Opinion | Constitutional reform, not amendment
Summary
Nepal's constitutional challenges are best addressed through a thorough and independent constitutional review rather than abrupt amendments, emphasizing implementation and democratic legitimacy.
Key Points
- The Government of Nepal has initiated a committee to discuss constitutional amendments amidst political sensitivities regarding federalism and governance.
- The article distinguishes between constitutional amendment and broader constitutional reform, emphasizing the need for implementation, interpretation, and institutional strengthening.
- Many implementation shortcomings stem from poor governance, political infighting, and weak institutions rather than constitutional design flaws.
- A thorough and independent constitutional review, involving public participation and evidence-based evaluation, should precede any constitutional amendment to ensure legitimacy and democratic continuity.
