Kathmandu, September 19
As Nepal is celebrating the third anniversary of promulgation of its constitution, the first in Nepal’s history which has been drafted by people’s representatives, Chairman of then Constituent Assembly Subas Chandra Nembang says he is very much delighted today.
Though some parties and sections of society still have dissatisfaction over the constitution, it has been ‘acceptable’ to all in its first three years, he says. “The case is similar in other parts of the world too. The constitution cannot satisfy everyone. But still, it is acceptable to all.”
The leader of the legislative body that completed the Herculean task of writing the country’s new law in five years and eight months claims the process, however, was not easy.
Nembang claims he received numerous threats to delay the promulgation of constitution, without citing who those people were. The number of threatens went up when the parties stayed united for the constitution.
“I do not want to name anyone now. Some foreigners also suggested that I do not rush to promulgate the constitution, politely sometimes and harshly other times,” he informs, “Some people said they would indict me on corruption charges. Some people said they would convince the army or the President to stop the process.”
“But, incidents that developed after September 20, 2015 indicate that,” he claims, “If we had failed to promulgate the constitution that day, the major parties would develop differences on the next course, and it is clear that the next course would be outside the Constituent Assembly in that case.”
Meanwhile, Nembang also reveals that then President Ram Baran Yadav, too, wanted to defer the process so as to discuss the charter’s contents in a more detailed manner.
“But, I think the constitution writing process was comprehensive and detailed in terms of people’s participation and discussions. We also dared to discuss whether we want to change the name of the country. We also discussed if we needed to changed the national flag,” he questions those criticising the process, “Do you think any process can be more democratic than this?”
