UML leaders still suspect that the reformed parliamentary system could invite political instability. They have suggested directly elected prime minister as head of executive and parliament-elected president as an alternative to NC’s proposal.

“On federalism and judiciary we (NC and UML) share similar position. We might also compromise on forms of government in course of negotiation, but reformed parliamentary system will not do. It will only promote political instability,” said UML Secretary Pradeep Gyawali.

Both ruling NC and UML leaders have made an understanding to go for seven-province model federalism, adopt bicameral parliament, three-tier government, and mandate the Constitutional Council to appoint Supreme Court chief justice and the Judicial Council to appoint the remaining justices.

UML hopes that timely negotiation among the parties would ease the constitution promulgation process. “But the constitution drafting process will be more complicated if the parties come up with their proposal and be willing to compromise on it,” said Gyawali.

UML top leaders involved in negotiation have expressed their readiness to adopt reformed parliamentary system at the cost of promulgating the new constitution by January 22 deadline.

NC, UML and UCPN (Maoist) have differences over key issues of constitution writing, mainly forms of government and federalism. NC and UML share similar views on federalism and judiciary system, but the two parties are at odds over forms of government.

  Meanwhile, UCPN (Maoist), has proposed for a directly elected president as head of the government. The party has also insisted that all disputed issues must be settled through consensus, against the NC’s and UML’s position of putting the issues to vote if consensus is elusive.