The three major parties today said they discussed the disputed issues in a more systematic way with a view to working out a package deal on disputed issues such as federal structure, forms of governance, election system and the judiciary.
The three parties — Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Unified CPN-Maoist — are close on the election system and the judiciary, according to UML leader Jhala Nath Khanal.
“We feel we are close on the election and judicial systems, but it can only be meaningful if we strike package deal on all four disputed issues,” he said after the meeting held in the Constituent Assembly building in Baneshwor in the presence of CA Chairman Subas Nembang.
The ruling NC and UMLhad recently proposed 70 to 80 per cent representation from the first-past-the-post system and 30-20 percent proportional representation in the House of Representatives reports The Himalayan Times Online.
Their original nine-point proposal spoke of a fully FPTP-based lower House. The ruling parties have also expressed readiness to set up a Constitutional Court for five to ten years although their joint proposal had favoured a Constitutional Bench in the Supreme Court.
The ruling parties have proposed allowing the concerned Pradeshes to determine their names if the seven-Pradesh model was agreed upon. As a point of compromise, they have proposed providing a parliament-elected President more rights.
Demanding apology from CPN-UML Chairman K P Oli for his statement at the meeting of the four forces on Wednesday, United Democratic Front leaders did not participate in the meeting. Although, Madhesi leaders reached the meeting venue, they held separate talks with UCPN-M, said Sadbhavana Party leader Rajendra Mahato.
Chairman of Constitutional-Political Dialogue and Consensus Committee Baburam Bhattarai said, “We, the three parties, held issue-centred discussions in a more systematic way. We feel, the door of consensus has already opened. However, consensus can materialise only with a package deal. Individual issue cannot be agreed upon although that can be close to consensus in the course of negotiations.”