It is a proven fact that the peaceful revolution of 2006 did not have a single or confined agenda. People wanted a fundamental change in the political system, though there was no difference of opinion on the question of change based on democracy. An end to autocratic rule and guarantee of fundamental rights were the movement’s focal point and so the people from all walks of life faced the tyranny of the royal regime.

There could be a divergence of opinion on the type of institutions to be retained or built, there could be a difference of views on the structure of the state or the electoral system but there has been unanimity on the question of freedom of expression and association and all such rights which forge a feeling of oneness among all Nepalis.

The right to agree to disagree is the fundamental principle of democracy. Every individual has the right to express his/her views and contradict or oppose others’ views in a dignified manner. PM G P Koirala expressed his views on the need for a ceremonial monarchy. Anybody has the right to contradict his views but one cannot ask him to stop expressing his opinion. Some enthusiasts who favour republicanism not only contradicted his views but also started casting aspersions on him as a tool of defending the monarchy. The integrity of such a person was challenged whose whole life for over 60 years has been dedicated to the cause of freedom and liberty.

The Maoist chairman’s first appearance on TV and mass media had projected him as a mature and well-meaning politician with a clear vision. The intelligentsia and the public acclaimed his deliberations. Even on the question of ceremonial monarchy he declared his opposition but upheld the right to plead for such a concept. This gesture by Prachanda was appreciated as his commitment to the freedom of expression. However, his recent statements have created doubts about his commitment to others’ rights to express their opinions. Let’s hope that Prachanda would stick to his original views, which are essential for the development of a truly democratic system.

There has been a vast difference in public opinion on monarchy. The overwhelming public opinion was in favour of constitutional monarchy and King Birendra had been appreciated for his adherence to constitutional norms. After King Gyanendra’s royal takeover, there was still a cautious hope but with the ill-performance of the royal regime the image of monarchy eroded heavily. Nevertheless, it cannot be claimed that all those who participated in the mass movement were for the abolition of monarchy. The sovereign people have a right to express their opinion but the people’s mandate on monarchy is yet to be determined. The CPN-UML has again come with a democratic way of determining popular will through a referendum on monarchy before the Constituent Assembly elections.

In a democracy the decision of the majority prevails. But if the chance is not given to everyone to express his/her views then a section of people may remain dissatisfied and peace becomes vulnerable. The referendum will give an opportunity to all to express their views on monarchy. If the people support Koirala’s view then the institution of monarchy will act as an ornament to the nation, but if the people reject his view the proponents of any form of monarchy shall have to be reconciled and accept the new order. The CPN-Maoist has brought a great change in politics and has immensely educated the people on matters of dignity and honour. This fact has been accepted by the seven-party alliance (SPA), and this led to the understanding between the SPA and Maoists.

In order to achieve the revolution’s goal and further mutual trust, both sides should restrain themselves. Undignified accusations against any political figure will benefit the anti-revolutionary forces. Koirala and other SPA leaders have a long history of sacrifice and dedication to the people’s cause and the Maoists provide a ray of hope. Closer unity among them is the current need. However, in a democracy unity is on principles and not on modus operandi. Principles do influence the course to be followed but there are several ways to achieve the same goal. All the leaders must recognise this.

Maoist leaders had stated that they would accept the people’s verdict even if it was in favour of retaining monarchy. The anti-monarchy ranks have swelled in all the parties. Therefore, a referendum is the most effective way to address this issue.

To maintain the understanding between the SPA and the Maoists a political conference should be convened. A widely participated conference in its deliberations and conclusions would set up the shape of Nepal’s future. The Maoists’ demand to hold a political conference, to empower it to act as an interim parliament should not be taken lightly. We need national consensus on all important issues. The conference will produce an atmosphere of political openness, frankness, mutual understanding and will lead to a national consensus.

Upadhyay is a former foreign minister