Dissatisfaction has started to be heard within the power equation saying that the political roadmap drawn by the leaders when the Congress and UML formed an alliance, even after nine months of government formation, they have not been able to follow the path. The UML President KP Sharma Oli's government, formed with the priority of constitutional amendment, good governance and economic reforms, has been directed towards irritating the citizens and heating up the streets rather than the intended purpose.

About the life of the current equation, the role of neighboring India and the working style of leadership Congress leader and coordinator of the Constitution Drafting Committee and National Assembly Congress Parliamentary Party leader Krishna Prasad Sitaula Durga Khanal of Kantipur Kulchandra Neupane and Jaisingh Mahara Edited part of the dialogue:

Constitution amendment has become the main issue when the government is forming. No, either he did not make that decision, after it was done, it had to be implemented immediately

Look at the provincial government, which old leader is there? There is no KP, Sher Bahadur and Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the Chief Minister, all the young friends are leading at the local level, the complaint is not only with one level of the government, but at all levels,

complaints are not only with the parliament and the government, but also with the constitutional bodies, there is also the complaint that the judiciary has not been able to administer free and fair justice, has the authority been able to raise the case in a fair manner?

What is the relationship of this government with China, India and America, I  Don't want to comment

,  The question has been raised that the government could not work as balanced as it should have been.

Less than 20 years after the change of governance system from the second people's movement, the former monarchists came to the streets by raising questions against the system. Citizens are also not satisfied with the functioning of the republican party. How have you assessed this situation?

After the election of the Constituent Assembly, it took seven years to make the constitution. Four years passed before the First Constituent Assembly could not give a constitution. The second Constituent Assembly issued the constitution in 20-22 months. I have a different assessment about the period from 2072 to 2074 since the promulgation of the constitution. When the constitution was promulgated, some Madhesh-centric parties boycotted. Before reaching the 2074 election, we succeeded in bringing them into the constitution as desired by the Madhesh-centric parties. 

2074 When evaluating the visibility, the first one term has been completed by all three levels of government. The local government has completed its third year in its second term after the second election. The union and state governments are in their third year after completing their second year. Until now, a ruthless review should be done. We have also said to review some issues in 10 years after the promulgation of the constitution. This is especially true of caste commissions. At this time, the overall implementation of the constitution should be reviewed. The

state should be viewed in a broader sense. State means parliament, government, judiciary, constitutional bodies, commissions. Therefore, it is time to evaluate all of them as a whole. According to the need, the constitution should be amended and the mistakes of state administration should be 'corrected'.

You said that you should only evaluate the period after the 2074 election. If that is the case, then how did the royalists come to the streets in a short period of time?

We have not been able to explain to the people that we have done well. Second, we did not do as well as we could have done. There are complaints against all agencies of the state. There are complaints against the courts, parliament and the government. There are three tiers of government. It is time that we take a closer look at the level of government that the people are dissatisfied with. Is it the people's dissatisfaction with the work done by the local government or with the state and union government? Nothing can be said about that subject without careful observation and review.

What is preventing the party that can change the system to fulfill the expectations of the people? This situation occurs because the

job is not reviewed. Political parties are also part of the constitution. Political parties should also review their internal management. Decisions should also be reviewed. The Constitutional Council has, 

It had to evaluate the appointment of the constitutional body and the work done by it. While protesting in the past, we have moved forward by reviewing the internal situation of the country in a ruthless manner. 

Political parties themselves could not be democratic. In constitutional appointments, there are comments that mediators influence the party and the leader, what do you say about this?  The

overall leaves little room for satisfaction. In short, everything comes after the review.  Are

leaders not wanting to be reviewed to reveal their weaknesses? 

From the preamble of the constitution, the arrangement of the fundamental rights of the constitution and the establishment of the state system have been managed with the aim of building a prosperous nation. It is not impossible to work according to the goal. can be done The problem arose from not periodically assessing the root cause of the inability to work. The major political parties of this country should work together to prepare a common agenda for the country. But the parties missed it. After the promulgation of the constitution, a very intense competition began. Leftists united. UML and Maoists entered into an electoral alliance. The government was formed by reaching the number of almost two-thirds. The alliance of UML and Maoist has got a big opportunity. CPN was also formed by uniting the party. A lot of work had to be done in that situation. Congress was in a constructive role while in opposition. There was no disruption. There were no street protests either. The leaders of that party think that we have done a very good job. But in my estimation, they missed the golden opportunity to make the constitution work in the interest of the real people. 

