Time for Nepal to Honor the History of Indigenous with the Federal Structure

At this turning point, if Nepal fails to recognize its indigenous communities with the federal structure names to honor their ancient yet prevailing history, it will be unfortunate because the obstruction crafted by the main opposition parties – Nepali Congress and UML. Consequently, the new constitution will not be promulgated. There will be constitutional crisis. The provision of the Constituent Assembly will come to an end.

Fundamentally, both Nepali Congress and UML as parliamentarian social democratic parties have failed to respect the anthropological significance of indigenous communities as the most diverse yet in minority group that through the federal naming structure Nepal could introduce them to the world community. The world would honor Nepal if Nepal could tribute its diverse indigenous communities with the federal naming structures. This will by no means disintegrate the nation. It is only the question of intellectual integrity of the senior leaders of main political parties to tribute the centuries repressed history.

Finally, on April 26, 2012 Nepal´s one of the main political parties the Maoists have introduced 10 identity-based states for the federal structure that can honor the indigenous community. The structure looks very comprehensible and inclusive despite of the Seti-Mahakali state (one of the Khash states), which is dislocated entirely from its Terai districts – Kailali amd Kanchanpur. Immediately after this NC introduced 7 state and UML 12 state federal structure.

What´s going on with the party leaders of main political parties the Maoists, NC and UML at this crucial period seems as if the leaders of main political parties, particularly NC and UML, have become completely disoriented in term of form of government and the federal structure.

NC argued that it has expressed willingness to accept the mixed model form of government with a directly-elected executive president as per Maoists´ demanded because the Maoists could be more flexible with the identity based federal structures. But it is the Maoists which had from the beginning supported the indigenous movement for the identity based federal states.

In my opinion, it is the failure of the NC leadership to accept the mixed form of government. Instead NC should have taken an initial step to modernize its Westminster Parliamentary form of government with the directly elected Prime Minister as the executive head of the government. It is naïve of NC leadership to think that the Maoists will let go the identity based federal states that can honor the history of indigenous communities, which was for centuries repressed by previous regimes from recognizing them with the state honor.

The most important of all for promulgating a new democratic constitution is the form of government. How could NC let go its founders ideal´, such as his honorable BPKoirala´s, as the most appreciated form of government even without considering it to make it more firm and stable? It seems the senior leaders are afraid of direct election system for the head of the government to run a stable government.

Obviously, their fear reflects their desire of becoming the Prime Minister each six month within the full term of the Parliamentary election. Otherwise, they will have to wait full term of a directly elected Prime M