The Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063 (2007) - Digital Himalaya

THE INTERIM CONSTITUTION OF NEPAL, 2063 (2007)AS AMENDED BY THE FIRST TO SIXTH AMENDMENTSTHE INTERIM CONSTITUTION OF NEPALIn 1990 Nepal adopted its fifth – and first fully democratic – constitution. Althoughthere were many good features about that constitution, it failed to satisfy the demandsof many Nepali people. There was also a sense that the 1990 Constitution had limitedinvolvement of the people in its making, and that it came formally into being not asan act of the people's sovereignty but as a gift of the King. Among the shortcomingsof the Constitution in the eyes of many were the insistence that Nepal is a Hindukingdom; the inclusion of many important economic and social rights as “directiveprinciples" only, which means they were not able to be used as the basis for legalclaims; inadequate provisions for civilian control of the army; excessive power givento the King; and provisions that were not clear enough about the King's powers,thus making it possible for those powers to be abused. Unfortunately, over the yearsno attempt was made to remedy the deficiencies of that constitution by amendment.To the faults of the constitution itself, and insufficient royal commitment todemocracy, must be added grave failures of leadership, failure of political parties tomake any serious effort to be representative of the nation as a whole, excessivedomination of many sectors of national life by a minority of the community, andexcessive concentration of powers in the hands of the Kathmandu authorities. Allthese were compounded by the ten-year Maoist insurgency. Matters were brought toa head by the King's seizure of all power in 2005.The actions of the King finally led to a people's movement, jana andolan, in April2006, and the King ultimately recalled the parliament originally elected in 1999. Bythen the Maoists had begun negotiations with the major political parties, in whichthe Maoists' main demands were republicanism and the convening of a ConstituentAssembly to draft a new constitution. But the hundred of thousands who came outon the streets were demanding more than a restoration of democracy; they demandedgreater inclusion of the various sectors of society marginalized in the past, includingDalits, Janajatis (ethnic groups), Madhesis (from the terai) and women. So theinsistence was on breaking the monopoly of power by the certain privileged groups,inclusion of all groups in decision making, including in the Constituent Assembly,and rights for all. The Maoists in particular insisted that the 1990 Constitution couldnot continue to be the legal basis for governance, even for a transitional period. Adecision was made to have an Interim Constitution.6