After going through writings on the problematic clauses in the draft constitution of Nepal, the document reads like a ‘comedy of errors’. After the massive April earthquake that ravaged the country, the political class was expected to resolve the contentious issues haunting the nation since the past eight years. But as feared, the new draft constitution has failed to provide a cure to the ills of Nepali society and  institutionalise the gains of the  2006 Jana Aandolan and the 2007 Madhes Movement. Instead, it has been criticised for being more regressive than the 2007 Interim Constitution and the preliminary draft agreed upon by the first Constituent Assembly (2008-2012).

On reading the draft, one finds it to be just the opposite of  public aspirations. It clearly makes a mockery of the rights of the citizens. Furthermore, the model of federalism recently propoped by the political parties does not take the diversity of the country into account. The issue of political representation of the Madhes remains unaddressed, and worst of all, the citizenship provisions are deeply patriarchal. It is unlikely the political class will be able to promulgate the constitution without addressing these issues.

Against women and Madhesis

The discriminatory provisions against women in the draft constitution regarding citizenship, their representation in the government and reproductive rights goes against the democratic notion of a state. The citizenship provision is irrational as it punishes Nepali women who marry foreigners. Therefore, there is an immediate need to change those discriminatory provisions in the constitution to make Nepal a more inclusive state. Also, the constitution must provide more rights to various ethnic groups within the country as they have long suffered at the hands of an undemocratic state due to their identity.

In addition, Kathmandu continues to discriminate against the Madhes. The low representation of Madhesis in all levels of the state machinery is a glaring example of such discrimination. And given the fact that Nepal has already overthrown the monarchy, the country has no excuse to continue giving more privileges to one group over the other.

Constitution first

But as completely rejecting the draft constitution means undoing the gains made in consitution writing so far, there is greater wisdom in amending the problematic provisions of the statute. Lawmakers in the Consitutent Assembly, along with the leaders of the major parties, should push for the required changes. Only then can the country focus on reducing poverty, unemployment, tackle the problem of foreign labour migration and the import of all goods consumed in Nepal.  

Likewise, politicians traveling abroad should also put an end to the tradition of seeking validation and approval of the leaders of host countries. They should instead work to pursue the best interests of the nation. This applies equally to the left and the right of centre.

Economic growth is central to the development of Nepal. And unless the country first promulgates a progressive and inclusive consitution, it cannot focus on the nation’s economic fundamentals. For now, much depends on what the Nepali politicans want for the country.

Thakur is a New-Delhi based journalist and writer