Parties Pushing Nepal To Failed State Status

Yuba Nath Lamsal

The seven politi cal parties have mutually agreed to defer the Constituent Assembly election scheduled for November 22 this year. This is the second time that the election has been postponed. Earlier, the election was to take place in June. But it was postponed as the government failed to make the necessary preparations for holding the election. The government and the seven-party (now six-party) alliance were responsible for the election postponement in June.

Blame

Now the blame has now been put squarely on the Maoists by the six-party alliance for the postponement of the November election. However, the Maoists have denied the accusation and say that the government is responsible as it could not create the necessary conditions for holding free and fair polls.The peace process is intact as all the constituents of the six-party alliance and the Maoists apparently seem to be committed to the peace process. However, the political process on which the peace process has hinged appears to be tumultuous and shaky. The political process that was initiated to institutionalise the peace process is heading towards collapse.

The bottom-line of the political process is to establish a democratic federal republic and total restructuring of the state through an elected Constituent Assembly. This was clearly mentioned in the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) reached between the then seven-party alliance government and the Maoists. The interim constitution and the interim parliament were also made in the same spirit.With the twice postponement of the Constituent Assembly election, a sense of doubt has crept in the minds of the voters that the Constituent Assembly election may not take place at all. It shows that all the political actors and forces are not committed to holding the Constituent Assembly election. It is so because these forces are not confident of their strength and position in the election.The problem started with the non-compliance of the comprehensive peace agreement and also the spirit of the interim constitution. The interim constitution had clearly stated that Constituent Assembly election should be held in the June of 2007. The government did not make any preparations to meet the deadline of the election set by the interim constitution.

The violation of the constitution and the CPA and breach of promise began right from this point. Later the constitution was amended to suit their interest in which the dates for the Constituent Assembly election were rescheduled for November 22.When it comes to non-compliance of the promise and agreement, the government again is in the forefront. It was agreed that several measures would be taken before going to the polls. The first responsibility of the state was to ensure perfect law and order so that the people could freely and fearlessly participate in the election. But the law and order situation continued to deteriorate. Several armed groups appeared in the Terai, and some hill-ethnic groups also sprang up threatening to take up arms if their demands were not met.The government has not been able to tackle these issues effectively and maintain law and order. The other issue of non-compliance is related to the allowances and conditions of the Maoist combatants living in the cantonments. The government did not release the allowances in time. The condition in the camps is so inhuman and poor that even UNMIN has raised this issue several times.

As far as the Maoists are concerned, they, too, cannot escape blame. They were part of the government and they failed to exert pressure on the cabinet to take necessary measures for the creation of a conducive atmosphere for the election. If the government failed, the Maoists, too, have a share in it. Their withdrawal from the government is not a solution.Moreover, there are certain things the Maoists have done that are not compatible with the CPA. On the eve of the election, the Maoists suddenly raised two political issues that ultimately caused the postponement of the election. The issues the Maoists have raised are genuine and they must be adhered to. However, the timing does not seem to be appropriate.The issue concerning a full proportionate electoral system was first raised by the CPN-UML when the interim constitution was being drafted. The provision of a proportionate election system could have been incorporated in the interim constitution, and the issue would have been solved long ago, if the Maoists had raised this issue when the constitution was being drafted. But the Maoists failed to realise it earlier, and they have raised this issue now which shows their political immaturity.

Moreover, the other parties were not fully prepared to go to the polls, although they had publicly expressed their commitment to hold the election on time. Had the parties been fully prepared and committed, they would have gone to the people with their election programmes. But the Maoist move has given an opportunity to other political forces to blame the Maoists for the postponement of the election.Internally, the other parties, too, are happy with the election deferral. The postponement of the election is a move to block the smooth political process. Although the Maoists appear to have blocked the November 22 election, all the political forces are in one way or the other responsible for this.Nepal has already suffered very badly due to political instability. The frequent postponement of the election and breach of promises by the political parties have raised serious questions about the legitimacy and credibility of the government in the international community.In the same way, people at home are slowly losing faith in the ability of the parties and their leaders. If the election is postponed frequently and the country is governed without a popular mandate, the chaotic situation will continue to grow, which would ultimately push Nepal towards the status of a failed state.

