Kathmandu, Dec 23: Senior advocate and former lawmaker Radheshyam Adhikari has pointed out the need of establishing a constitution study commission so that objective analyses and research could be done on new system.
Hasty blame on federalism is not warranted, he said, underscoring a comprehensive study on federalism and enforcement of constitution.
The former lawmaker was making such remarks while giving a lecture on ‘Democratic System and Constitutionalism in Nepal’ in the federal capital on Friday.
The lecture was organized as part of the annual event of an academic research organization, Martin Chautari, on its foundation day.
“Inaction of politicos and lawmakers can not be transferred to discredit entire system, which needs proper nurturing,” he said, however, expressing worry over lawmakers’ failure to prepare acts on time to enforce fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution.
Adhikari further urged those critical to the federalism to come up with valid reasons instead of making hasty generalization and stray thoughts.
In the lecture, he also reminded the difficult moment that eluded consensus on some issues while writing the present constitution.
Adhikari, who had played a significant role on constitution making, shared that there was intense debate whether to include ‘pluralism’ in constitution.
But, it was included finally. Adhikari also made elaborate his observation on the constitutional development in the country.
According to him, the Muluki Ain (civil code) of 1910BS is the foundation of constitutionalism in Nepal. As the constitutions gradually became progressive, broader issues of human rights were recognized.
“The constitution of 2047BS incorporated first generation rights while the interim constitution of 2063BS the second generation rights,” he mentioned.
The senior advocate viewed time has come to review the constitutional bodies as we near a decade since promulgation of present constitution.
In response to a query relating to the role and performance of civil society, the senior advocate said, “I find civil society in the letters to editors. I read the letters to editor as these are people’s voices.”
Civil society generally remains loose network rather than a solid and firm movement, Adhikari viewed.
