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. Finally new constitution was adopted on 20 Sep 2015 which has met with demonstration and agitation by Madheshi and Tharu in Terai area.Since its adoption Nepal has been virtually blocked by agitators and calls for immediate solution.

1. Nepal Crisis and Adoption of Constitution
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.
The Constitution was voted into effect Wednesday,16 Sep 2015 with 507
members of a 601-member assembly voting in its favor. Leaders of Madhesi
parties boycotted the vote and the promulgation.
After nearly a decade of delay marked by haggling and political infighting, Nepal
formally adopted a constitution on Sunday, 20 Sep 2015 with President Ram
Baran Yadav calling the moment a realization of “the continuous democratic
movements initiated by Nepalese people” after he signed the document.
It was 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.
The Constitution aims to reinforce Nepalas a secular, democratic republic with
a provision for the protection of religion, and establishes seven provinces.

2. 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 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.
India, which borders the plains, called for political flexibility in the constitutional
process.
“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. More protests and killing continues .
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 Nepalesemothers and foreign fathers.
Others, however, point to its progressive features, including the banning of
capital punishment.
Some in Nepal said that the Constitution, while flawed, represented an important
opportunity for the country to move forward and develop economically.
On 21 September2015 – While acknowledging the adoption of the long-
awaited constitution of Nepal, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-

3. moon voiced concern about recent violence in the country and stressed the
need for dialogue and non-violence.
“The Secretary-Generalacknowledges the adoption of the new Constitution
in Nepal. Noting that the Constitution is a living document, he urges all
political leaders to act in the broad national interest and with continued
flexibility and inclusivity,” his spokesperson,Stéphane Dujarric, told
reporters in New York.
“He remains concerned about the recent violence and stressesthe
importance of dialogue and non-violence as well as respectforpeaceful
protestand freedomof assembly,” he added.
“A peacefuland democratic Nepal is what the people of Nepal seek and
deserve.”
According to media reports, PresidentRam Baran Yadav officially
promulgated the Constitution yesterday. This is the sixth constitution since
the country established democracyin 1950,and the first to be created by
the people’s electedrepresentatives.The previous constitutions were
drafted by the monarchy or selectcommittees.
NepalRationsFuel as PoliticalCrisisWith India Worsens
Nepal began rationing fuel on Monday to copewith a worsening shortage brought
on by continuing unrest over the country’s new Constitution and are blaming India
for instigating unrest which has been denied by GOI
Nepal imports all of its fuel from India, but tanker trucks carrying fresh supplies
have been blocked from crossing the bordersince late last week. “Things are
completely out of order,” said Deepak Baral, a spokesmanfor the state-run Nepal
Oil Corporation. “What we are doing now is just to continue emergency-only
services.”
“It is an economic blockade of Nepal,” said Mahesh Basnet, Nepal’s industry
minister. “India imposed it after some of its suggestions raised internally regarding
the new Constitution were not addressed.”He added that the move was igniting
“anti-India sentiment” in the country.
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs denied ordering any blockade, and Indian
officials said sit-ins on the Nepalese side of the border by members of the Madhesi
ethnic group, who have been protesting the Constitution for more than a month,
were disrupting trade across the border.

4. Though the violence has ebbed, the protests appeared to have taken on a new form
through sit-ins at border posts.
The impasse has underscored Nepal’s profound economic reliance on India,
particularly after April’s devastating earthquake destroyed Nepal’s land trade
routes with China.
The controversy comes after more than a year of friendly relations between Nepal
and India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India visited Nepal in 2014, and India
pledged $1 billion for reconstruction after the earthquake.
On Friday, Nepali officials summoned India’s ambassador, Ranjit Rae, to the
Foreign Ministry over the fuel crisis, and Nepal’s commerce and supplies minister
went to Delhi on Monday to meet with officials.
Prime Minister SushilKoirala of Nepal visited Tharu and Madhesi areas over the
weekend to meet with local leaders and security officials, a step many in Nepal
had urged him to take during the violent protests. Nepali lawmakers havesaid
concerns over the boundaries of provinces can be addressed through
amendments to the Constitution.
Nepal: Conflict Analysis
An over-militarised security reaction and inadequate political responsefrom the
centre threaten to fuel deep-seated ethnic, caste and regional rivalries .The major
parties should recognise the depth of discontent and the fundamental challenge this
poses to the legitimacy of the constitution.
The constitution, nine years in the making, was envisioned as an instrument to
address longstanding grievances of large parts of society, who argue that the old
system marginalised them from state institutions and political authority, deprived
them of a fair share of the benefits of development and discriminated against them.
These groups include plains-based Madhesi, Tharu and smaller groups, Dalit caste
groups in the hills and plains, hill ethnic Janajati (“indigenous nationality”) groups
and women. Many have concluded that the constituition does not adequately
deliver on commitments to a federal system and inclusion.
The government and its opposition partners in the constituent Assembly say they
under pressure to end years of uncertainty by passing it. They downplay the