By agreeing to postpone the Constituent Assembly election, the seven political parties have agreed to make Nepal into a failed state. No political force can escape from the blame. All constituents of the seven parties as well as the Maoists are equally responsible. This situation has only benefited the Monarchists and regressive elements that do not want the election at all as the election, if held, would eliminate the monarchy from Nepal.The Constituent Assembly election was aborted in 1951 by the king. Now there is sufficient ground to raise the question whether the election would be held at all. It is the process of making a people's constitution and involving the people in the process. In the present political equation, the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and the Maoists are the chief actors.

Dignified presence

Making a constitution without the active participation of all these three forces would be a futile exercise. In this constitution making process, the parties must not think who will win or lose in the election. But arrangements should be made so that all these forces have a dignified presence in the Constituent Assembly. For this, the leaders of Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and the Maoists must act in a more responsible, liberal and rational manner.

Source: The Rising Nepal, October 17, 2007

Election Detour in the Himalayas

Brenda Norris

The Maoists were polite, but firm: no civic or voter education activities could be conducted until their national political demands were met. Hours of negotiation succeeded only in convincing the young men not to burn the voter education materials that our local partners intended to distribute. For the previous two hours we had watched our partners complete a two-day voter education training of facilitators and a mock election in the small classroom in Nepal’s Rasuwa District. The trainers were dedicated and professional, and were visibly excited to educate their fellow villagers about the upcoming Constituent Assembly election. With the memory of violence from Nepal’s ten-year-long Maoist insurgency still fresh in their minds, they watched as the Maoists ripped posters from the walls and carted all the voter education materials away. As we learned later, this heartbreaking scene in Rasuwa was being played out in districts all across Nepal, with voter and civic education activities being disrupted in scores of localities.

The Maoists succeeded in their goal of delaying the election. On October 5th, the Chief Election Commissioner announced that the Constituent Assembly election, scheduled for November 22nd, would be impossible. Nepalis were understandably baffled: Maoist insurgents had fought their guerilla war for a decade, and holding a Constituent Assembly election to redraw the country’s constitution and framework of governance had always been one of their central demands.

So why were the Maoists opposed to a November election date? In part, because they feared what many communist parties have traditionally feared: that they might not do very well in a free and fair election. They stated that two demands must first be resolved: replacing the mixed electoral system with full proportional representation, and declaring the country a republic prior to the election. But their reasons were also deeper. The Maoists have taken an increasingly hard-line approach in part, it appears, because they feel the government is not sincere in delivering on commitments it made in a series of peace agreements to downsize the army, integrate former Maoist combatants, and tackle difficult issues such as land reform and caste discrimination.

Now Nepal’s peace process stands at a crossroads. Before the country can begin voter education and related activities, the political parties, including the Maoists, must resolve their disputes about the electoral system and forming a republic. Those steps are crucial, but even they will not be enough to ensure a free, fair, and safe election. All parties need to take a hard look at themselves, and begin implementing the agreements they have already committed to. The Maoists need to leave their habits of violence and intimidation behind, just as the government must demonstrate that it is willing to change how it does business in a country that remains one of the most profoundly discriminatory – on the basis of gender, language, class and caste – anywhere in the world. In Rasuwa, and across Nepal, the people are eager to have their voices heard.

Source: The Asia Foundation, October 17, 2007

Nepal revolutionaries call on mass support to end monarchy

David Hoskins

Nepal’s communist revolutionaries walked out of that country’s interim government in mid-September and announced immediate plans to launch street protests. The walkout followed the government’s rejection of a 22-point set of demands by the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M) that were meant to ensure free and transparent polls for planned Constituent Assembly elections in November.

Three weeks later, on Oct. 5, the government announced the November elections would be postponed.

The Nepali Congress Party and other reformist parties objected to two key points in particular. These basic points would have declared Nepal a republic before the polls, to ensure that the monarchy does not interfere with elections, and would have established a proportional representation-based election system. Nepal still has a king, despite massive protests against the monarchy last year.