Now Congress and UML have formed the government in a situation. It is also called government of compulsion. This is also an opportunity. In a parliamentary system, usually the first and second party governments do not form. But there are two big party governments here. Everyone knows the circumstances under which it was built. But if we are to evaluate this government, there is no room for complacency. The government should have given an adequate message that it has acted in the interest of the people. That message has not been delivered. Constitution amendment became the main issue when the government was formed. However, there has not even been a debate yet. Either that decision was not made, it had to be implemented immediately after it was made. It has been delayed. The constitution amendment bill will not be passed easily. A two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives and the National Assembly is required to amend the constitution. If it has to enter the jurisdiction of the provinces, the consent of the provinces is also required. However, for revision, review should be done first. Only then will it be decided which subject to amend. However, it has not been able to move forward. 

Is there any reason behind not wanting to do homework on constitutional amendment? 

The reason for this is the will power of the leaders.

After the promulgation of the constitution, various governments and equations were formed. However, citizens did not trust anyone. What percentage are you satisfied with yourself? 

The functioning of the government is neither good nor bad. People's dissatisfaction has not decreased. The government is not going to collapse because of the dissatisfaction of the citizens. However, the citizen's question about what we got even after the new constitution is conceivable. The new constitution came, the idea of ​​state power seems to be old. not new A unitary, centralized feudal  State power has not been freed from

culture. The actual implementation of the constitution has not taken place. State administrators should bring about a change in mindset as a whole. This change must start from within.

is only possible by changing the idea? 

The newness should also be seen in the plans and policies brought by the government. Old style plans and policies cannot fulfill the promises made to the people. When creating the plan, the related programs should be new. Must be balanced. Whether there is an increase in production and the implementation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution, it should be fulfilled. People's expectations cannot be met and discontent will not subside unless the government runs with a new vision.

UML and Congress alliance was said to be for political stability, but since the formation of the government, the debate started on how to divide the small parties, with this attitude of the leaders, can we reach the right place only by pointing out the error in the constitution? 

In the year 2048, even the single government led by Girija Prasad Koirala did not last, it did not last even during the time of Sher Bahadur Deuba, and after this constitution was issued, the government of almost two-thirds of the left coalition could not function. There is a history of government failure even when there is not only a majority, but even a two-thirds majority. A majority of only one party will not lead to stability and the country will not move forward. Even though the CPN had two-thirds of the government, the party split, and a recommendation was made to dissolve the parliament. Parliament was saved only because the court restored it later. Especially, this situation has come when the power and self-centered politics of the leadership of the big party dominates. 

On the one hand, there are complaints that the province has not been able to do a good job, on the other hand, it has been said that the province has not been able to do effective work due to lack of laws. Why did the parties not want to make laws related to the province? 

There was unhealthy competition in Parliament. They competed for their own interests rather than the people's interests and the implementation of the constitution. The school education bill is in the committee of the House of Representatives. There has been a long discussion but the committee does not give a solution. This is the sad part. In the constitution, there is a provision for sharing the powers of the union, state and local governments. But no effort has been made to implement it honestly. The same problem exists not only in the union, but also in the state. The chief ministers and ministers of the state have become centrist. The structure of the party is also in the provinces but the decisions are made at the center. The mentality is centrist, not federalist. Either federalism should not have been brought, after it was brought it should have been implemented honestly. The School Education Bill is now hotcake. If this bill had been submitted to the National Assembly, it would have been passed on time. There is a clear provision in the rules of the National Assembly that the bill should not be kept in the committee for a long time. 

It has been commented that the current situation is due to Netaraj rather than the constitution and laws. Voices are more vocal that the three top leaders of the three major parties should take leave. How do you see it? 

It is not that there are only old leaders. The face of the youth is visible within the cabinet and party organization. KP Sharma Oli may be a bit older as the Prime Minister, but all the youth are represented in the Minister. 

People have seen who is in the hands of the decision and because of whom the current situation has been created, right? 

