Nepal's constitutional transition
The political situation of Nepal has changed rapidly in 2006. Civil war ended by virtue of a shared constitutional agreement for future peace and development of democracy. In the current transitional phase, constitutional legality and the rule of law may be difficult to preserve. However, the transition will be successful only if the new Constitution can be seen as unquestionably based on people's sovereignty. This article tries to address a set of specific constitutional questions: (1) Why did the Constitution of 1990 fail? (2) How did the country step into the constitutional transition? (3) Does the Interim Constitution suffer a lack of legitimacy? (4) What about the future role of Parliament? (5) Is Hindu Monarchy over? (6) How Military can be brought to democratic civil control? (7) What kind of electoral system is needed for the Constituent Assembly? (8) How can the future constitution guarantee justice for the violations of human rights and political crimes of the past? (9) How can the Constitution Making Process develop inclusive democracy? (10) Has Federalism a chance? The answers reflect from a European perspective on ideas that are now discussed in Nepal about the constitutional process and could be useful even elsewhere.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uca:ucapdv:84. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lucia Padovani)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.