By Narayan Prasad Mishra
We do not see a single method of making a constitution of a country. The three methods are generally seen in practice — by forming an expert committee, a commission of different sectors of people, and a constituent assembly. However, the model of a constitutional assembly is considered the most democratic and best. But the most accepted principle is that it should be based on the country’s history, culture, tradition, education standard, economy, and geography of a country.
The formation of a Constituent Assembly is often hailed as a historic moment in a nation’s journey toward self-governance and democracy. It is a body tasked with framing a constitution that upholds the will and aspirations of the people. Assemblies are designed to be a forum where diverse voices come together to draft a framework of governance that reflects the collective vision of a nation. In theory, they should represent various segments of society, including ethnic groups, economic classes, and political affiliations. Their task is to ensure that the Constitution not only protects the rights of citizens but also fosters equality, justice, and opportunity. People always remember the constitutions of the USA, India, or South Africa’s post-apartheid Constitution as among the best formulated by Constituent Assemblies.
In Nepal, we not only had no constitution, but we also had the autocratic Rana Rule until 1951, when the will of the Rana Prime Minister, known as the Shree Teen Maharaj, was the Constitution and the law of the land. However, after the fall of the Rana Regime in 1951, we introduced our first Constitution in 1959. After that, we replaced it with many other constitutions as a result of political changes, movements, and revolutions. One of these was the Constitution of 1990, which established a multiparty democracy and enshrined the human rights and fundamental rights seen in other democratic constitutions. However, the communist revolutionaries opposed this Constitution, claiming that it was not formulated by a true Constituent Assembly and demanding a constitution created by one. They propagated the idea that Nepal would become a “heaven” once a Constituent Assembly formulated a constitution.
With the changing times and circumstances, other democratic parties, including the oldest democratic party in the country, the Nepali Congress, also joined hands with these revolutionaries and started a movement. As a result, they discarded the Constitution of 1990 and drafted a new one with a Constituent Assembly, which is known as the Constitution of Nepal, 2015 (*Nepalko Sambidhan, 2072*).
It is said that while the notion of a Constituent Assembly may be rooted in democratic ideals, in practice, many such assemblies are influenced by power dynamics that skew the constitution-making process. In principle, a Constituent Assembly holds the promise of establishing a foundation of equality and justice for a nation. However, when manipulated by self-centered parties or groups, it becomes a means of cheating the very people it was meant to serve. Political parties, powerful corporations, and influential lobbyists often control it. Consequently, marginalized groups are frequently left out of the conversation. Their needs and concerns are either ignored or superficially addressed, leaving entire sections of the population without meaningful representation. When people see the Constitution as a document that cheats them rather than protects them, the rule of law itself is undermined. A government that operates under such a constitution lacks legitimacy. It is visible that this reflects the current condition of our country and its people.
The parties in power within the government and the parliament claim that the Constituent Assembly formulated this Constitution by collecting opinions from people across the country and that it represents various sections of society. However, a large number of people disagree. According to them, opinions were collected merely for formality’s sake, but these opinions were not seriously considered. They also argue that the majority of people demanded a Hindu nation with their opinions, but the seven ruling parties, along with the Maoist party, disregarded this preference. Allegedly, they were so fearful of public opinion that they did not even open the boxes containing the opinion papers.
Furthermore, these parties used party whips and applied pressure to prevent any opposition to their interests. The resulting Constitution transformed Nepal from a constitutional monarchy to a republic, from a Hindu state to a secular one, and from a decentralized administration to a federal structure. The Constitution was formulated dictatorially by ignoring the country’s history, culture, tradition, education standard, economy, and geography, which should be based on formulating it. This was done not in response to the people’s interests or opinions but based on the interests and advice of their foreign allies.
Despite its noble intent, the implementation of this Constitution has often fallen short, leading many to see the Constituent Assembly as a façade that ultimately cheated the people it was meant to serve. Observing this betrayal as an independent citizen, I wrote the following poem in Nepali, which was published in *Janasatta Weekly* (Janasatta Saptahik ) on March 29, 2008 (B.S.2064 Chaitra 16)
Poem in Nepali
Poem in English
Note: This poem is composed in English based on the above Nepali poem, not translated word for word.
A Divine Cow in the Political Barn
In the political barn, a celestial cow stands tall,
Granting wishes, astonishing one and all.
To Maoists, it bestowed a republic system grand,
To Indigenous people, a federal land.
To Christians, it offered a secular state’s embrace,
To Madhesis, territorial autonomy’s grace.
What use are the people’s voices now,
When all emanates from the cowshed’s vow?
Laws and constitutions, as they please,
The cowshed’s whims, the nation decrees.
People’s will and party’s whim entwine,
In the cowshed’s realm, they intertwine.
Millions spent on the Constituent Assembly’s show,
But from the cowshed, all flows.
For in the political barn’s mystical haze,
The divine cow’s will holds sway.
– By Narayan Prasad Mishra
This sense of betrayal has created disillusionment and dissatisfaction among people, as the Assembly failed to live up to its promises, serving the interests of the powerful rather than those of the citizenry. The country’s condition in all sectors—moral, economic, educational, administrative, and technical—continues to decline. Consequently, people are suffering unbearably, and the future of the country appears bleak.
So far, no single individual, leader, party, or group commands the trust of the people. We do not see any savior who could become the hope of the people and the country. I wish we had a national leader like Mahatma Gandhi of India, Nelson Mandela of South Africa, or Abraham Lincoln of the USA—someone with the vision of Winston Churchill, the resilience of Václav Havel, or the transformative power of Martin Luther King Jr. We lack a national leader who could inspire unity, courage, and instill justice like Franklin D. Roosevelt, or embody compassion like Mother Teresa. I am saddened to say this.
Comments:
Leave a Reply