communists in the uprising against Russian tsarism in Russia and the character of the interim revolutionary government“ that irrespective of whether participation of Social Democrats in the provisional revolutionary government is possible or not, we must propagate among the broadest sections of the proletariat the idea that the armed proletariat, led by the Social-Democratic Party, must bring to bear constant pressure on the provisional government for the purpose of defending, consolidating, and extending the gains of the revolution.”( Two Tactics of Social Democrats in the Democratic Revolution – vi, Lenin vol-9 p-24). In that very book, Lenin writes about the resolution adopted by the conference:“ The resolution clearly defines the character and purpose of a provisional revolutionary government. In origin and basic character such a government must be the organ of a popular uprising. Its formal purpose must be to serve as an instrument for convening of a national constituent assembly. The content of its activities must be the implementation of the minimum program of proletarian democracy, the only programme capable of safeguarding the interests of a people that has risen in revolt against the autocracy”( Lenin Collected Volume 9, p. 28, Progress Publishers). Then Lenin further says that, many may say that it is not possible to know without elections whether such a program has the approval of the people or not, these are the words of reactionaries and abstractionists. How strangely similar it is to Nepal, if we remember, Nepali ruling classes had not accepted the demand of the Maoists to declare Nepal as a republic and the Maoists did not object it. In fact, the Maoists have thrown away both Lenin and December-2025
Mao in the name of‘ Prachanda Path’. The Nepali Maoist or Marxist- Leninist parties did not want to establish any revolutionary government. They wanted to share power with the feudal landlordbourgeois forces by keeping the anti-monarchy mass movement to their credit. They forgot Lenin’ s warning that the victory of the revolution does not mean not merely the destruction of the counter-revolution. On the contrary, they started a more ruthless struggle on a new path. But they made 12-point and 8-point agreements in 2005 and 2006 respectively, which instead of developing the class struggle, tried to control the mutual struggle.
In the 2008 Nepal elections, 60 percent of the seats were directly elected and 40 percent were on the basis of proportional representation. Accordingly, out of the 575 elected seats, the Maoists won 220, becoming the largest party. The Nepali Congress got 110 elected members and the CPN( UML) got 103 elected members. The elected members of the Madhesi parties were also in good number. In particular, the Madhesi Jan Adhikar Forum won 52 representatives. But in no other election after that first and last, the Maoists could not come close to this number; not only could they not become the largest party. Their popular base gradually decreased. In 2001, the Maoists said that they would never become a parliamentary party, but now not only they became a parliamentary party, but they also became a major player in the game of power sharing with the bourgeois-feudal landlord parties. From 2008 to 2025, Baburam and Prachanda became prime ministers from among these Maoists once or thrice. But have the toiling masses, the workers and farmers got their rights, or at least the traditional bourgeois democratic state that the Maoists promised? The simple answer is‘ no’.
The government formed by the two so-called leftist parties in 2008 failed to present a constitution to the people of Nepal on time and in the restructure of the royal army. Prachanda as the prime minister did not even remove the army chief loyal to King, as a result of which the Maoists were forced to resign from the government within a year. But they did not take to the streets. They considered the public trust they had gained at least to some extent at the cost of the deaths of twenty thousand Nepalese people as permanent and tried to return to power by sharing power with various vested interests and traitorous ruling class parties. Constitution of Nepal:
The process of drafting the constitution that had begun since 2008 could not be presented to the Nepali people within the specified time due to internal squabbles. The elections kept getting postponed. In 2012, the Constituent Assembly elections were held again. Here, the disappointment of the people became clear. The Maoists came in the third place with only 80 seats. And in the process of drafting the constitution in this Constituent Assembly, it was seen that the Nepali Congress and the ML group agreed on many issues and the Maoists reduced everything to a bargaining chip. After the 2012 elections, the Maoists joined hands with the Nepali Congress to form the government. Finally, in 2015, the Constituent Assembly adopted the Constitution of Nepal. If we look at it or try to explain it, we find two references. One is the Chinese constitution as a new democratic state after the revolution and the Indian constitution as a semicolonial-semi-feudal state created as a result of the mass movement against British imperialism and the compromise of the Indian ruling class with the imperialist forces.
If we discuss this Nepali constitution a little, we will see that
11