The Constitution Assembly (CA) was formed in 2008 for a period of two years. However, the
CA term was extended up to four years through four amendments to the Interim
Constitution.
Rabin Bogati
May 2012
Nepal updates as of May 2012.
The Constitution Assembly (CA) was formed in 2008 for a period of two years. However, the
CA term was extended up to four years through four amendments to the Interim
Constitution. Initially the term was extended for one year, then 3 months each twice and last
for a period of six month in Nov 2011. In November 2011, the Supreme Court ordered that
only six month can be extended for the last time till 27 May 2012. The court has also order
to go for other alternative if failed to deliver the constitution by 27 May 2012.
Since the constitution was due May 2012, the Political parties were working day and night to
bring consensus on the number of federal states and other contentious issues of the new
constitution. During constitution writing, the three major parties in mid May struck accord on
forms of governance and state restructuring; however, they were also committed to bring out
the constitution before May 27.
Strikes and closures
Many people’s organizations and different interest groups organized number of strikes,
closure and sit-in protest generated pressure for ethnic identity in formation of federal states
and undivided regional states. Government had series of agreements with different
organizations, some of these decisions classed with interest of other groups and situation
deteriorated due to number of closures and strikes. As a result, Government decided to
amend the Interim Constitution and extend the tenure of constitution Assembly for three
months beyond May 28. In November, the Supreme Court verdict had declared the sixmonth
extension as the final one, which had prompted the parties to seek consensus in a
bid to declare the constitution within 27 May. But inability of the parties to resolve thorny
issues had forced the government to seek yet another extension.
Supreme Court Order
The Supreme Court issued an interim order in the name of the government to withdraw its
proposal to extend the term of Constituent Assembly. The order issued by a single bench of
Chief Justice (CJ) was in response to writ petitions filed by a few lawyers. The decision of
the government to extend the term of the CA by three months was against the previous
verdict of the SC issued on November 25, 2011 and Articles 64 and 116 of the Interim
Constitution, said Chief Justice in his three-page interim order.
“The government proceedings to extend the CA term as if there was no verdict in the past
in this regard was against the final verdict of the court and the constitutional provision,” the
bench said. “The government’s act is against the constitutional principle of balance and
convenience,” the order said.
CA Dissolved and call for fresh election
The major parties failed to find common ground, mainly on state restructuring. In a clear
manifestation of deepening political crisis, the CA was dissolved at midnight 27 May
Sunday, and without a new constitution being promulgated. The 601 – member CA could
not even hold its farewell meeting scheduled for 11 am. The Maoist lead coalition
Government (who had 229 seats in CA) decided to hold fresh elections to yet another
Constituent Assembly on November 22, an hour before the current CA’s four-year term
expired.
After the parties failed to reach consensus on names, number and boundaries of the federal
units, Prime Minister after holding his party’s emergency standing committee meeting,
announced that fresh election to CA be hold on November 22.
Nepali Congress and UML parties wanted to carve out at least five federal units in Tarai
while Madesh-based parties stuck to only two federal units there, bringing four years of
effort to a naught. The development is likely to trigger legal and constitutional crisis in the
coming days as parties are sharply divided on the dealing with the crisis. Two major parties
– Nepali Congress and CPN UML (who had 223 seats 37% in dissolved CA) have rejected
the government’s unilateral decision to go for a fresh mandate.
The Finance Minister (Maoist) beg apology from the Nepali people for failure to adopt the
new constitution through the CA.
All efforts to forge consensus went down the drain and the historic CA collapsed shortly
before the midnight. Most disillusioned were the CA members, who became part of one of
the most inclusive parliament in the world, but were not allowed any responsibility when it
mattered most. The historic and most inclusive CA had 191 women members in 601 fullhouses.
There were representatives from 26 political parties in the CA in which only 11
parties had won 240 seats as first past the post election, 335 seats were proportionate
representations and 26 nominated.
Blame game began; the people who must take responsibility are the top leaders of the four
major political groups, who hijacked discussion about the constitution away from the CA.
The demise of current CA has not only weaken legitimacy of Maoist Chairman Mr Puspa
Kamal Dahal and Prime Minister Dr Baburam Bhattarai within the Maoist Party, it also
questioned qualities of leadership in Nepali Congress and UML.
Failure of the political parties all these years, not only just in areas of handling the peace
process and writing of a new constitution but also in the case of maintaining good
governance, has brought complicated problems to fore. Today, chances of ethnic/communal
discord have heightened and the society has been polarized. While the political parties
brace themselves for fresh elections on November 22, it should be stressed that they do
3
their best to check communal disharmony. The political leadership must seek ways to
address the issues in a way that will be acceptable to all the stakeholders.
The achievement of the 2006 movement will not die, but the political force should be
sensitive in carrying these values forward. Election is an opportunity, not a liability and
political parties must once again seek to test themselves in people’s court.