It is not fair to hold the responsibility only to the leadership. The decision is made on the basis of extensive discussion within the party. At least that's what happens in my party. Look at the provincial government, which old leader is there? KP, Sher Bahadur and Pushpa Kamal Dahal are not there nor the Chief Minister. All the young friends are leading at the local level. Complaints are not only with one level of government. It is at all levels. Complaints are not only against the parliament and the government, but also against the constitutional bodies. There is a complaint that the judiciary is also unable to administer free and fair justice. Has the authority been able to raise the case in a fair manner? So the question is not only in the leader, but all around. Unless one's actions are reviewed, wrongdoing continues. As long as the work done by the person is not evaluated, the mistakes will continue. Once self-examination is done well, no one wants to repeat mistakes again and again. The main thing is that there is no self-reflection in the political circle of Nepal, there is more stubbornness and arrogance. It is not only in the top leaders but also in the youth. Not only in my party, but in every party. Not only in the federal government, but also at the state and local levels. 

Do you think that while reviewing the state mechanism, it should start with the political party?  The

should be reviewed as a whole. Political parties are also part of the constitution. It is necessary to assess whether political parties and constitutional bodies have been able to work according to the constitution. Only then will we know where the constitution needs to be amended. Just don't blame the electoral system alone. Almost two-thirds majority of the communists came in this system as well. Can't run together, can't manage the party and blame the election system? Now the power-centered politics is more than unity and cooperation. The constitution is good, if the state administration is wrong, it should also be corrected. Those that are not corrected should be changed. Must bring another. 

is not working on the basis of running on the basis of running on the basis of the festival, now the process of change in the Constitutional Council is also taking up the idea? & nbsp; The process of approving the official of the officials and a court's appointment to the democratic practices compared to other countries who have practiced democratic practices is of our different nature and strong. The Constitutional Council has a 'composition' of parliamentary, government and judiciary. It is difficult to say that such a system cannot do well. India appoints by the Prime Minister. In the United States, the President does. Court does "censor '. Our system is 047, 'Floodup', the first one is the first one member of being members. This time, 6 people have been kept. To say that women are represented, the system of keeping the Subjector can in the council has been added. This topic is not the case with the constitutional council of parliamentary, government and court. It can also be reviewed. Now that the council's appointment could not work, why could not While appointment, which had to bring a character person, so did not bring it! Santi-Break feels that you have been able to do good work in your experience? & nbsp;

expected during the drafting of the constitution during the drafting of the constitution. & nbsp;

Revised Congress and UML are using the Congress and UML to make a task force on you. Is there only a situation that the desire of two parties can be amended? & Nbsp; I don't know yet. & nbsp so far. & nbsp;

Constitution is the first number of polls. There are two elderly numbers from the House of Representatives and the National Assembly. It is also difficult to reach the majority of the ruling party in the National Assembly. Therefore, the Congress, UML and Maoist should be at one place in the last. The constitution is difficult. Consignation like a constitutional constitution is amended; Procrement will be in the interest of the country. & nbsp with all the parties represented in the parliament. & nbsp; The people of the electoral system that the leaders of the political party is only main as the leaders of the political parties, but don't you think so? & NBSP;

is not the only idea of ​​the idea. Now revise & nbsp; Even when stoY-breaker, we do not only think of us. All parties should agree and decides by the amendment number of amendments. We are based on the basic beliefs of the federal democratic republic, we are able to go to the implementation of the subject arranged in the fundamental. The people have been disappointed in the people without the implementation of fundamental right. Everywhere is six, you need to be true. How can the Constituent Manufacture of the general dissatisfaction with leadership also meet the STYY-BREA CAINTS amendment? & NBSP;

is not like that. First of amendment the constitution, the first is the first to the bill. Then you have to make public the suggestions of the people. Not to pass with a normal bill. & Nbsp; If

would become according to the desire of the people, why should anyone have to the road to the road? Even when the constitution suggests from the Constituent Assembly, the public suggestions and Nbsp; What's not

? & NBSP; Not

, much implementation has been implemented. There was both the people who need federalism that need federalism within the Constituent Assembly. Not all of the political parties have the same idea. Picture Bahadur Kasis, federalism is still necessary. There are also different votes and ideas within the party. It is in favor of the people and work on the side of the people, if that does not work, it is not necessary to amend the constitution. No, the error of the state operators were to improve. It had to be left without easy.

