The party´s sharply divided Central Committee had then decided to join the government to be led by Sher Bahadur Deuba, who was reinstated by then King Gyanendra Shah, saying that Deuba´s reinstatement was "partial correction of regression".[break]
Some CPN-UML leaders are apprehensive that the recent decision to okay the Maoist proposal to form an election government under the leadership of sitting chief justice might be prove to be another debacle. They prefer to describe the present development as “part-II of the partial correction of regression”.
As a majority of CC members stood in favor of joining the government, the party had quit the agitation and joined the Deuba government even though Girija Prasad Koirala-led Nepali Congress and some other small political parties continued their protests demanding reinstatement of the dissolved parliament.
But in February 2005, King Gyanendra sacked Deuba and imposed his own direct rule forcing UML and Deuba-led NC (Democratic) to eventually rejoin the anti-king agitation led by Koirala.
This time around the CPN-UML has endorsed the proposal to form a CJ-headed government even as an absolute majority of members in the central committee stood against it. They strongly disapproved of the decision so much so that a noted leader Pradeep Nepal announced at the meeting to stay away from party activities for three months in protest.
Politburo member Nepal said he announced to stay on leave for three months from party works “because the party leadership has shown utter incompetence in taking right decisions at critical times”.
Though some key leaders backed party chairman Jhalanath Khanal in his proposal to form CJ-headed government, the standing committee remained sharply divided over the matter. Khanal, KP Sharma Oli, Bamdev Gautam, Bidya Bhandari and Bishnu Poudel lobbied in favor of the proposal. Other standing committee members, including General Secretary Ishwar Pokharel, Shankar Pokharel, Yubaraj Gyawali stood against the decision. Former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal was on a week-long visit to France during the time.
Top leaders somehow managed to convince central committee members to allow the party leadership to take a decision on forming a CJ-headed government. But the leaders had to use ambiguous wordings in the formal decision.
The party, in the formal decision, pledged not to make any compromises on the basic democratic principles, including separation of powers, supremacy of the constitution, independent judiciary and strengthening the role of political parties. However, the party at the same time has remained open to forming an election government under the leadership of sitting CJ.
“Considering the inevitability of a political agreement, this meeting decided to remain open to various alternatives. But the party while taking a decision on government formation will firmly stand in favor of basic democratic principles,” read the decision.
However, with the arrival of former Prime Minister Nepal on Monday, the intra-party dispute over the issue resurfaced as he fiercely criticized the party leaders for standing in favor of a CJ-led government.
Immediately after his arrival, he held separate discussions with General Secretary Pokharel, Shankar Pokharel, Yubaraj Gyawali, Pradeep Gyawali and Agni Kharel, among other leaders, who were against the proposal. In response to growing dissent among senior leaders on the decision, the party called an emergency meeting of the standing committee for Wednesday. Sensing possibility of a heated debate, the party chairman deferred the meeting until further notice citing busy schedule of the leaders.
Nepal argued that it was a wrong step to support the Maoist-floated proposal as the former rebel party lobbied for the idea with a plan to drag the Supreme Court into controversy and taint the judiciary´s image.
However, leaders close to party chairman Khanal and another leader KP Sharma Oli argued that it wasn´t a choice but a compulsion to agree on the proposal given the complex political as well as constitutional crises.
Rival factions criticized Nepal for staying abroad at a critical juncture and “spreading propaganda against the party decision” immediately after arriving in Kathmandu.
“First of all he shouldn´t have left the country at such a crucial time because he is the head of the party´s talks team, or, should have cut his visit short.” said a leader preferring anonymity. “He started criticizing the party´s decision through the media instead of consulting the party leaders.” Nepal has also shunned interparty talks ever since his return to the capital.
Also, some leaders close to Nepal expressed dissatisfaction with him for “overreacting” against the decision “without studying the ground realities”.
Oli, while addressing a function on Wednesday, claimed that the decision was the need of special circumstances. "It is like feeding a patient through saline. When the patient recuperates it is obvious that the person can take his meal normally,” he said arguing that the politics would take a normal course after election.
Will the decision inflict damage to the party and leaders? Arguments differ.
UML youth leader Rajan Bhattarai said leaders need to be prepared for risks when they take crucial decisions. "If it yields positive results, the leaders will take the credits just like they did after the signing of the 12-point agreement between then Seven-Party Alliance and the rebel Maoists as the deal paved the way for the ongoing peace process,” he said. Among the UML rank and file, the numbers of those who are apprehensive that the decision might boomerang is high.
Though CJ Khil Raj Regmi is yet to accept the proposal, the major parties do not have an easy excuse to backtrack from the decision either. “They have already moved half way toward forming a CJ-led government. If they want to backtrack from the decision, they have to come up with a better option,” said Bhattarai.
Related story
UML leader Bhushal's proposal: Let’s form a left front and win...
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
