The confrontational stances of political parties on the ordinance about the election of National Assembly has delayed government formation and also dragged the President's Office into the controversy.
The President's Office is sitting on the ordinance that is indirectly obstructing the formation of new government with the Election Commission (EC) formally announcing it will not announce final results for federal parliament until the election for National Assembly is held. The election, obviously cannot be held until the President Bidhya Devi Bhandari endorses the ordinance.
The EC argues that it must first know who gets elected to the National Assembly before instructing the political parties about the number of women, Madhesis, and persons from indigenous ethnicities and other marginalized communities to comply with the constitutional provision that requires each party to have at least 33 percent women's representation, and required proportion from other marginalized communities in the House of Representatives and National Assembly combined.
The new government cannot be formed unless the EC sends the final results of the federal parliament to the President's Office which will then invite the left alliance which has secured a big majority to form the government.
CPN-UML claims the Sher Bahadur Deuba government is needlessly trying to remain in the government citing this issue and argues that the National Assembly need not be elected for forming the new government. It points how Nepali Congress (NC) had formed the government after the first parliamentary election following the restoration of democracy in 1990. It further points how Deuba as the then home minister had brought the bill for election of the National Assembly.
UML Chairman KP Oli has bluntly hinted that the EC is acting on NC's instructions while taking the stance of not announcing final results before election of the National Assembly.
NC, on its part, claims that the President's Office is sitting on the ordinance on UML's instructions.
So, who is to blame for the current confrontation?
Let us first look at the main reason behind the impasse. The ordinance sent by the Deuba government states that the election for National Assembly will be held in Single Transferrable Vote system while UML wants the election to be held in majority system.
NC wants Single Transferrable Vote system as it stands to get a few seats more in the National Assembly than if it were held as per majority system. UML, uderstandably, wants to form the government first and then pass the law for election of the National Assembly to ensure that the election is held in majority system.
This dispute is not new and the seeds were sown three months back. The bill for election of National Assembly was first registered in the parliament on September 13. It mentioned that the election will be held in majority system.
But many said that the majority system will not be right as per the spirit of the National Assembly to have reputed and respected persons as members. The government then lodged an amendment on the bill to hold the election in Single Transferrable Vote system. It cited how the National Assembly after 1990 also was formed through Single Transferrable Vote system.
But the results of even the second stage of local elections had arrived by then and UML had won more local units. UML, therefore, opposed the amendment and obstructed discussion on the bill. The then government of NC and CPN (Maoist Center), now together with UML in the left alliance, could have passed the bill as they had majority in the House.
But the Deuba government did not pass it and preferred to wait to get the law through an ordinance once the parliament were to be dissolved before the election.
The government then sent the ordinance to the President's Office including the provision of electing the National Assembly through Single Transferrable Vote system on October 24. President Bhandari, reportedly under UML's instructions, has been sitting on the ordinance for almost two months.
The President's Office unofficially says the Constitution only has provisions for first past the post (FPTP) and PR electoral systems and this ordinance with Single Transferrable Vote system cannot be issued by the President.
Article 113(2) of the Constitution states 'A Bill submitted to the President for his or her assent in accordance with this Article shall be assented to within fifteen days, both Houses shall be informed thereof as soon as possible.'
Ours is a parliamentary system and the President's Office has to issue whatever bills or ordinances the government sends to it. There is also a constitutional provision that allows the President to send any bill back to the Cabinet within 15 days along with the message if the President's Office does not agree with the bill. But the Constitution does not speak about sending back an ordinance in that manner.
The President's Office has in this way erred in sitting on the ordinance for two months. It should either have sent it back to the government or issued it.
The Constitution says the House of Representatives will be elected through FPTP and PR systems but it does not speak about election for the National Assembly. Article 86(6) says 'Other matters relating to election to the members of the National Assembly shall be as provided for in the Federal law.'
The Constitution of 1991 had mentioned that the National Assembly will be elected through the Single Transferrable Vote system. But the current Constitution does not. So, the election for National Assembly technically can be held through whichever system the election law mentions.
Deuba wants the ordinance to be passed so that it will be held through Single Transferrable Vote system while UML wants its government to bring the law including the provision of majority system.
What can be the way forward?
There are three alternatives for ending the current impasse.
The first is President Bhandari issuing the ordinance sent by the Deuba government.
The second is the EC giving up its stance and announcing the election results to pave the way for President to start process for formation of the new government.
The third is the parties reaching an agreement to end the impasse. The parties that have reached here after resolving far greater disputes can easily resolve the current problem if they so wish.