was hard to leave that? & NBSP;

that's what the concerned parties think. & nbsp; What is the alliance that the government was stables after the issue was relentless of two in large groups after the government has been fixed and developed, but it is still discussed until it is left behind, but the development of the country that has nothing between today? & NBSP;

is not that I go to the government. & nbsp; What is the basis of

? & NBSP; The Story-BREAP government may not work as we wish. & nbsp;

I'm also unsatisfactory. However, the government again and Nbsp;

is not dissatisfaction. & nbsp; The subject of

is for the transaction? & nbsp;

is not that either. Complaints of some of the government's Ministry not to work from time levels. The government should be taken positively by the government. Should be taken as a suggestion. Be able to go discuss. Let's do this, we need to go that our ability is so. Even when the government of the same party is a complaint. This is a coalition government. UML and Congress are a different background and attitude. It is a great deal of making two parties together. Yes, the Congress may not work as according to his party's principles, ideas, the same. This complaints are running too.

is from such complaints when the coalition changes, not in a change of alliance. Is there any reason for the reason yesterday, that is not a strong basis for not happening now? & NBSP;

I don't have much to say. However, the root of the government has gone the government. The Maoists are the third group of Parliament, but what about Dahalji I continue to play two parties and will keep the prime minister.

, Sher Baha Bahadur Deuba, who is also a great party, now, is you sure that he would soon have that it would happen? Sher Bahadurji is a prime minister in the 083 year in the coming year of the

! What if the

will be a lot of time, or not? & nbsp;

is not this equation into the basis of such a disbelief. The agreement is implemented on the basis of faith. If there is no faith, how can the government become the middle of the two big party? & Nbsp; What is the government changing that the government is changing even if the domestic reasons is now more changing? & nbsp;

external reason I don't know. What is the relationship with China, India and the United States, I comment & NBSP; I don't want to

. & nbsp; With Indian-Break, India has not been able to become a good relationship with the government. The Ministers of the Nepali Congress and leaders made fun of the government and India, but did the chairman of the Congregation Become Now, Prairem Deuba has been? & NBSP; The question that the

was needed to work as balanced by the government, that is not the case. Congress, which leaves this government, has no external pressure. Does

cannot make a distance with India and not to cooperate with India for a long time? & NBSP; How to evaluate what is the distance with

India? Foreign Minister is satisfied. We have not conveyed to dissatisfaction with us. While I was in the government, such issues may have been understood while in the party, but Nbsp in such a matter. story-braak has not been. India has a link to Nepal's special nature and a little different nature with China. These relationship should be continued. When these relationships deteriorate, the party gets suffering, not by special. India is a special relationship of Nepal, has an open limit. There is a religious, cultural relations. China is a relationship with a different nature. That must be the same kind. How much balance in it is a matter of knowing. We have already been told that we need a common policy of such a matter. Even though the prime minister is a foreign minister, even with common policy. & Nbsp; Do there are many examples that the government has not been stabilized by the

, especially when India is not good. & nbsp;

is not that. It is wrong to blame your neighbor to cover up the shortcomings, can't work. Their agility was now the support of India for that as much as Nepal was made in Nepal. Say the 2007 revolution and say the people's movement of the last 062/63 year, or in the peace process, everyone has harmony and support in everyone. & Nbsp;

Nepal is the power of the democratic country as Nepal is sovereign country. Let that America be in Europe or anyone. Believing in democratic governance has given us moral support, as the Congress has always been supported by the Congress. Nelson Mandela has done support support in Africa's movement. Therefore, there is also our political relationship with India. Following everything, Nepal should be able to keep his relationship with India, and India's development is large contribution to India. & Nbsp;

did India want him to have an effect on Nepal as you said that their influence on Nepal's politics would ever be able to ever in the politics of Nepal. & NBSP; To make a whose government in

Nepal, we decided to do what a coatanon is, India, not India. I do not think Nepal's health interest in the work of the leadership of the Congress leadership government leadership. So we need to be able to maintain a balanced relationship with India and China. & Nbsp; Is

, that if the effects of not being a balance is to be in power equation, do you? & nbsp;

is not an effect on the alliance but the effects of how much the effects of the system. In Nepal's democracy and democracy and democratic governance, we are looking for supporting from the people of where. Congress is clear that we do not want China's communist unive system. We want India's influence on Indocracy and Democratic Rule, Nepal's democratic governance is not for a particular leader and party. Similarly, the effects of European and the rule of the United States is looking for politics. & Nbsp;