The government’s rejection of these demands, say the revolutionaries, risks providing cover to the criminal supporters of King Gyanendra in the army and among underground terrorist units, allowing them to disrupt elections, and has created an unnecessary crisis in election preparations.

Other organizations have voiced support for the CPN-M’s electoral demands. Amik Sherchan, chair of the People’s Front Nepal, has stated that the 22 prerequisites were legitimate and that “the Maoists were left with no option but to launch a program of strong protests to establish a republic.” People’s Front Nepal is a semiunderground leftist organization and a member of Nepal’s interim government.

The CPN-M remains in Nepal’s interim parliament, where it has become the second-largest party since pulling out of the government. Three other groups, including the militant Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist), have merged with the CPN-M since it withdrew from the cabinet. The CPN-M has emphasized the need for a single revolutionary communist party to fulfill the aspirations of Nepal’s workers and oppressed.

Maoists call street protests; student organizations join

After all four Maoist ministers announced their resignations from the government, the CPN-M called for street agitation to begin on Sept. 25. Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, a leading party official, declared that, “Efforts to declare a republic from the parliament have failed. Now we will declare a republic from the streets.” The CPN-M has promised to hold actions in all of Nepal’s 4,000 villages and at every district administration office in order to advance their people’s agenda. The actions are being unrolled in carefully crafted phases. The first phase was held from Sept. 19 to 21, when the Maoists held a door-to-door public awareness campaign surrounding their demands. A week of rallies began in the capital on Sept. 22 and was planned to spread geographically. The revolutionaries are preparing to launch an exposure campaign to reveal corrupt government officials and business people.

Students, too, vowed mass participation in the street protests. The All Nepal National Independent Student Union-Revolutionary (ANNISU-R) laid out its own protest agenda. Public hearings in schools and universities began on Sept. 19 and were expected to continue until Oct. 3. Motorcycle rallies across the country began Sept. 29 and torch-lit rallies were to follow. More than 4,000 soldiers in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) had earlier walked out of their cantonments to protest in favor of the 22 demands raised by the revolutionaries. The PLA is the armed wing of the CPN-M and has voluntarily confined itself to a U.N.-monitored cantonment during the peace process initiated by the revolutionaries. More than 30,000 PLA soldiers are stationed in 28 cantonments around the country.

Revolutionaries champion people’s needs

Many of the government’s ruling parties fear an embarrassing setback in the polls at the hands of the revolutionaries. The popular program advocated by the Maoists and the revolutionary student and youth organizations has done much to earn the support of Nepal’s oppressed workers and peasants. The revolutionaries have consistently exposed corrupt landlords and held them accountable in People’s Courts set up around the country. For many of Nepal’s poor, this is the only system of justice available to them.

The revolutionaries have been in the vanguard of the fight to abolish Nepal’s brutal feudal monarchy. The CPN-M initiated 10 years of armed struggle which, combined with the street protests it helped coordinate, brought an end to King Gyanendra’s absolute rule late last year. He had clung to power with the support of the U.S., Britain and India. The revolutionaries continue to be the most consistent force advocating the total abolition of Nepal’s monarchy and the establishment of democratic republicanism with fair elections. Additional campaigns have established free health care in poor districts and the creation of a Health Team Project coordinated by the PLA’s medical department to create units of medical specialists and support staff in rural areas. In August the Young Communist League (YCL) mobilized 600 cadres over a course of three days to collect tons of garbage from the streets of Kathmandu.

Nepal’s poverty cries out for revolutionary change

Nepal is an impoverished country of 29 million people that until recently was ruled by a feudal monarchy dominated by the huge capitalist state of India to its south. Only 10 percent of Nepal’s population has access to electric power. More than 85 percent of the people live in rural areas without running water or basic sanitation. Malnutrition is rampant among children and at least one-third of the population lives below the official poverty line. While literacy runs a little less than 50 percent, it is only 39 percent among women. Meanwhile, Nepal’s infant mortality rate currently exceeds 63 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Nepal ranks among the 50 poorest countries in the world. The poor living conditions have fueled the militant consciousness of the masses and paved the way for revolutionary forces to enjoy a mass base of support for the armed struggle launched by the CPN-M in 1996. In light of the accomplishments of the revolutionary forces in providing for the basic needs of Nepal’s suffering people, it comes as no surprise that many in Nepal’s ruling parties are hesitant to compete with the CPN-M at the polls on a level playing field.

