Thaindian News

Kathmandu, April 14 (IANS) As Nepal ushered in the Nepali new year 2067 Wednesday, the festivities were dampened due to the uncertainty prevailing about the future of the republic and the failure to resolve the feuds that had marred the peace process the previous year.
On Tuesday, the Nepali New Year eve, the Supreme Court was to have resolved the major row of 2009 that led to the collapse of the eight-month Maoist government and saw the start of anti-government protests by the dislodged party.

The then Maoist prime minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda had tried to sack then chief of the army, Gen Rookmangud Katawal, for refusing to allow Maoist combatants in the army despite a peace agreement. But Prachanda failed after President Ram Baran Yadav reinstated the sacked general.

Prachanda was forced to resign as his allies deserted him and the Maoists began a campaign against Yadav, calling his intervention unconstitutional.

Two individuals filed a case against the reinstatement and though the Supreme Court was to have delivered its verdict Tuesday, the two judges hearing the case deferred it to a full bench.

Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal, who succeeded Prachanda, Wednesday scotched rumours that he would step down under Maoist pressure.

With the Maoists demanding that they, as the largest party in parliament, be allowed to lead a coalition government, Nepal’s decision not to quit will make it virtually impossible for the ruling alliance to write and enforce a new constitution by May 28 due to Maoist opposition.

If Nepal fails to meet the May deadline, there is conjecture that it would lead to the dissolution of the government and parliament and unleash chaos.

The continued quarrel between the ruling parties and the Maoists has also jeopardised the fate of nearly 19,600 Maoist soldiers.

Though the fighters were to have been inducted in the army, now the parties refuse to honour the agreement. The Maoist combatants, who have been confined in UN-monitored cantonments since the peace pact in 2006, have warned they would revolt if a new statute is not promulgated by May.