not wanting to let go of the prestige and financial benefits of membership, will drag
out the process as long as possible – and lose the opportunity for change. On the
other hand, given the kinds of purpose served by the process (for example, the
people and the representatives will have to educate themselves on the purpose
and structure of the state and questions of public policy), the presumption must be
against a rushed process. What constitutes a happy medium between too long
and too short a process depends on the context, and on whether the people are
knowledgeable enough to engage in the process. In the event the assessment
must be that the process has taken too long – though not as a result of the process
design.
The IC provided for up to two years for the CA to make and adopt the Consti-
tution, but provided for a one-off extension for another six months, by a resolution
of the CA, if the Constitution is not ready due to ‘an emergency situation in the
country’ (Article 64 ). The extension would require a resolution passed by a simple
majority of members present and voting. In the case of failure, the CA would
automatically be dissolved.
The actual process in the CA
After elections to the CA had twice been postponed, voters went to the polls in
April 2008. The Maoists emerged as the strongest political force, though without an
overall majority. Girija Prasad Koirala (of the second-largest party, the Nepali
Congress) made way for Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda), leader of the Maoist
party, as prime minister. The CA sat first on 28 May 2008 and declared Nepal a
republic and on 11 June 2008 the king left the royal palace, which was converted
into a museum.
The IC gave the CA two years from its first sitting to complete the Constitution.
Progress was extremely slow. Serious differences arose among the major parties,
and the CA did not meet again for a considerable time after its inauguration. When
it did meet, it was in its capacity as the legislature (having opted against setting up a
special committee for this purpose). It did not address constitutional issues for
a long time. Eventually it set up ten committees to deal with different matters:
system of government, human rights, rights of minorities and federalism. The CA
did not provide civic education (some of this was done by non-governmental
organisations and by the UN), nor did it set up a commission for public consult-
ation and and for making recommendations for a draft constitution. But the
committees of the CA sought the views of the public by going round the country,
with a questionnaire which the audience were requested to fill in at a meeting
(though answers delivered later were accepted). The committees distributed a
number of responses to each member of the committee for study and summary,
and presumably in the expectation that members would use the responses, and
other considerations, for drafting the relevant chapter of the constitution.