Source: Workers World, October 14, 2007

INDIA-CHINA PERSPECTIVE: NEPAL’S FALTERING PEACE PROCESS

Jan Sharma

India’s long-standing policy towards Nepal seeks to:

(a) Engage all political forces, including the CPN-M as well as the monarchy,
(b) Install a government friendly to India,
(c) Forestall any government unfriendly to India,
(d) Promote Indian political, economic and security interests,
(e) Thwart any attempt to challenge Indian supremacy and domination in Nepal, and
(f) Prevent Nepal diversifying sources of arms other than India. India’s interests in Nepal are extensive – from security to water resources for irrigation.

Nepal also shares a 1,880 km border with India to the east, south and west, and the best military talents among the Nepali hill people are recruited in the Indian Army estimated to be over 100,000. India has also refused to recruit a single Madhesi Nepal in their army obviously on grounds of their inferior military qualities. In addition, there are over 115,000 Indian government pensioners in Nepal whose welfare is the responsibility of the Indian Army Ex-Servicemen Welfare Organization (IEWON). It’s a huge network, given the number of family members and dependents, most of them in remote hills where CPN-M has its sway. The conflict-induced exodus of young Nepalis in India is estimated at 4 million and rising.

Top CPN-M leaders operated from India, giving credence to popular perception that the so-called “people’s war” was in fact a tool of Indian diplomacy. The meeting between Prachanda and leaders of communist parties represented in Parliament at Champasari near Siliguri in India in August 2001 and again in Lucknow on November 20, 2003 and March 29, 2004 was a huge embarrassment to India. In the context of the 9/11, Minister for External Affairs Jaswant Singh of India in September 2001 described the Maoists as “terrorists,” and pledged full support to Nepal to fight it. His successor Yashwant Sinha during his visit to Nepal in August 2002 expressed “concern over the clandestine use of the Nepali soil by Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence for anti-Indian activities.” Indian Chief of the Army Staff General N. C. Vij visited Nepal in April 2002 to discuss military cooperation.

India nabbed Chandra Prasad Gajurel, Maoist Politburo member, at Chennai airport in India on August 19, 2003 and formally charged him of traveling under a fake document to Europe. Some saw it as a “major rethink” of India’s policy [Josse, 2004]. Unlike Gajurel, Matrika Prasad Yadav and Suresh Ale Magar arrested in Lucknow in India on February 8, 2004 were handed over to Nepal without formal charges. The arrest of Mohan Vaidya, second highest ranking in party command after Prachanda, in Siliguri on March 29, 2004 was described as a “consequence of the alliance and bargaining between the Indian and Nepali feudal rulers against Nepal’s rivers and other natural resources” [Prachanda, 2004]. Indian security officials seized important documents, including maps outlining planned Maoist attacks on security targets in Nepal.

It was reported that CPN-M was creating bases in Bihar to target security forces in Nepal and that international terror group and “a country hostile to India” may use them to create disturbances in the area and thus had “security implications” for India [TOI, 2003]. Instead of a military solution, India wanted a political solution, as indicated by its suggestion in November 2003 for the formation of a national government in Nepal to resolve conflict:

The Prime Minister of India expressed concern over the serious security situation prevailing in Nepal and stressed the need to take up urgent broad-based measures to deal with it. In this context, the Prime Minister reaffirmed India’s consistent position that a national consensus needs to be evolved based on the principles of multi-party democracy and constitutional monarchy. This would require both the institution of monarchy as well as the political parties to demonstrate flexibility and reach a consensus to address the challenges posed by the Maoist insurgency. A representative government with the participation of all parliamentary parties, working in close cooperation with the monarchy, would assist in evolving a national response to the situation [Sarna, 2003].

