India should have been the first to welcome the adoption of the Constitution. Hundreds of trucks loaded with essential goods, cooking gas cylinders and petroleum products were stalled at the Nepal-India border at Birgunj due to the agitation. He added: “On a day when Nepal was celebrating, India did not join in with us”. But it has also been criticised that it takes its neighbour for granted. The bureaucracy concerned should have provided the details of its requests much before, and the relevant minister of state should have had preliminary discussions.
With it Nepal institutionalized itself as a democratic, republic and federal state.
The new Constitution allows only 45 per cent of the total members of Parliament to be elected through proportional representation system as compared to 58 per cent under the interim Constitution of 2007.
But even before the constitution was passed, it became clear it would not address the aspirations of all. The article as it stands discriminates between men and women and is demeaning to the latter. “Issues of differences should be resolved”.
A brief history of Constitution-making in Nepal is instructive.
The charter has sparked protests from many quarters. The Constituent Assembly rejected this proposal overwhelmingly.
There is unnecessary posturing on both sides.
They also assumed that because they have the numbers, including a significant presence of Madhesi lawmakers within their party ranks, they might manage to contain the political fallout.
The Madhesi people who constitute 50 percent of the population of Nepal may have legitimate grievances. In the coming days, political parties in Nepal are expected to send their representatives to meet the Indian leadership and find a solution to the current impasse. The remaining 507 members voted in favour of the Big 3 draft, and the Constitution was adopted.
India’s reaction has complicated matters. India has to rise above the usual ministry of external affairs line that these issues are an “internal matter of Nepal”.
The objective of a new constitution was to lay the foundations for an innovative state and society.
What does the new constitution say? An interference by any standard of the word.
Has India really imposed an economic blockade against Nepal as it did in 1989?
BBC Nepali reporters in Kathmandu say long queues are forming at petrol stations as residents stockpile fuel in anticipation of shortages. This irked Kathmandu’s sensibilities. It has urged Nepal to amend the new constitution by securing ‘widest possible. Kathmandu is now seeking answer to this question from New Delhi. India’s decision this week to step up security at key posts along its border with Nepal had triggered fears of a repeat for some in that country. This is clearly directed against the Madhesis, and must, in Nepal’s own interest, be withdrawn.
Work on the document began in 2008 after the Maoists won parliamentary elections and abolished the monarchy.
Considering the situation, Indian Ambassador to Nepal Rae called on Prime Minister and Nepali Congress president Sushil Koirala, CPN-UML Chairman KP Oli and senior leader Madhav Kumar Nepal separately.