Congress and UML have decided to form a task force to do the homework of amending the constitution four months after the formation of the government. Kantipur's conversation with constitutionalist Radheshyam Adhikari on this subject:

Congress and UML are trying to carry out the homework by forming a task force for constitutional amendment. However, it is not clear what to amend the constitution. What do you think needs to be revised? 

In view of the completion of nine years of the implementation of the constitution, it is taking 10 years to amend the amendment. In the meantime, the experience showed that everything has to be done. Like, how to make a government in the executive? From the timing of the motion of no confidence to the formation and reorganization of the government, many things have been seen as inconsistent. It has been seen that the related provisions should be clarified. In order to give stability to the government, it was said that a no-confidence motion could not be tabled for two years. However, with many parties in the government, as soon as one of the parties left, the Prime Minister had to take a vote of confidence. As a result, up to four governments have been formed in one year. A situation has arisen where votes of confidence have to be taken time and time again. It needs to be discussed to settle it. 

It seems that the two parties did not give priority to other issues by bringing only the election system into the debate rather than where to make amendments in the initial discussion? 

Several things given by the constitution could have been improved by us through the law. Federalism, inclusiveness and proportionality could also be improved through the Act. However, the behavior of our leaders is that they do not take the relevant bill to the parliament and play in the holes of the constitution. If the law did not suit him, if there was an obstacle, he would bring an ordinance. Considering all these things, it is seen that everything should be made clear in the constitution. 

In your opinion, what are the topics that should be clarified in the constitution? 

Under the legislature, the House of Representatives and the National Assembly also have a different arrangement for the same work. Like, a bill passed by the House of Representatives goes to the National Assembly. If the National Assembly does not send it within 60 days, there is a provision in the constitution that it can be implemented automatically. While the bill originated in the National Assembly and sent to the House of Representatives, it has not been passed within five years. These things also need to be reconciled. Thirdly, whether or not to make the Vice President as Speaker in the National Assembly was discussed at the time of constitution making. In terms of political balance, the leaders did not agree at that time. However, now it is realized that everyone has to be made. 

What are the other topics? 

The things that need to be improved in the judiciary are going well. The appointment of judges in the judiciary is becoming an obstacle. It seems that the restructuring of the Constitutional Council should also be revised. A constitution should always be about progress. Stopping it will not run the country. The state does not work. Therefore, the political parties should not focus on any single issue and should proceed with their homework to amend all the incompatible issues of the legislature, executive and judiciary. 

The Constitution requires inclusion commissions to be reviewed every 10 years. What do you say to that?