{"id":8704,"date":"2021-06-17T17:05:46","date_gmt":"2021-06-17T11:20:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/english.kathmandupati.com\/?p=8704"},"modified":"2021-06-17T17:20:36","modified_gmt":"2021-06-17T11:35:36","slug":"testing-times-for-democracy-in-nepal-nihar-nayak","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/english.kathmandupati.com\/?p=8704","title":{"rendered":"Testing Times for Democracy in Nepal-Nihar Nayak"},"content":{"rendered":"

The President of Nepal, Bidya Devi Bhandari, on May 22, exercising her power under Article 76(7) on the advice of Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli, dissolved the House of Representatives or the Lower House of the Nepal Parliament and announced fresh elections. This decision was taken after political parties failed to form a new government under Article 76(5) of the constitution. The president\u2019s office in a statement said: \u201cWhile considering the fact that same members have been counted on both sides [K.P. Sharma Oli and Sher Bahadur Deuba], members have supported one another against the party decision and request from the concerned party to disregard their support \u2026 both the claims to obtain vote of confidence of the House of Representatives as per the Article 76(5) of the Constitution to be appointed as the Prime Minister do not stand valid.\u201d1<\/a>\u00a0Therefore, neither of them could form a new government by May 21 (9:00 pm), as per the deadline set by the President a day before.<\/p>\n

This is the second time the House has been dissolved in last five months. Previously, it was dissolved in December 2020. The Supreme Court, however, had reinstated the House on February 23, 2021, after hearing over a dozen writ petitions questioning the decision to dissolve the House.<\/p>\n

Like last year, this time too, the decision to dissolve the House was met with overwhelming resistance from across the Nepali society and the opposition parties. The latter criticised the decision as being authoritarian and anti-constitutional. Prime Minister Oli did not follow the laid out constitutional procedures like testifying confidence in the House within 30 days. He also did not resign after losing the confidence motion on May 10 and again on May 20 this year. The opposition criticised President Bhandari for showing parochialism and also allocating a very short time (21 hours) to the opposition parties to form the government. They have filed writ petitions in the Supreme Court against the decision and a constitutional bench has been formed under the Chief Justice along with four senior judges of the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

The Unfolding Crisis<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Despite the promulgation of a new constitution in September 2015, which was supposed to provide political stability, the country has witnessed a recurring political crisis. The top leaders, often, were more interested in grabbing power by punishing rival factions within the party, splitting parties, and stoking anti-India sentiments to shore up nationalism and hide incompetence. In this context, one needs to analyse three major factors that have precipitated the constitutional crisis in Nepal.<\/p>\n

First, the intensification of factional conflict in the erstwhile Nepal Communist Party (NCP) due to the failure of the power-sharing deal between the Oli and the Pushp Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda faction. The said political deal was concluded before the formation of the NCP, which came into being with the merger of the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist-Leninist (CPN-UML) and the Maoist Centre (MC) in May 2018.\u00a0 As per the deal, it was agreed that: (1) the two leaders would equally share the prime ministerial tenure, 2) Prachanda would hold the co-chairmanship of the NCP with executive powers, (3) sharing of cabinet seats should be in accordance with the pre-election deal (60:40, the CPN-UML got 60 per cent seats and the MC got 40 per cent seats), and (4) the prime minister and the chairman of the party would consult the senior leaders in party matters.2<\/a><\/p>\n

Since the formation of the NCP, the top leaders of the party have often accused each other of not abiding by the deal. Factionalism reached its zenith in April 2020, when Oli issued an ordinance on the Political Parties Act.3<\/a>\u00a0The objective was to demonstrate his dominant position in the government and within the party to his rival factions. The motive was also to split both the NCP and also the smaller parties of the Terai region who would join the government in case the rival faction led by Prachanda withdraws support. Most importantly, the Chinese initiative of a new power-sharing agreement between Oli and Prachanda in September 2020 could not prevent the party from forming two separate organisational structures within the NCP.<\/p>\n

The intra-party factionalism came to an end after the Supreme Court scrapped the merger of the CPN-UML and the MC on March 7, 2021. However, the legacy of factionalism reappeared in the revived CPN-UML. It is believed that the anti-Oli faction led by Madhav Kumar Nepal had voted against the Oli Government on May 10. Some media reports in fact hinted that Madhav Kumar Nepal\u2019s faction of the CPN-UML had allegedly supported a Nepali Congress (NC)-led initiative to form a new government under Article 76(5) on May 20, 2021.4<\/a><\/p>\n

Second, there has been a lack of clarity on the interpretation of Article 76 and related clauses as the constitution is silent on the following issues:<\/p>\n