October 2007 Nepal: The Politics of the Constituent Assembly Elections Dev Raj Dahal, FES Kathmandu • The power struggle among the ruling parties, the movement of subsidiary identities and non-state armed actors with a number of demands have challenged the state's monopoly of power, weakened its ability to govern and facilitate the political transition. • New demands of various groups for a federal republic, a proportional representation election system, an adjustment of the armed forces of both sides and contesting visions on social, economic and political reforms generated high political dynamics and forced the postpone­ment of the Constituent Assembly(CA) elections twice. • Public security, timely CA elections, human rights, reconciliation and peace building continue to engage the policy of the international community and civil society. Introduction The political transition of Nepal from feudal­ism to democracy has suddenly hit a snag. On September 18, the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN-Maoist)'s exit from the interim govern­ment headed by Premier G.P. Koirala for not meeting its 22-point demand including a dec­laration of Nepal as a republic before the CA elections on November 22, a fully propor­tional election system, an adjustment of the People's Liberation Army(PLA) and Nepal Army(NA) and a roundtable dialogue to ad­dress the grievances of all subsidiary identities encouraged a variety of angry groups to in­tensify their activities. The ruling parties ex­pressed an inability to hold the CA elections as scheduled, negotiate a new date for it and also find a new political consensus based on a changed context. The paradox of Nepali politics is that in spite of a vibrant press, public opinion and articu­late civil society, constitutional behavior essen­tial to a civic political culture has not been en­trenched in governance. The history of au­thoritarian politics and the lack of an inde­pendent checks and balances of power chal­lenged the boundary between private and public, reduced the sovereignty of the political arena- the state, its ability to mediate con­tending interests and foster democratic gov­ernance. Despite the promise of the Compre­hensive Peace Agreement(CPA) to end impu­nity, to ensure the rights of the victims to re­turn to their homes and to disclose the whereabouts of disappeared persons, the processes of reconciliation and winning vic­tims' trust have yet to begin. The govern­ment's reluctance to establish a Truth and Reconciliation Commission(TRC), a Commis­sion on Enforced Disappearances(CED), a Peace and Rehabilitation Commission(PRC) and a State Restructuring Commission(SRC) has given continuity to the vacuum in the rule of law. The TRC bill provoked heavy criticism from the international community for ignoring the rights of victims to transitional justice, granting amnesty to perpetrators and breach­ing the provisions of the UN basic principles on compensation, reconciliation and rehabili­tation. To restore its image of a justice­oriented democratic nation the Nepali leader­ship's vision should be inclusive, collectively­oriented and forward looking.