The Constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal that came into effect yesterday has officially ended the decade-long peace process that had begun with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2006. The peace process had twin objectives: management of ex-Maoist combatants and their weapons (which was accomplished a couple of years ago), and promulgation of a new constitution by the Constituent Assembly.

Accomplishing the task of constitution-making the Constituent Assembly II has dissolved and Nepal’s arduous political transformation has entered a new era. The new constitution, it is hoped, will transform Nepal politically and economically in the years to come. While the constitution has institutionalised the major achievements of the Jana Aandolan II, Nepal has still to evolve as a nation-state.

Promulgation of the constitution has been marred by violent protests and casualties in different parts of the country even as the constitution attempts to accommodate diverse aspirations of the peoples.

The country has been federated into seven provinces but the provincial demarcations have failed to win hearts and minds of Madhesis and Tharus living in the southern plains. Indigenous and ethnic communities from the hills have also expressed their discontent.

These are warnings signalling difficulties in the implementation of the constitution. Trust deficit between political parties seems not to subside. This is where all political forces of the country — the three major parties and the protesting Madhesis, Tharus and other ethnic communities — are expected to show prudence and demonstrate flexibility. As per the constitution, everything can be amended by a two-thirds majority, except for the national unity, territorial integrity and people’s sovereignty. The constitution has embraced mixed election system, which ensures inclusive representation at all levels while a liberal approach has been taken to address the demands and concerns of different interest groups regarding the citizenship. As demanded by the Madhesi parties, electoral constituencies will be redrawn keeping in view distribution of the population.

The constitution has tried to appease every stakeholder to the extent possible, including the judiciary, which was vehemently opposed to the creation of a Constitutional Court.

Now the political actors would do well to internalise that constitution is a document of compromise and has its weaknesses, but the important thing is that it continues to evolve.

The stand-off between Madhesis-Tharus and the state does not augur well for the country.

All sides must show flexibility and keep the doors for talks open so that the divisive issues will be addressed over time. Sincere efforts should still be made to include and take along the protesting parties.

Now that the country has a new constitution the attention must be on improving the socio-economic conditions of the people. A just, equitable society is what the Nepali people deserve. The new constitution heralds a new dawn but it all depends on how well the constitution itself is implemented. Equally crucial is the role of the three major parties to bring the protesting forces back to the fold by addressing their genuine concerns.