Unexpected political developments have, again, dragged Nepal towards uncertainty and chaos. On 3 M ay, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal made a unilateral decision to sack Chief of the Army Staff Rukmangud Katawal, despite opposition from all non-Maoists in the coalition cabinet. A few hours later, President Ram Baran Yadav issued an order to General Katawal, asking him to "continue in his office in his capacity as per the Interim Constitution, 2007, and the existing law." Most of the discontent and political activities that have taken place since then have been a direct result of these two power moves.
The following day, Prime Minister Dahal announced his resignation. He described the move by President Yadav as unconstitutional and a result of foreign influence. A few hours after the resignation, a Kathmandu-based television station, Image Channel, broadcast a videotape from January 2008, showing Dahal (aka 'Prachanda') telling his People's Liberation Army (PLA) commanders how the Maoist party had double-crossed all stakeholders to the peace process. Dahal described the tactics that the party intended to use to take over state power, through indoctrination of the national army, wholesale integration of Maoist fighters into that force, and use of violence and money to influence the Constituent Assembly elections. The Maoists had also, the Maoist chairman claimed, duped the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) into accepting almost three times more people into the cantonments than the Maoists actually had fighters. (Following its creation in January 2007, one of UNMIN's central responsibilities had been to verify who would and who would not be accepted into the seven major cantonments set up to house the former Maoist cadre. UNMIN eventually verified 19,206 such cadre; in the videotape, however, Prachanda said the real number had been only 7000 to 8000.)
After the prime minister's resignation, President Yadav directed the other political parties to form a government by consensus by 10 May. Over the subsequent weeks, the Maoists conducted large-scale nationwide protests against what they have dubbed the president's "constitutional coup". With the initial due date set by the president having elapsed, the matter was referred to the Constituent Assembly, which also doubles as a Parliament, for a government by majority vote. Having set a fine example by their resignation, the Maoists chose to block the procedures for formation of a new government by disrupting the work of the Constituent Assembly. Their demand was for President Yadav to apologise for his unconstitutional decision to retain Gen Katawal, and for the latter to be sacked. It seemed unlikely that any of the other parties would go along with the Maoists on this, all of them having petitioned President Yadav in writing to overturn the Maoist action against the chief of the army.
Vague directives
Although many political analysts have described the row between the prime minister and the president as a politically motivated wrangle, it is pertinent at this time to discuss what exactly the constitution specifies in this regard. Meanwhile, it must be remembered that parallel writ petitions are presently before the Supreme Court challenging both the prime minister's decision and the president's move on constitutional grounds.