Leaders now weighing the CA extension option

KATHMANDU, MAY 14 -

Two weeks ahead of the expiry of the “final deadline” of the Constituent Assembly, major parties are mulling a possible extension of the assembly as “the only way to pull the country back from the brink.”

CA term extension is one of three options the major parties are weighing in recent talks. And this comes in the face of the verdict the Supreme Court issued last November, which bars any such extension.

On Sunday, the Prime Minister’s Chief Political Advisor Devendra Poudel said the CA would get another extension after May 27. “The country will plunge into turmoil if the Constituent Assembly (CA) fails to deliver the constitution,” he said at a public programme in the Capital. “The term will be extended another time by addressing legal complications.”

The first option with the parties is to promulgate the new constitution within the deadline by referring ‘unresolved’ issues to the parliament that will continue after the CA completes its task. Agreement on the first draft and going for a brief extension to complete the procedural tasks is the second one.

The third option suggests extending the term for six months by declaring an emergency in the country.

A source claimed leaders from different parties have even approached the top brass of the judiciary, including Chief Justice Khilraj Regmi, informally to discuss the possibility of the CA extension. Regmi and the judiciary’s top brass have conveyed to the leaders that they are firm on the November 25 verdict. The officials have suggested party leaders bring out the first draft in the form of a bill of the new constitution so that the court gets space for a new interpretation if the process is challenged.

Leaders too have said the court has indicated that it remains firm on its verdict. “Judges have said that the best option is to promulgate the constitution within May 27 by incorporating issues that are agreed at the political level,” said a party negotiator.

“The unsettled issues could be the business of the parliament that will continue after the Constituent Assembly completes its task.”

CA Chairman Subas Nembang has also pitched for the same option during meetings with top leaders. Leaders can avert a looming crisis by promulgating a complete constitution that commits to federal states but would entrust with the parliament the task of settling unresolved issues, according to Nembang.

Those supporting this school of thought argue that since constitutions are always subject to amendments, complicated issues can be incorporated on that ground as well.

They have cited the various amendments made in the Interim Constitution of 2007, which incorporated provisions of federalism, republicanism and the positions of the president and vice president later on.

“Given the current situation, there will be a crisis in the country, whether or not a new constitution is in place within the remaining time,” a source quoted Nembang as telling party leaders. “If we can bring out the constitution within the time frame, parties can tackle forces that will challenge its legitimacy by enforcing a writ of the state as mandated by the new statute.”

While top leaders are yet to publicly express their wish to go for a term extension, UCPN (Maoist) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal and CPN-UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal have talked about the possibility of completing the first draft by May 27.

Maoist General Secretary Ram Bahadur Thapa on Saturday floated the idea of a six-month extension by declaring an emergency in the country.

On the agitation and the indefinite banda in the Far West, a non-Maoist leader said the top leaders’ indifference to the Far West agitation and their alleged support to the protest of Brahmins and Chhetris is a ploy.

“Leaders are deliberately ignoring these protests so that they can create a chaotic situation that would justify their move to declare an emergency,” said a UML leader. The leader argued that the court’s ruling does not prohibit a term extension by declaring an emergency, but “doing so would be fraudulent.”