The Indian policy has undergone subtle shift since a Left-backed Congress-led coalition of Manmohan Singh was installed in May 2004. Minister for External Affairs Natwar Singh of India visited Nepal in June 2004 even as Prime Minister Deuba had not even formed his Cabinet. Singh gave an unsolicited advised to Nepal: “It is only a representative multiparty government, working in close concert with the institution of constitutional monarchy, which can restore political stability in Nepal. This would also pave the way for holding elections to new parliament and tackling the insurgency through peaceful negotiations” [EoI, 2004].

After the royal coup in February 2005, India suspended arms supplies and asked China to refuse arms to Nepal. New Delhi also successfully worked on a strategy to unite Prachanda and Bhattarai within the CPN-M, then cemented the SPA to oppose the king, and finally engineered SPAM “understanding” in what was a tactical shift to an alternative to the king from its earlier stand that constitutional monarchy and multiparty democracy [India Today, 2005]. There was also suspicion that a prolonged freeze on military assistance would dilute traditional military cooperation between India and Nepal.

An Indian pro-establishment scholar argued for a “practical engagement” with the CPN-M to ensure Nepal’s stability, a “democratic monarchy” and “its internal autonomy preserved from the growing Western and other undesirable influences” [Muni, 2003]. India has been successful in pleading that “no arms should be given to Nepal which are more sophisticated than those in the Indian armoury” because India does not want “the level of conflict in Nepal to be upgraded” [Outlook, 2003]. India after the royal takeover of February 2005 was no more talking about constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy but was seeking “alternative” to the king [India Today, 2005].

India in a sense punished King Gyanendra not because of his assault on democracy and freedom but because of his audacity to challenge India’s supremacy at the summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in Dhaka where it threatened to veto entry of Afghanistan as a new member unless China was simultaneously invited to join as an observer. The summit concluded with Afghanistan became the eighth member, and both China and Japan admitted as observers. China without even being present at the summit just tore up India’s Monroe doctrine [Mohan, 2005]. The summit declaration noted that “small states require special measures for support from all concerned for safeguarding their sovereign independence and territorial integrity” and that “protection of small states should be firmly rooted in scrupulous adherence to the UN Charter, rule of law, the strict adherence to universally accepted principles and norms related to sovereign rights and territorial integrity of all states, irrespective of their size” [Dhaka Declaration, 2005].

China

China has traditionally lent strong and unequivocal support to the monarchy but is likely to have friendliest of relations with anyone in the saddle of power. China would like to have a stable and strong regime in Nepal because it borders Tibet, its soft underbelly. China is wary of hostile environment in the neighborhood, and is watching closely the activities of a large Tibetan population in Nepal. It has also been recently stressing on integrating the economies of Nepal and Tibet. It is for these considerations that Beijing described the royal coup as Nepal’s “internal affair.” At the same time, it has categorically disassociated itself with the CPN-M, saying “neither the communist party nor any entity of the government of the People’s Republic of China has any link with and support for the terrorists of Nepal.” The official Chinese position has always been that the Nepal government would “properly handle its domestic issues” [Zhang, 2001]. It subsequently accused self-styled Maoists, which it described as “anti-government forces” of “usurping the name of the leader of the Chinese people. China supports Nepal’s fight against the anti-government forces and hopes for peace, stability and economic development for its neighbour” [Liu, 2002].

During his first state visit to China in July 2002, King Gyanendra reassured President Jiang Zemin that Nepal “will not allow the emergence of elements ruining against the development of Nepal-China ties. It will not permit within its borders any activities that undermine China’s interests” [People’s Daily, 2002]. The reference was clearly Tibet, which Nepal recognizes as an inalienable and integral part of China. Beijing, which shares a 1,400 kilometer border with Nepal, is worried by the presence of an estimated 35,000 Tibetans in Nepal who have fled from Tibet and could launch anti-China activities from Nepal, as was the case with the Khampa insurgency in the 1960s and crushed by the Nepal Army in 1974. It is for this reason that it has been maintaining a close watch on the movement of Tibetans in Nepal, especially since the flight of Karmapa to India in the summer of 2000. In a major policy departure, the royal regime arrested 18 Tibetans, including eight minors, fleeing China into Nepal and handed over to the Chinese authorities in Kathmandu in July 2003.

