We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
Congress and UML have decided to form a working group to do the homework of amending the constitution four months after the formation of the government. Kantipur's conversation with Advocate Dipendra Jha on this matter:
The two parties have decided to form a working group to amend the constitution. How do you see it? Creating a
task force is absurd. The country has former Chief Justices, judges and constitutional scholars. Keeping free people, it should be studied where the Constitution worked and where it didn't during these 10 years. According to the report made on the basis of expertise, the government should send the constitution amendment bill to the parliament.
The working group also said that they will decide the subject of amendment only with the consent of all political parties?
During this period, the general acceptability does not increase by forming a task force of the leaders of the same political parties. There is no justification for this. There are people in this country who are trusted by the people. Young retired judges are staying at home. What if they were made a commission? After the bill goes to the parliament, the parties will have their opinion. I understand that the way the party leaders are trying to start the process is absurd. It is also controversial. There is no way to amend the constitution. Only then should we go to the subject matter. This is not just the constitution of Congress and UML. The process should be carried out in such a way that everyone can accept it. Otherwise it's like a 'Pendoraj's box'. What do you say about the topics that need to be revised
? Like
, the constitutional bench did not seem to be able to work between them. We have kept the electoral system, but it was grossly abused. Leader's wife, loved ones and relatives were brought. It was not implemented as intended. It needs to be corrected. Electoral laws can also be amended. However, for that, it should be included in the constitution. However, there is no alternative to proportionality. Amendments were found necessary on the matter of another executive. The parliamentary system did not work, so the Maoists propose to go for a presidential system. It is also being discussed. The fact that the parliamentary system has failed by going to the executive model has also reached the public mind. That can also be discussed. Regarding the issue of federalism, it could not be implemented in the way it should have been. Could not deliver. That's why it is necessary to make federalism workable by empowering it.
Since the promulgation of the constitution, the Madhesh-centric parties have been protesting and protesting. Some demands were covered through the first amendment. However, the day of promulgation of the constitution is still celebrated as a black day as it is insufficient. How can the demands of the Madhesh-centric party be included in the amendment?
had a lot to do with it. After that, many things have become stagnant. Some things have become irrelevant now. Some things still make sense. So it can be discussed. But, my
The main difference is in the task force itself. The Task Force cannot study all of these. If the constitution is to be accepted by everyone and connected with the life style of the common people, whatever commission or task force is formed under the leadership of an independent person is possible. That alone can also address the feelings of Terai-Madhesh. However, the working group of parties does not.
