On Monday, the first of the two days set aside for open public debate over the new draft constitution, people from around the country took an active part in expressing their concerns over the draft. The normally voluble lawmakers mostly listened to their constituents. Others sent in their suggestions through email, online forums, letters and over the phone. As such, people from all walks of life voluntarily participated, seemingly in great numbers, in the vital feedback phase of constitution-making. The process has not been foolproof. Some cases of violence were reported in the Tarai belt as dissatisfied political parties burnt the draft constitution and pelted stones on vehicles of local lawmakers. In Rautahat, police had to resort to lathi charge and firing in the air to control an unruly mob. In some other places, like some hilly regions of Nawalparasi district, locals complained that they had no access to draft constitution. As unfortunate as these incidents are, they were not unexpected.With the passage of time, the number of stakeholders in the constitutional process has steadily increased. This meant that no constitution, whatever its other merits, would be above controversy. Some sections of the political establishment would always oppose it tooth and nail. We don't for a moment believe the draft constitution, in its present form, is flawless. There are problematic provisions regarding citizenship, federalism, press freedom, and a number of other issues. But that is precisely why it is being taken to the people for their feedback. After people's feedback is collected, the draft constitution, along with the feedback, will be taken to the Constituent Assembly. Considering what is at stake for all the sides in the constitutional process, we expect a vigorous debate inside the chamber. Only then will the final draft of the constitution be prepared. But while we largely approve of the ongoing constitutional process we do have some reservations about the hastily arranged feedback campaign.
Rumor mills have it that government feedback channels are being inundated with suggestions that have, among other things, called for the restoration of the Hindu state and for ditching of the federal agenda. If, for instance, the majority of the feedback collected is in favor of these agendas, what will the political parties do? Aren't they committed to respecting the voice of the people? We believe there has been a serious communication gap. The political parties have failed to impress on the people that although all suggestions are welcome, under no condition can the post-2006 achievements (federalism, republicanism, secularism) be undone. While canvassing for votes for the second CA elections, all the major political forces campaigned with a promise to help cement these achievements, and the voters rewarded them for it. There is no way people's mandate expressed through the universally accepted secret ballots can be overturned on the basis of the subjective process of random public feedback. Moreover, the feedback process should have been longer and more systematic. So, irrespective of the feedback, the four signatories to the 16-point agreement must keep trying to reach out to the opposition parties and take them into confidence on new constitution. The larger the political support for the new constitution, the greater will be its legitimacy.
Related story
Fourth time lucky?
-1200x560-1774606010.webp)
