After the split in the Congress, everyone's attention has turned to the Election Commission. There is less than a week left before the day to nominate candidates for the direct election to the House of Representatives on 21 Falgun. There is general interest in which side will now receive official recognition from the Commission.

Some are also concerned that the Congress dispute will disrupt the atmosphere of the upcoming elections. In this context, Kantipur had a brief conversation with Pre-Election Commissioner Bhojraj Pokharel –

A dispute over authority has been seen within the Congress party on the eve of the elections. What do you see as the root of this dispute?

The current dispute in the Congress is more complex than that seen in political parties in the past. The current context is above the provisions of the party's authority or division in the Political Parties Act. The Act talks about the Central Committee. However, the Congress dispute does not end in the Central Committee. It is linked to the general convention. The Election Commission should decide on the general convention. The dispute has sought further explanation and a solution.

There is a mandatory provision in the Congress statute that a special general convention must be called within three months after a demand is made by 40 percent of the general convention delegates. But whoever should have called it did not call it. He did not 'endorse' it. Perhaps whoever should have called it did not see the special general convention as favorable to him. They did not want to call it. However, those who demanded a general convention challenged it. A general convention was called. The majority of the general convention representatives moved forward, which brought about a new outcome. Therefore, in the process of resolving this dispute, the first thing the commission had to do was to speak about the validity of the general convention.

They said it was a dispute above the provisions in the Act. How is that?

The current law says that in cases where the issue of authority or division is not resolved based on evidence, the decision will be made by looking at the majority of the central committee that remains. Although the Act on Political Parties talks about the central committee, it does not talk about the general convention, the higher body. It is silent about that. The lawmakers did not even anticipate that such a situation could arise. It is possible that there was a good intention that no one outside the statute would know. However, I will not go into that.

The current situation in the Congress is not about party division. This is a matter of claim on the entire party. According to the provisions in the party statute, the representative has the right to request a special convention. They demanded accordingly. And, there is also a mandatory provision to call it within 3 months. However, the central committee did not call it. What needs to be resolved now is the status of the convention.

Its validity should be clear. If the convention is found to be valid, the decisions of the convention will also be valid. However, if the convention itself is not found to be valid, it will make a difference. That is why it is not possible to go by looking only at the central committee here. The main issue is the test of the validity of the convention. The convention has dissolved the old central committee and elected a new central committee. Therefore, the issue to be resolved is whether to abide by the decision of the central committee or accept the convention meeting as per the party statute. 

The direct nomination of candidates is scheduled after 4 days. It seems that the commission has taken a lot of time in making decisions in the past. Does the commission have such a facility now?

No. The Commission can decide on a matter that it feels is right at first glance, looking at the basis, evidence, party statutes, acts and rules. If the Commission decides on a matter that it understands, one way opens up. Those who are not satisfied with the Commission's decision can go to court. Or, based on the Commission's decision, both parties can come to an agreement at the last minute.

In normal circumstances, it can take months to resolve a party dispute. It also takes time to complete the procedures prescribed by the Act. At this time, the Commission should be able to take 'risks'. The Commission should decide quickly after looking at the election situation and the state of the country. What will happen if it goes without a decision? That should be considered. It is not right to delay the dispute of a big and old democratic party and deprive it of the election. The Commission should open the door.

As you said, can the Election Commission give a decision at first glance?

The Commission should be brave. After becoming a constitutional body, it should be ready to solve the problems facing the country. The nomination of candidates is on the 6th. If it is extended, there are questions about participation in the election. The constitution stated that the election would be held on the date set by the government within Jestha in 2064 BS. However, neither the law was made nor the government set the election day until the end of Chait.

After seeing the election within Jestha as impossible, the Commission announced in mid-Chait that the Jestha election was no longer possible and that the election could be held only 120 days after the law came into force. The constitution did not give the Commission this authority. But when the state is in crisis, it is also the responsibility of constitutional bodies to make decisions keeping in mind the national interest.