The term “people's mandate” has been frequently used in Nepali politics in relation to the CA election. Political leaders interpret this term according to their own political preferences

What are the norms of a multiparty democracy and the provision mentioned in the interim constitution are common and the people have the adequate knowledge in this regard. We introduced the system of “National Consensus” of seven political parties and also kept this provision in the interim constitution 2063. According to the provision mentioned in the interim constitution 2063, every decision of the country will be taken with consensus among the partners of the seven party alliances. Whereas, the election of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker, appointing the Prime Minster, amendment of the constitution and vote of no confidence to the Prime Minster can be executed only when two third majority of the parliament decides else, consensus among the seven political parties has to be reached.

But the political scenario in the present Nepalese politics has changed. After the CA election many new powers have emerged. There are 25 political parties in existence in the present constituent assembly. All of them have the mandate from the people. So the consensus means the unanimous decision of all the political parties represented in the constituent assembly. If the consensus can not be reached among the political parties represented in the CA body then one has to follow the provision of the interim constitution 2063.

Everybody knows that out of 601 seats, the Maoist have 220 seats in the parliament. It is about 35% of the total seats. Similarly, Nepali congress and UML have respectively 110 and 107 seats. Thus the parties have neither received two thirds nor a simple majority in the constituent assembly. Even in terms of the percentage of votes secured in the election, only 29 % of the vote goes to the pocket of the Maoists. It implies, by extension, that 71% of the people voted against the Maoists. So how can one say that the party securing 29% vote or 220 out of 601 seats have the peoples’ mandate? This data shows that no political party has secured the majority in the constituent assembly or single mandate from the people.

Again, the main goal of the constituent assembly is to draft the new constitution that would be made in consensus with all the parties. The provision of the constitution also gives right to political parties to form the government. But one must show the two thirds majority in the parliament to form the government on its own or secure consensus among the political parties representing the constituent assembly. It is because of this reason that the present political process starts from the amendment of the interim constitution 2063. The recent decision of the Nepali Congress CWC meeting was executed to open the door for the present political deadlock not the other way round. Unless the CA appoints the President-the last amendment to the Interim Constitution incorporates the provision for tendering the resignation of the prime minister to the president, nobody can accept the resignation of the Prime Minister and appoint the new Prime Minister unless there is consensus among the 25 political parties. So before making any decision, the name of the President has to be declared to end this political deadlock. In this context, it is not wise to blame Nepali Congress for that it did not open the door for the formation of the new government.  The NC CWC meeting has already decided that NC is not willing to head the new government. The Nepali Congress has already made it clear that it will support the party---that will be ready to run the government as per the norms and values of a multiparty democracy. Thus, it should be clear to all that the Nepali congress will not join hands with the Maoist unless it abides by the agreements signed in the past.

To make it clear to all, the Nepali Congress do not possesses the right to support the party that neither follows the norms of the multiparty democracy nor follows the agreement signed at different intervals of time---71%  people voted for that agenda, if one were to recall.

The activities of the Maoist after the CA election amply demonstrate their democratic credentials. Take for example the Shaktikhor incident---it demonstrates the Maoists’ pseudo loyalty to the rule of law.  Similar incidents have taken place in many parts of the country. That is why Nepali Congress has decided not to join hands with the Maoist unless they show total commitment and honesty to democracy and moral values prevailing in a civilized world.

So, with the argument above, it becomes clear that the people have given their verdict in favor of the seven political parties not just a single political party---the Maoists. So the responsibility of the seven party alliances is to draft the new constitution as soon as possible and quickly hold the next parliamentary election. As a matter of fact, the Maoists must also understand that the mandate of the people this time—through the CA election is not just to form a government on their own or to declare their programs for the coming four decades. In the process, forming a government or dissolving it, can be done as per the provision stipulated in the interim constitution, above all the responsibility is to write a new constitution as per the wishes of the people. Taking these facts into account, the Nepali Congress is totally committed to honor what has been decided by the seven political parties in the recent past.