5. significance of the protests, arguing that not everyone in a democracycanbe
satisfiedand that the constitution can be amended. The state responseto the
protests has been security-heavy and in some areas, the army has been mobilised to
deal with civic unrest for the first time since the civil war.
A botched solution risks entrenching communal polarisation in society and
radicalising groups that feel their concerns were not seriously considered.
Reconciling the expectations of all Nepalis was always going to be a challenge for
the Constituent Assembly. The 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement between
the then Maoist rebels and representatives of political parties, as well as the 2007
Interim Constitution, promised political reform and redress for past inequities.
Numerous social groups based on caste, gender, ethnicity, and regional interests
lobbied for their agendas. Often, movements turned violent to force the
government to take them seriously. Since 2007, governments have signed over 40
agreements, often contradictory, with different groups.
The recent violence was mainly sparked by delineation of the six-, now seven-state
federal structure proposed to replace 75 administrative districts. Tarai-based
groups wanted to keep stretches of the southern Tarai plains together, including by
changing the traditional north-south administrative divisions, which mixed plains,
hills and mountains in administrative zones. In the hills, some Janajati groups want
to keep areas traditionally considered homelands intact, though this is not a focus
of protests.
Other issues are also highly contentious though not explicitly part of the current
demands: a citizenship measure which makes it difficult for children with a
single Nepali parent to gain citizenship with the same rights as those who receive
citizenship by descent; and the electoralsystemand standards for demarcating
constituencies, whichmay not deliver better representation of the agitating
population groups.
Madhesi communities, one of the country’s biggest population blocs and the
largest group across the Tarai, and Tharu communities, many concentrated in the
far-western Tarai, say the current system puts them at a demographic
disadvantage politically. They anticipate gains under the new system but object to
some parts of the plains being included in hill states. Traditionally hill-based

6. communities, and the framers of the constitution, counter that migration continues
from hills and mountains to the Tarai, forming mixed communities, and that hill
community members have land or commercial ties to the disputed areas. Madhesi
and Tharu groups believe the major parties want to renege on the letter and spirit of
earlier commitments to political empowerment and reform.
Within the Constituent Assembly, which functions as the parliament, there was
discontent. The governing coalition consists of the Nepali Congress (NC), the
Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (UML) and the Madhesi
Janadhikar Forum-Democratic (MJF-D); its oppositionpartners in the
constitutional deal are the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-M).
The MJF-D last week said it could no longer supportthe deal if Tharu concerns
were not addressed. The NC and UML have forbidden their members from trying
to amend the draft; 33 smaller parties have refused to be part of the process, and
the oldest Madhesi party, Sadbhavana, resigned from the Constituent Assembly ..
There are protests and agitation in much of the Tarai. Kailali district in the far
west, parts of which Tharu groups and the hill-based Undivided Far West
Movement wanted for their respective new states, had the worst violence.. The
major parties revised the federal model to add a seventh state in responseto
Undivided Far West Movement’s demands. That added to the discontent of Tharu
groups, considered among the most historically marginalised in Nepal, who said
their grievances were ignored as they lacked close ties to Kathmandu power
centres.
Birgunj city and areas in the central Tarai are tipping into serious violence. With
over 40 people killed .
It is unlikely the discontent can be resolved by a deal between power-brokers in
Kathmandu that does not address coreissues. While some district-level political
leaders and parties that represent Tharu and Madhesi groups in the Constituent
Assembly have been involved in the protests or supportthem, the mobilisation and
leadership comes largely from within local communities. Many of the protests do
not involve huge numbers, but rely instead on better organisation and target the
shutdown of specific infrastructure, such as government offices and stretches of the
national East-West highway.

7. The government must act urgently to address tensions, reduce the risk of more
violence and to restore confidence in the constitution. The enormous trust deficit
between agitating groups and Kathmandu’s political leadership will worsen if the
government and major parties persist with a heavily securitised responseto
fundamentally political protests, and if they and the media portray the protests as
marginal or criminal. The government should also urgently form an independent
commission to investigate the recent killings.
All protesting groups must denounce and guard against violence from within their
ranks, and avoid threatening or extreme rhetoric. They must also offer realistic
alternatives, not just reject Constitution.
The government anticipates speaking to each agitating front separately, but Tharu
and Madhesi groups may seek a joint negotiation. Small adjustments to the
proposedboundaries of states in the far west and east would significantly lower
tensions but are strongly resisted by some leaders.
Tenor will matter as much as issues. If there are more deaths and if groups feel
negotiations are not respectful or in good faith, this could jeopardise confidence in
other contentious compromises on citizenship, the electoral process, the number
and distribution of constituencies, the threshold for political parties, representation
and inclusion.
The anger in the Tarai and among various social groups is real. If it is ignored or
mishandled, the violence will grow. If the new constitution is truly to be one for all
Nepalis rather than a starting gun for new forms of conflict, its framers must
recognise that getting it done right is more important than getting it done fast.