agreement on June 8, breaking the deadlock, to expedite statute drafting. The parties agreed on eight federal states, to be carved out and named after constitution promulgation, which has drawn criticism from fringe parties and the civil society.
The opponents argued that it was a ploy to drop the issue of federalism ultimately. The Supreme Court also issued an interim order, on a writ petition, to delineate the federal units before statute promulgation.
A significant number of participants also expressed their views against the provision of secularism and demanded ‘religious freedom’ instead.
Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, a pro-monarch party with 25 seats in the CA, has been openly advocating Hinduism as the state religion. The party has boycotted public consultation and mobilised cadres to disrupt the process.
“It’s good that people came up with diverse opinions,” said Lok Raj Baral, a political scientist. “The real task is to turn diversity into harmony, bringing those outside the process on board the foremost.”
According to Baral, the contentious issues need clarity. He argued that public views collected in such a short span of time would ultimately lead to an improved draft but they are not everything. “Gauging public opinion is important but what matters most is what helps the country move forward,” he said.
CA member Gagan Thapa said he got to listen to 400 people in two days. “Many of them submitted suggestions in writing,” he said.
A majority of speakers suggested allowing either parent to pass on citizenship to their children. Almost every woman unfailingly supported citizenship through mother while a significant number of males stood for gender equality in its distribution.
“Males and females should be treated on an equal footing. Women have every right to enjoy what males do,” said Binod Prasad Bhattarai. Participants argued that making the nationality proof of both the parents mandatory would lead to statelessness of children of single mothers.
Opinion collection faced obstruction by cadres of RPP-Nepal and CPN-Maoist at all centres in the Capital. The Maoist party that had boycotted the CA polls wants a roundtable conference to settle disputed issues.
Some participants wanted a directly elected prime minister, while others suggested educational qualification for politicians. They said that the Westminster system had failed in the country so there should be directly elected President or PM as the head of government. They argued that screening lawmaker candidates would end instability in government and horse-trading in Parliament.
They wanted the executive head to have at a minimum Master’s degree while one should not be allowed to run in parliamentary election without a bachelor’s degree.
There were others who criticised the consultation process. Bina Lohani said she came to participate as a responsible citizen, even if she knew the process was merely a formality. “I got the draft just one day before, and it’s hard for me to understand the vague terms and jargons in it,” she said.
Secularism was drowned in the clamour for religious freedom. Participants demanded restoration of Nepal as a Hindu state and religious freedom. They said secularism was an “imposed” agenda. “Over 80 percent people in the country follow Hinduism,” said Surya Prasad Giri. “Secularism has ended the identity of Nepalis.” However, the speakers were mostly non-Janajatis.
No comments:
Post a Comment