Editorial
In a nutshell
Public frustration over zero-sum political games is an ominous signalThe deep differences over the constitution amendment continue to come to the fore. And it is difficult to see the recent attempts at various quarters bearing fruit in immediate future. The relationship between top leaders from major parties—the ruling Nepali Congress and the CPN (Maoist Centre)—and the main opposition CPN-UML has soured to a great extent.
Almost every day we get reports that they are “trying to find common ground”, but the differences between them seem to have only deepened. In their desperate attempt to keep their bases happy, they are using a very divisive language. The recent move to let the second-tier leaders handle the inter-party negotiations is clearly an effort to see if these leaders can do what their senior stalwarts have failed to do so far.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday appointed an amicus curie, seeking its advice on whether the local elections should be held with the existing framework, or a new delineation. The amicus curie comprising three members each from the Nepal Bar Association and the Supreme Court Bar Association will offer its opinion on the contentious issue next week. The next hearing has been scheduled for December 28.
A commission formed to determine the number and boundaries of local units under the new federal set-up suggests that there will be close to 725 local units, which are supposed to replace the existing 217 municipalities and 3,117 VDCs.
Yet, as we have stressed here repeatedly—the political fault lines run deep.
Unless the ruling coalition and the UML can first find common ground on whether the constitution amendment bill should be tabled for parliamentary deliberations and then, if they do, what could be the content(s) of the amendment, the ground will remain polarised. Their differences will manifest in various ways and will lead to continual delay in the implementation of the constitution and the elections, which must be held by January 2018 as per the constitutional deadline.
Both the ruling parties and the main opposition need to find common ground and avoid the game of brinkmanship.
Defying the inevitability of elections in a democracy and resorting to political expediency is a dangerous business. Our parties will do well to realise that the rise of populist politics can give way to dangerous demagogues who love to ride roughshod over democratic norms and institutions.