How can Nepal´s President CORRECT his Unconstitutional Veto?
Prakash Bom
May 07, 2009
One does not need to be a Nepal´s constitutional expert to understand that a ceremonial president in the Parliamentary system of government in Democracy has no constitutional provision to veto people elected government´s decision regardless of civil or military decision. However, if the government´s decision such as Nepal Army chief´s dismissal is unilateral or partisan and need unanimous consensus then president ought to consult the Parliament for Hearing, instead of giving executive order outright against people elect government´s decision.
As a supreme commander of the military under rare national emergency in Parliamentary system the president can try to protect the nation if the government fails with uncommon political turmoil, which is uncommon. Nonetheless in some countries it has been repeatedly occurred because of which democratic system has military supremacy over civil government as such in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Maldives in South Asian nations. As a result, these nations have remained underdeveloped, less-democratic, unjust and corrupt with their socio-political and economic disciplines.
But, Maoist-led people elected civil government´s decision to discharge Nepal Army chief Katawal under the leadership of a first elected Prime Minister in the history of Nepal did not create a national emergency. On the contrary, if the president had been careful for not to take executive decision in haste the current political turmoil could have been avoided. Frankly, the Nepal Army chief is the employee of Nepal government and it is the responsibility of the government to discipline its employee if he or she disobey government and defy its order.
It is obvious that the establishment of Nepal Army under Katawal´s leadership still takes the position of military supremacy over civil government particularly dealing with Maoist-let government. This means military establishment does not trust the electoral mandate of people at this point in history that Maoist party has secured the most. Therefore, if such cynicism exists in among military establishment and certain political parties mainly Nepal Congress and UML then it is the president who has responsibility to play the most sensible role for unity. This is where president Yadav has failed with his responsibility and instead created current political turmoil.
Seriously, the ceremonial president in Parliamentary system cannot make party-affiliated decision. Instead he or she should redirect party-affiliated or partisan or unilateral decision of the government to the Parliament for Hearing. Once a ceremonial president is elected he or she should dislodge from his political party affiliation while seated as a ceremonial head of the state. But if every president of Nepal like Dr. Yadav fails to observe off-limits of the ceremonial president in the Parliamentary democratic system but subconsciously clings to the ´feudal mentality´ then Nepal must amend the provision of ceremonial president as a supreme leader of army. In that case, this responsibility must be given to the Council of Parliament.
But if president Yadav is willing to correct his decision against the order of people elect government on dismissal of army chief Katawal that will not only resolve the current political turmoil but also will pave the ethical guideline for the future ceremonial presidents of Nepal. In order to correct his decision he must consult Parliament for Hearing on the government decision on army chief Katawal´s dismissal.
Unless president sensibly correct his decision there will be no political stability in Nepal for a long period of time, which will jeopardize not only the responsibilities of people elected representatives of Constituent Assembly for drafting a new constitution by derailing peace process but also will obstruct the economic prosperity upon political uncertainty.
For example, the investors from all over the world will not take risk at this global financial melt-down. Indian investors have already been worried with the current political turmoil that has been surfaced with the improper, retaliatory and unconstitutional action of president Yadav against the decision of the government.
It is certain that Maoist will not take part in the government of national unity as long as president Yadav does not correct his improper executive action against the decision of government that gave order to reinstate ´sacked´ army chief Katawal. The best way to reconcile and correct president´s decision against the people elected government is to give the responsibility to the Parliament for Hearing on the fate of army chief Katawal – let the people´s elected representative cast their vote on the government decision.
The president at this point must think and decide independent of outside influence either of legal experts or party affiliation. If president Yadav can decide on his own to resolve this political turmoil in the history of Nepal then he needs to call on such a Parliamentary Hearing as soon as he can. If he does then he will not only save himself but also contribute to properly process Nepal´s infant Democracy through the mandate of people elected representatives of the Constituent Assembly.
Moreover, such a correction will definitely strengthen the supremacy of people elected representatives in the Parliament over the government with the power of electoral mandate that will grand civil government to establish supremacy over military against the status quo of Nepali politics that the mindset of many political parties depend on.
