KATHMANDU: It is almost eight months that the country has been facing a series of political deadlocks. The stalemate began after the Unified CPN-Maoist resigned from the government on May 4.

Budget could not be passed on time, parliamentary proceedings were halted for around seven months, peace process could not move forward and protest and strikes became part of our lives during the period. Maoists’ two demands — correcting the President’s move on army chief row and change of guard - were the main stumbling blocks. Each deadlock ended only after the country suffered bad consequences. Since the national agendas — peace process and constitution writing — hold more importance than the Maoist demands, the UCPN-M had to always backtrack to end each stalemate.

Why has the UCPN-M been backtracking from its stance? The party obstructed the parliament for around seven months between May and December. But without accruing any apparent benefit, it decided to let the parliament function on December 24. It launched three rounds of protests, but when the fourth round was about to reach a climax with an indefinite general strike scheduled to start from January 24, the party withdrew the stir. It may be either the party’s compulsion or its wrong strategy that it has to backtrack at the eleventh hour without any apparent gain after sticking to a stance and creating deadlock. One is supposed to learn from the past and move ahead without repeating the mistakes. The largest party, UCPN-M, should have understood by now that creating a deadlock is futile if consensus and backtracking are inevitable. Moreover, being the largest party it should act responsibly to keep the country in order and give political stability.

Some analysts say the Maoists fight for petty issues, sidelining larger national concerns. They believe the party has not been able to turn itself into a democratic force. Militant thought prevailed over the democratic line in the party even while it was in power, they point out. This explains why the Maoists could not devise a concrete work plan to manage its combatants and weapons when they were in power for around nine months. Due to the overriding militant thought, the party intends to induct maximum number of PLA combatants into security bodies, mainly the Nepali Army.

Why the Maoists are giving more importance to their own agendas than the national concerns? It is because they think that the national agendas will be settled as per their wishes only when they are in power. Additionally, they think sticking to their agendas will increase the party’s strength in national politics.

Is HLPM the ultimate body?

Why the UCPN-M agreed to join the High-Level Political Mechanism and withdrew its protest without getting their demands addressed? They must have realised two things - if the constitution were not written on time, it will undo all gains and president’s rule may be imposed and HLPM may be a more practical and easier way to attain power than resorting to protest. They may also have thought that the protests may also invite an untoward incident, which will not be in their or the nation’s interest.

Although, positive and negative opinions have been expressed about the mechanism, it is a fact that consensus is a must to address contentious national concerns. Another reality is that the state bodies, such as the cabinet, the army and the court have not delivered on forging consensus. Even the Constituent Assembly and the parliament have failed in this regard. Whether we accept it or not, the HLPM is the final and ultimate forum to forge a consensus; without it, it will be impossible to address the national concerns.

“HLPM’s failure will reflect on the peace process. It is because, there is no alternative to consensus and there is no other body, which can achieve ii,” says Nepali Congress’s Krishna Prasad Sitaula, who closely worked in setting up the HLPM.

HLPM’s mandate

The idea of HLPM was floated by NC President Girija Prasad Koirala seven months ago. It took shape on January 8. Koirala is its coordinator, Maoist chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ and CPN-UML chairman Jhalanath Khanal members, while Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal is the invitee member. It, however, is yet to take complete shape by including Madhes-based parties and other major ones. Its third meeting held on January 22 approved its Terms of Reference, which has three sections — objectives, work procedure and code of ethics.

a. Objectives

1. Maintaining sustainable peace by taking the peace process to a logical conclusion. The mechanism will help complete the process

on time and resolve the

problems surfacing during the process.

2. Since the country is moving ahead in the process of writing new constitution, the mechanism will help write constitution on time and resolve all difficulties.

3. Nothing will be accomplished until we forge

consensus among major

political parties of the country. This mechanism will

play a major role to move ahead with unity.

4. The mechanism will make serious efforts to create an atmosphere of confidence by reviewing all processes since the inking of 12-point agreement and remove mistrust and skepticism among the major parties.

5. Since the mechanism is a political body, it will make joint efforts to sort out all political problems.

b. Work Procedure:

1. It will forge consensus among parties to end the present political deadlock.

2. It will help in the essential processes, including

the peace and constitution writing, by forming sub-committees.

3. The mechanism will hold meetings at least once a week.

4. It will make efforts to form commissions as mentioned in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the interim constitution.

5. It will review and implement past agreements, including making public the status of whereabouts of

the disappeared people

and getting the seized

properties returned. Sub-committees may be formed in this regard as well.

6. The mechanism will review its work procedure as per the necessity.

7. The mechanism will take all decisions on the basis of consensus.

c. Code of Ethics

1. To stress on mutual

consensus.

2. Not to use abusive and provocative language against other party leaders or cadres.

3. To curb violent tendencies of party cadres

4. To make efforts to resolve differences through talks.