NEPAL: Fourth Round of Election Ends in a
Fiasco: Update No. 230
By Dr. S.
Chandrasekharan
The fourth round to the post of Prime
minister held on 6th August, ended up in a
fiasco with the candidates getting less than
what they had obtained in the earlier third
round. Dahal of UCPN (Maoist) got 213 votes-
46 less than in the previous one and R. C.
Paudel of Nepali Congress obtained 122
votes, 2 less than in the previous one. As
expected both the UML and the Madhesi Groups
abstained.
What is surprising is that many of the
Parliamentarians did not attend the session
in time for the voting. It looked that they
had lost interest once it was known that the
voting pattern of the parties will not
change.
More interesting is that it happened soon
after the visit of the Indian Prime
Minister’s Special envoy to find a consensus
and the obvious conclusion by many in
Kathmandu was that his visit was a failure.
It is almost certain that the Indian envoy
would not have ventured on this publicised
visit unless he was sure of getting round to
a consensus among the parties. It is not
clear as to what went wrong.
But the visit has certainly evoked an
unseemly controversy.
The Committee on international relations and
human rights of the interim Assembly
summoned both the Prime Minister and the
foreign Minister to explain the visit of the
Indian Envoy. While the Prime Minister did
not attend, the foreign Minister explained
to the committee that the visit of Mr. Shyam
Saran was a private one and that the foreign
ministry was not informed of it. The
committee concluded that the visit was
against protocol and directed the government
to ensure that such uninformed visits do not
recur.
There was no doubt that the visit was an
official one and Mr. Shyam Saran did mention
to the press persons soon after landing in
Kathmandu that the Prime Minister of India
has sent him as an envoy to see “whether or
not we can build a consensus.” He also met
the leaders of all political parties,
sometimes on a one to one basis with Dahal
and Baburam Bhattarai of the UCPN (Maoist)
and also together as in the case with the
leaders of the Madhesi groups at the Indian
Ambassador’s residence. He also called on
the President..
One commentator called the visit “undiplomatic.”
Another called on all the parties to join
hands to solve the problem and thus prevent
visitors from neighbouring countries coming
to “fix the problem.” One other called it as
“crude tactics” and that these do not help
to win trust and respect in Nepal. The
private blogs on the visit have been more
critical and severe.
In the central committee meeting of UCPN
(M), Dahal made an indirect reference to the
visit. He said that the PM’s election is
linked to independence and called for
forging an alliance with like-minded forces
for safeguarding the national interests at a
time when the “foreign interference has
become critical.”
The Indian embassy was involved in another
controversy which on the face of it does not
appear to be true. It is alleged that one of
the consular officials from the India
mission gave a “death threat” to a
parliamentarian from the Maoists party, Ram
Kumar Sharma for “garnering support” of
Madhesis for the UCPN candidate for the 2nd
August election. The embassy has denied the
whole incident and in fact said that the
allegation does not dignify even a response!
The Chairman of the Parliamentary committee
on international relations and human rights
went to the extent of declaring that the
incident was a challenge to the “sovereignty
of the nation” and that the Indian embassy
should tender an apology. Pracahnda ( Dahal
) is also said to have spoken to the
Ambassador besides sending a formal letter
seeking clarification from the mission.
The next election is to take place on 18th
of August. By this time at least the parties
should come to some understanding. One way
that is suggested is that the Prime
ministership could be rotated among the
three parties. Another would be for both the
candidates of the Nepali Congress and the
UCPN (M) to withdraw and look for a unity
government. The third would be for the UML
to change its stand and not insist on two
thirds majority or opt for one of the two
parties now contending.
The Maoists have indicated that after the
next round of election if unsuccessful, they
would look for other alternatives. It is not
clear what that means. Their central
committee will be meeting on the 19th. The
Nepali Congress has not changed its stand.
They are insisting that a consensus should
be forged on vital issues of peace process
mainly on integration and rehabilitation of
Maoists combatants before they could change
their stand.
Surprisingly the civil groups which were in
the forefront during the Jana Andolan II are
silent.
If the present trend continues, it is likely
that the fifth round of election on 18th
will also end in a fiasco.
The political parties will have to think of
alternatives and not go through the farce of
elections again and again.