If president Yadav correct his action through the Parliamentary Hearing it will be new chapter that he will contribute to the drafting of a new constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal with the new provision for ceremonial president a chance to avoide political turmoil.
As a supreme commander of the military under rare national emergency in Parliamentary system the president can try to protect the nation if the government fails with uncommon political turmoil, which is uncommon. Nonetheless in some countries it has been repeatedly occurred because of which democratic system has military supremacy over civil government as such in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Maldives in South Asian nations. As a result, these nations have remained underdeveloped, less-democratic, unjust and corrupt with their socio-political and economic disciplines.
But, Maoist-led people elected civil government´s decision to discharge Nepal Army chief Katawal under the leadership of a first elected Prime Minister in the history of Nepal did not create a national emergency. On the contrary, if the president had been careful for not to take executive decision in haste the current political turmoil could have been avoided. Frankly, the Nepal Army chief is the employee of Nepal government and it is the responsibility of the government to discipline its employee if he or she disobey government and defy its order.
It is obvious that the establishment of Nepal Army under Katawal´s leadership still takes the position of military supremacy over civil government particularly dealing with Maoist-let government. This means military establishment does not trust the electoral mandate of people at this point in history that Maoist party has secured the most. Therefore, if such cynicism exists in among military establishment and certain political parties mainly Nepal Congress and UML then it is the president who has responsibility to play the most sensible role for unity. This is where president Yadav has failed with his responsibility and instead created current political turmoil.
Seriously, the ceremonial president in Parliamentary system cannot make party-affiliated decision. Instead he or she should redirect party-affiliated or partisan or unilateral decision of the government to the Parliament for Hearing. Once a ceremonial president is elected he or she should dislodge from his political party affiliation while seated as a ceremonial head of the state. But if every president of Nepal like Dr. Yadav fails to observe off-limits of the ceremonial president in the Parliamentary democratic system but subconsciously clings to the ´feudal mentality´ then Nepal must amend the provision of ceremonial president as a supreme leader of army. In that case, this responsibility must be given to the Council of Parliament.
But if president Yadav is willing to correct his decision against the order of people elect government on dismissal of army chief Katawal that will not only resolve the current political turmoil but also will pave the ethical guideline for the future ceremonial presidents of Nepal. In order to correct his decision he must consult Parliament for Hearing on the government decision on army chief Katawal´s dismissal.
Unless president sensibly correct his decision there will be no political stability in Nepal for a long period of time, which will jeopardize not only the responsibilities of people elected representatives of Constituent Assembly for drafting a new constitution by derailing peace process but also will obstruct the economic prosperity upon political uncertainty.
For example, the investors from all over the world will not take risk at this global financial melt-down. Indian investors have already been worried with the current political turmoil that has been surfaced with the improper, retaliatory and unconstitutional action of president Yadav against the decision of the government.
It is certain that Maoist will not take part in the government of national unity as long as president Yadav does not correct his improper executive action against the decision of government that gave order to reinstate ´sacked´ army chief Katawal. The best way to reconcile and correct president´s decision against the people elected government is to give the responsibility to the Parliament for Hearing on the fate of army chief Katawal – let the people´s elected representative cast their vote on the government decision.
The president at this point must think and decide independent of outside influence either of legal experts or party affiliation. If president Yadav can decide on his own to resolve this political turmoil in the history of Nepal then he needs to call on such a Parliamentary Hearing as soon as he can. If he does then he will not only save himself but also contribute to properly process Nepal´s infant Democracy through the mandate of people elected representatives of the Constituent Assembly.
Moreover, such a correction will definitely strengthen the supremacy of people elected representatives in the Parliament over the government with the power of electoral mandate that will grand civil government to establish supremacy over military against the status quo of Nepali politics that the mindset of many political parties depend on.
If president Yadav correct his action through the Parliamentary Hearing it will be new chapter that he will contribute to the drafting of a new constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal with the new provision for ceremonial president a chance to avoide political turmoil.