Nepal Ruling Parties Take Common Position on Contentious Issues
By IANS | Published: 03rd November 2014 10:27 PM |
KATHMANDU: Nepal's ruling parties -- Nepali Congress(NC) and Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist-Leninist (CPN-UML) -- have come up with a common position on key issues of new constitution, form of government, judiciary and electoral system, party leaders said Monday.
CPN-UML chairman K.P. Oli presented the common position at the meeting of Political Dialogue and Consensus Committee (PDCC), Xinhua reported.
The ruling parties have rejected the idea of ethnic federalism as demanded by opposition parties. On the form of government, the ruling parties have stated that reformed parliamentary system would be a suitable model for the country like Nepal.
Some fringe parties have also supported the position of the NC and CPN-UML.
On electoral system, the ruling parties have said that a mixture of direct and proportional system should be adopted.
On Judiciary, the NC and CPN-UML have said that judiciary should be loyal to the constitution and a constitutional court could be formed to settle the dispute between the central government and provinces.
The opposition Unified Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN-Maoist) and Madhesh-based parties have objected to the common position of two parties. In the Constitutional Political Dialogue and Consensus Committee (PDCC) meeting, UCPN (Maoist) chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal said the ruling parties' model regarding the federalism is a regression.
"We want a progressive restructuring of the state which would liberate the oppressed and marginalized communities," Dahal said in the meeting.
The UCPN (Maoist) is of the view that there should be more than 10 provinces in the new federal setup. The dispute relating to federalism is delaying the process of promulgation of new constitution that would institutionalise republicanism and secularism achieved in 2008.
The constitution drafting process has faced a deadlock as ruling and opposition parties are adamant on their respective stance. There has not been any progress in the cross-party talks on contentious issues of the new constitution.