KATHMANDU, Nepal — After nearly a decade of delay marked by haggling and political infighting,
Nepal formally adopted
a constitution on Sunday, with President Ram Baran Yadav calling the moment a realization of “the continuous democratic movements initiated by Nepalese people” after he signed the document.
Yet the process that led to the adoption of the Constitution, intended to bring much needed unity to the impoverished, fractious Himalayan nation, proved divisive and was attended by paralyzing strikes and violence that led to more than 40 deaths.
The Constitution aims to reinforce
Nepal as a secular, democratic republic with a provision for the protection of religion, and establishes seven provinces. Its passage is the latest chapter in a turbulent history that includes a bloody civil war, the overthrow of the 239-year-old monarchy and a
devastating earthquake in April that killed thousands and left thousands more homeless.
Sunday’s ceremony marked the culmination of months of negotiations among the leaders of Nepal’s major political parties, which led to agreements on proportional representation in Parliament and the size and borders of the provinces.
“We believe the country will move to adopt a speedy path of socioeconomic development,” Mr. Yadav said.
But the new Constitution has deeply alienated much of Nepal’s southern plains and the Madhesi people there, who have said that it dilutes their representation. Ethnic Tharus in western Nepal have also strongly objected to the provincial boundaries.
“It’s a black day for us,” said Rajendra Mahato, a leader of the Unified Madhesi Democratic Front, an umbrella organized of Madhesi parties. “We are burning the document as it curtailed our rights.”
India, which borders the plains, called for political flexibility in the constitutional process. Hours before the Constitution was enacted, a protester was killed when the police opened fire with rubber bullets on a crowd in the Parsa District in the plains, according to the chief district officer there.
In 2006, after years of an insurgency that left at least 13,000 people dead, Nepal’s Maoist rebels agreed to
put down their arms and join in a democratic political process.
An interim Constitution was adopted the next year, and in 2008, the Constituent Assembly was elected to a two-year term and the monarchy was abolished. But the term was extended after political parties failed to reach an agreement on the provinces.
In June, after the earthquake, the major parties agreed on a constitutional structure in which the lower house of Parliament would have 60 percent of its seats elected directly and the rest elected through a proportional representation system. The parties had proposed to determine provincial boundaries through a commission, but the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution could only be passed with the provinces in place, and last month, six federal provinces were delineated. After protests broke out in the midwestern region, a seventh province was created, in the hills.
“In going from six to seven was where the mistake was made,” said Kanak Mani Dixit, the founding editor of
Himal Southasian magazine and a political commentator. The plains people “felt absolutely cheated and bereft because the Kathmandu-based politicians did not show sensitivity to them while showing sensitivity to the hill people.”
Protests became violent. On Aug. 24, at least six police officials and three civilians were killed in clashes in western Nepal. This month in the Mahottari District, southeast of the capital, an injured riot police officer
was dragged from an ambulance and beaten to death. Last week, a 4-year-old boy was among four people killed when
the police fired rubber bulletsin Rupandehi, west of Kathmandu.
Politicians have been criticized for failing to consult a wider segment of society in the drafting of the document.
“This should have been a Constitution that was a progressive leap for Nepal,” said Prashant Jha, a journalist at The Hindustan Times in India and the author of “Battles of the New Republic: A Contemporary History of Nepal.” “Instead it represents a conservative backlash.”
The leaders of the major political parties say they are still open to changes in the provincial borders, which could be enacted through a federal commission.
Critics have noted other flaws in the document, including a clause that denies equal citizenship for children born to Nepalese mothers and foreign fathers. Others, however, point to its progressive features, including the banning of capital punishment.
The Constitution was
voted into effect Wednesday, with 507 members of a 601-member assembly voting in its favor. Leaders of Madhesi parties boycotted the vote and the promulgation.
Some in Nepal said that the Constitution, while flawed, represented an important opportunity for the country to move forward and develop economically.
“I call it a suboptimal Constitution, but we have to pick up and move ahead,” Mr. Dixit said.
