The resignation of the Prime Minister of Nepal and its prompt acceptance by the country’s President, expose the vulnerability of the ongoing democratisation process in that country. The peace process in the newest democracy of the region, even after nine months, appears to be extremely fragile due to the continuing tensions between the Maoists and the Nepal Army. The past nine months witnessed shadow fights, predominantly between two factions, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), together, pitted against the Nepal Army.
The government led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal inherited a broken down state with the least infrastructural framework to run a country. The administrative infrastructure in Nepal is withered owing to the criminal neglect of the former administrations. State offices have diminished in value and purpose, to become in essence, mere opportunities to engage in corruption with impunity. The country is in such state that caste and allegiance to the ruling class are the defining norms of the eligibility quotient to assume authority than merits and principles.
The administration of the country is reduced to some pockets like the capital city and a few far-flung towns in Nepal. Beyond the limits of these towns the writ of the state is literally absent, thereby creating an administrative vacuum. It is this vacuum that is abundantly exploited by the military, the ruling class politicians and the Maoists.
The massive support of the people to the Maoist led resistance movement that eventually abdicated the monarch was based on the people’s aspiration for a change from the status quo. Yet, after assuming authority by leading a coalition government, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) hardly did anything to realise that change which the people is aspiring for. Instead, what is witnessed is the dogfight between the PLA, with support in abundance from the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), and the Nepal Army.
The Constituent Assembly that was voted to office after the general elections held on 10 April 2008 could hardly make any progress so far in drafting the new and the promised constitution for the country. Credible sources from the country affirm that the fate of the Assembly was sealed much before it was elected to office.
The former Prime Minister, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, in a speech delivered on 2 January 2008 to the PLA cadres at Maoists’ Cantonment in Nawalparasi district was found assuring the PLA that the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) will spare no opportunities and avenues to strengthen the PLA in rank and file. Pushpa Kamal Dahal guaranteed the PLA cadres that towards this end, even the relief grand to be obtained in the name of the victims of the decade-long civil war, could be used to procure arms for the PLA.
The nine months Pushpa Kamal Dahal stayed in the Prime Minister’s office witnessed the realisation of this promise. Between April 2008 and May 2009, the estimated strength of the PLA increased from six thousand to thirty-five thousand. The other members of the multi-party coalition that forms the current government unfortunately could not find the political and practical space to prevent this blatant breach of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
Article 2 (a) of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement defines “ceasefire” as the ‘prohibition of all types of attacks, abductions, disappearances, obstructions, mobilisation of armed forces, their strengthening, offensive and violent activities by the government and the Maoists aimed at both parties, and the activities that include anarchy, provocation or instigation.’
Article 5 further expands the meaning and the purpose of the ceasefire to end military operation and the mobilisation of arms by the army as well as the Maoist-controlled PLA. The Agreement expressly prohibits the army and the PLA from carrying out additional recruitment.
Contrary to the terms of the Agreement, the army also was engaged in recruitment. To make matters further worse, the army chief, Rookmangud Katawal, unilaterally extended the tenure of eight senior generals.
These acts by Katawal are in violation of the Agreement and an intentional insubordination to a democratically elected government and a cabinet functioning under it. It is understandable that a notorious officer like Katawal and his subordinates are not used to working in a democratic framework that demands accountability and rules out arbitrariness. Yet, Katwal’s actions easily found clandestine support from different corners in the current government.
The undeclared yet visible support for Katawal and his cronies in the Army is based upon the fear by an arguably large section of the elected representatives within the Constituent Assembly regarding the alarming increase in number of the PLA cadres. Unfortunately these elected members failed to find a safer alternative and a democratic space to counterbalance the PLA and its overdrive mode of recruiting cadres. The recurrent and often violent street protests organised by the Young Communist League (YCL), a youth wing of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), only helped to justify this fear.
The platform created by the YCL is used by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) to criticise or threaten anyone who poses a challenge to the PLA. Even the Supreme Court of Nepal was not immune to this threat. Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s response however was to shamelessly support the YCL in public, reiterating the common fear in the country that the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), the PLA and the YCL are not interested in the due process of law or the establishment of the rule of law in the country. In this aspect, these three political forces in the country are acting not differently from the former monarch or the Nepal Army.
In this backdrop, the resignation of Pushpa Kamal Dahal from the Prime Minister’s office is not a step forward in realising the promises made in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. It could be arguably viewed as a strategic move by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and its political supporters within and outside the country, to continue violating the Agreement, which eventually will destabilise the overwhelmingly fragile peace process.
The current crisis is the result of the lack of belief by the government in due process, human rights and the rule of law. The attempt so far has been to deal with issues politically, by resorting to the use of force. This has further weakened the public institutions in the country, particularly the judiciary, and reduced the free space for a democratic discourse and debate upon the issues that affects the country’s destiny.
The prompt acceptance of the resignation of the Prime Minister by the country’s President is the result of the continuing political short-sightedness of the ruling elite of the country. It is the reaffirmation of the disregard they continue to entertain against the legitimate demand of the people of Nepal to have stability and peace in the nation. It is a disastrous setback for establishing the rule of law in Nepal.
