It is imperative that the government steadfastly adheres to the constitution. Upholding the constitution is critical for ensuring the rule of law
The pre-electoral coalition is generally considered inconsistent with ethical democratic practices, a sentiment explicitly reinforced by the Constitution of Nepal, which overtly prohibits such alliances. Article 56 (6) of the constitution underscores the nation's commitment to a multi-party, competitive, democratic republic. Additionally, Article 269 (1) defines a political party as an organisation of individuals united by a common political ideology, philosophy and programme. Combination of these two constitutional provisions conveys a clear message that a pre-electoral coalition is unconstitutional.
Despite the unequivocal constitutional stance against pre-electoral coalitions, major political parties have consistently engaged in such alliances. Regrettably, this unconstitutional practice has yet to face legal scrutiny in the judiciary, raising concerns about the enforcement of constitutional principles. The journey of the coalition government commenced with the adoption of this unconstitutional practice and continues to exhibit an ongoing pattern of disregard for constitution. The persistence of this unconstitutional spree raises serious concerns about the government's commitment to upholding the rule of law and adhering to the foundational principles set forth in the constitution.
The coalition government has been involved in significant unconstitutional practices, such as the declaration of a public holiday on Falgun 1 to commemorate the so-called People's War day – a term not officially recognised by the constitution. The arbitrary designation of holidays based on non-constitutional events undermines the rule of law and compromises the sanctity of the constitutionally defined public holidays.
Whether declaring Maitighar to Baneshwor Chowk a prohibited area, imposing a six-month restriction on organising any forms of mass gatherings in the area, or the involvement of the speaker of the Koshi Provincial Assembly in voting for government formation, the coalition government has blatantly disregarded constitutional provisions. These actions have not only violate established democratic legal norms but also demonstrated a concerning lack of commitment to upholding the constitutional framework.
Furthermore, the federal government's hesitance to recognise provincial governments as sovereign entities has sparked considerable apprehension, pointing towards a potential violation of the constitutional provision of federalism. This reluctance undermines the core principles of the federal structure mandated by the constitution.
These instances highlighted above are just a few representative examples of the coalition government's ongoing constitutional violation spree. Considering these references, it becomes apparent that the government may continue to partake in further unconstitutional activities. The need to address and rectify these issues is paramount to safeguarding the integrity of constitutional principles and ensure responsible governance.
The government's first-year progress report revealed a lack of significant achievements, a fact admitted by Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal in his address to the nation. In response, he pledged to amend his working approach for the upcoming second year, which is slated to be his final year in office. Hearsays suggest that the coalition faction has informally agreed to divide the five-year prime ministerial tenure among three leaders: the first two years for Dahal, the middle year for Madhav Kumar Nepal, and the final two years for Sher Bahadur Deuba.
This arrangement contradicts the spirit of the constitution. Article 76 of the constitution clearly outlines the provisions for forming a government, prohibiting the arbitrary allocation of premiership terms in advance. Moreover, such an arrangement amounts to a blatant disregard for the people's mandate.
The persistent violation of constitutional provisions by the government has dealt a severe blow to the rule of law, eroding the very foundation of our democratic society. This has fostered a palpable sense of lawlessness, diminishing confidence in the government's capacity to govern responsibly. A recent tragic incident at Balkumari, where two youngsters aspiring to seek employment in Korea lost their lives, serves as a poignant illustration of the prevailing state of lawlessness in the country.
In democratic societies, governments obtain their legitimacy from the constitution and the consent of the governed. Continuous breaches of constitutional provisions can erode this legitimacy, prompting citizens to question the authority and moral standing of the government. Persistent constitutional violations have historically been linked to political instability, fostering unrest that can manifest in protests and challenges to the government's authority. Over time, this may lead to a breakdown in governance. The recent call for protests against the government by various opposition parties after the month of Magh serves as a tangible expression of discontent and aligns with this broader understanding.
Persistent violations of the constitution are certain to draw international attention and scrutiny. The gradual decline in our government's international reputation and a close call on degradation of the National Human Rights Commission from A to B status serve as concrete indicators of these concerns and affirm the global ramifications of constitutional transgressions.
Drawing insights from these incidents, it is imperative that the government steadfastly adheres to the constitution. Upholding the constitution is not only critical for ensuring the rule of law but also for safeguarding citizens' rights and maintaining the fundamental principles of democracy. This commitment is indispensable in preserving the democratic values and institutions that serve as the bedrock of a fair and equitable society.
Dr Joshi is senior scientist and independent opinion maker based in Germany
pushpa.joshi@gmail.com
