Home >> South Asia >> Nepal & Bhutan

     Email   Print 

Nepal in Tug O' War over Consensus Politics

Prakash Bom - 2/23/2009

Of course, the consensus politics cannot overrule the authority of electoral process in multiparty Democracy, particularly electing leaders and representatives, and nominating political appointees in all three branches of government – legislative, executive and judiciary. However, consensus politics can play significant role in decision making process predominantly between governing political party and oppositions under certain historical circumstances, for example in Nepal's volatile peace process and in drafting Nepal's new constitution.

However, an attempt to seek consensus for appointing political party leaders within a political party organization and the representatives of the Parliament is nothing but the perversion of consensus politics due to the lack of confidence in the electoral democratic process. The consensus politics is an intermittent means but an end to the regular electoral processes of the multiparty Democracy.

For instance, the scenarios of ongoing UML national convention that is unnecessarily engaged in for consensus politics to appoint its chairperson and general secretary from among its prominent leaders – MK Nepal, KP Oli and Jhala Nath Khanal. It is for sure that those leaders who have lack of confidence in direct election for appointment cannot obviously lead the party with their outdated politics of consensus. Similarly, if UML fail to adopt direct election to process party leadership appointment it cannot sow the seed to lead the multiparty electoral Democracy for rest of other political parties to follow the trend.

On the contrary, as per the report titled "Nepal's Faltering Peace Process" of the International Crises Group based in Brussels that for advancing peace process the rebuilding of the consensus between main opposition party Nepali Congress and governing Maoist party is indispensable.

According to the report that despite the cease-fire future peace in the country is under threat from widespread impunity, insecurity and a breakdown in a consensus between the governing Maoists and the opposition Nepali Congress. The consensus therefore between governing Maoists and opposition Nepali Congress for peace is indispensable for country to move forward with the democratic processes such as drafting a new constitution.

If the consensus politics fails between governing Maoists and the opposition Nepali Congress for establishing permanent peace and Democracy as the cornerstone for creating a new Nepal the option such as regular electoral process to settle such issues will obviously drag the nation into conflicts. As a result, the peace process will collapse and the democratic processes might turn into civil war.

In this context, the consensus politics is essential. Therefore, the International Crises Group has called upon international community to immediately recognize the fragile stability in Nepal and put pressure on both governing Maoists and the opposition Nepali Congress to prevent a collapse of peace process.

In one of the evidences such as famous Maina Sunwar's case that High Commissioner of Human Rights in Nepal is still seeking justice is due to this lack of consensus that both governing Maoists and the opposition Nepali Congress are responsible to pave the road for justice. If the justice fails but impunity and insecurity continue then both governing Maoists and the opposition Nepali Congress party will be accountable to the collapse of peace process due to the lack of acknowledgement for consensus politics to sustain permanent peace and security. In this regard, none of the military – Nepal Army or PLA has aptitude for inspiring consensus politics for governing Maoists or the opposition Nepali Congress.

Nonetheless, the consensus based politics must not lead the regular multiparty electoral democratic processes such as appointing leadership of certain political party or the representatives of legislative, executive and judiciary bodies of the government. Therefore, UML national convention cadres must elect their leaders by initiating direct election procedures. For this reason the consensus politics must not be perverted for the sake of the prominent party leaders who have lost their confidence in the multiparty democratic electoral process.

Mr. Jhala Nath Khanal is the leader of UML who is people's elected representative of the Constituent Assembly. Both MK Nepal and KP Oli lost people's trust and thereafter both of them have lost their confidence in direct election procedure of the Democracy. Politically, both of them are more inclined to Nepali Congress party than Maoists.

However, Mr. Khanal has different inclination and if he is elected the coalition between Maoists and UML in the current government might continue. In addition to it, it is crucial that Maoists stay in the government largely for peace. If Mr. Khanal is elected to lead UML then his prime responsibility ought to reach both governing Maoists and the opposition Nepali Congress leaderships for consensus politics to sustain permanent peace and drafting of a new constitution of Nepal.

It is only elected leaderships of political parties and people's elected representatives have credentials in Democracy for consensus politics. The bygone prominent status quo political leaders who contradict their own tongue with their thought and fail to secure people's vote might seek consensus politics for their own glory but cannot sustain peace and lead the multiparty electoral Democracy for establishing institutions of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. Let people elected leaders lead Nepal with the consensus politics for permanent peace and Democracy.