If some parties, certain communities, caste, religion, gender and geography are represented in the working group and the constitution is amended accordingly, such a situation cannot do justice to the sensitivity of the constitution and the future of the constitution.
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, which formed an alliance by making constitutional amendment the main agenda of the consensus, have intensified the discussion on the subject. They have started preparing to take the issue one step further through a bipartisan working group.
They are prepared to review the implementation of the constitution by the same working group and identify the issues that need to be amended. If the process proceeds according to the preparations made by the Congress-UML, which led the power and presented the constitutional amendment as an agenda, then a working group will be formed with their representation, and the constitutional amendment bill will come to the parliament according to its recommendation.
It is almost certain that such a working group will prepare a report in the form of a report on the arguments regarding the amendment of the constitution that the top and second level leaders of these two parties have been putting forward in public. Therefore, there will be constant questions about the issue of where to amend the constitution and all the procedures before taking the bill to the parliament for the amendment of the constitution. To which Congress and UML may have to answer immediately and for a long time.
Those who are now taking the initiative to amend the constitution, they have many questions to answer before they start it. In particular, who is making this constitution weak? If the answer to this question is expected, at the moment the Congress-UML leaders are arguing that the constitution should be amended for stability due to increased instability due to small parties. But they do not have the moral strength to make such an argument.
Congress, UML and Maoists have a major role in the game of power change after the promulgation of the constitution, rather than the smaller parties. Because after the promulgation of the constitution, UML president KP Sharma Oli became prime minister three times, Congress president Sher Bahadur Deuba twice and Maoist president Pushpa Kamal Dahal became prime minister twice.
Especially during this 9-year period, the seat of power is alternating between the three of them. On the other hand, they are also the leaders who find holes in the constitution or dissolve the parliament by misinterpreting it. Therefore, they should not blame others without atoning for their actions.
The basic purpose of amending the Constitution should be guided by the intention to make it stronger and more acceptable. After 2072, efforts should be made to cover the agenda of marginalized communities as much as possible, to avoid the holes that appeared in the implementation phase and to address the new problems that appeared in the meantime. But even though the Congress-UML agreed to amend the constitution, it seems that they themselves are not clear on that matter.
That's why they haven't been able to publicize a solid opinion about the amendment. It seems that they do not give importance to the agenda of constitutional amendment being raised by different communities, rather they intend to alternate the leadership of power only among themselves. Which is sure to weaken the constitution rather than strengthen it.
It is a matter of waiting to see how wide the range of stakeholders and content will be in order to procedurally advance the amendment brought by the two big parties in the debate. Otherwise, the amendment of the constitution will become only a matter of strength and technicality of the main party. Which will push the country towards another instability.
When the constitution was promulgated in 2072, the agenda of the dissatisfied parties is being changed, even the issues that have been settled may arise from a new angle, a wave of dissatisfaction may arise in the country and it may be difficult to manage it. There is also a danger that it will push the country into conflict again and the life of the constitution will be uncertain. Congress-UML should take this possibility seriously.
This constitution is important as a break from the six-and-a-half-decade-long dream of issuing a constitution from the Constituent Assembly. On the other hand, this constitution is also a document of agreement-disagreement prepared by the power struggle of the then Constituent Assembly and other stakeholders.
While proceeding with the amendment of the constitution, the background should not be forgotten. It is imperative that the path adopted to amend the basic issues of the Constitution issued by the Constituent Assembly be more and more broad. Amendments made through a narrow path will create wider problems.
If some parties, certain communities, castes, religions, genders and people of geography are to be represented in the working group and the constitution is amended accordingly, such a situation cannot judge the sensitivity of the constitution and the future of the constitution. Therefore, it is inevitable to estimate the destination before taking the step of revision.