Beijing welcomed the move but Washington deplored Nepal’s handling of the issue which “not only violates international norms and practices regarding the humane treatment of asylum seekers, but also tarnishes the Government of Nepal’s long-standing and well-deserved reputation for tolerance and hospitality.” Nepal subsequently closed down the office of the Dalai Lama’s Representative in Kathmandu near the royal palace. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also stopped providing travel documents it had been providing since 1990 to Tibetan and Bhutanese refugees for third country travel. Nepal gave “unequivocal” support for the Chinese anti-secessionist law in 2005 authorizing the use of force against Taiwan [People’s Daily, 2005].

President Hu Jintao visited South Asian capitals in February 2005 but skipped Nepal. Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing visited Nepal March 31-April 1, 2005 when he described the king’s direct rule as Nepal’s “internal matter which has nothing to do with China. Nepali people have full authority to tackle their internal politics and development.” Li quoted the king as saying, “Nepal appreciates and supports the important role that China has been playing in the international affairs” [Xinhua, 2005]. China and Nepal also agreed to promote military cooperation. An agreement was signed on military cooperation under which China was to provide Nepal eight million yuan (Rs.72 million) to promote “stability, development and peace in Nepal” and “combat internal and external terrorism.” The Sino-Nepal military cooperation alarmed India.

Since the regime change in 2006, the Office of the Dalai Lama is back in business, as are pro-Tibet rallies. For example, in March 2007 a free-Tibet protest rally was held at Bouddha and Swayambhu, the two areas with a heavy concentration of Tibetan refugees, and a group set ablaze the Chinese national flag at Bhat Bhateni close to the Chinese Embassy. Celebrated Hollywood star Richard Gare, a well-known free-Tibet campaigner, addressed the Tibetan community to urge them to liberate Tibet. Then there was an American Everest Expedition, which demonstrated a banner urging solidarity for the "liberation" of Tibet. While the Nepal government has maintained a total silence on these developments, Chinese are worried by the changes and currently engaging major political parties.

Source: Telegraph Nepal, October 17, 2007

Nepal Maoists start anti-Dalai Lama campaign

In a significant development, Nepal's Maoist guerrillas are mounting a campaign against the Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama. The Janadisha daily, the Maoist mouthpiece that reflects the party's views, said that a secret meeting had taken place in the Kathmandu valley to plan strategies for an anti-China secessionist movement from Dharamshala. Dharamsala, in Himachal Pradesh state in India, is where the Dalai Lama has his government-in-exile, which is not recognised by any country. The front-page report Monday, with a photograph of the red-robed Dalai Lama, said China's growing interest in Nepal's political developments had made "some forces" apprehensive, and they were trying to foment anti-China activities. It said that last month Christian groups from nearly 20 countries had held a nine-day conference at a resort in the valley.

It alleged that though the conference was ostensibly called to discuss religious issues, it meant to add momentum to the movement to free Tibet from China. Buddhist monks from India, Nepal, Japan, the US, Britain, Germany, Uganda, France, Israel, Argentina, Chile, Iraq and Tibet took part in the meet, it said. According to the report, the participants discussed fomenting a secessionist movement in Tibet so that Beijing would become preoccupied with retaining the annexed kingdom. This would enable India and the US to intervene in Nepal. Despite pledging commitment to multi-party democracy, Nepal's Maoists remain anti-religion, following the way of northern neighbour China. Maoist chief Prachanda has ruled out allowing the office of the Dalai Lama's representative in Kathmandu to re-open, saying his party would not condone any action that could displease China. Ironically, it was King Gyanendra, whom the Maoists opposed, who ordered its closure. The new government adheres to the China policy formulated by the royal regime even while it has overturned the king's other policies.

Last year, when the Maoists signed a peace pact mediated by India, they said they wanted the same harmonious relations with both their immediate neighbours, China and India. But since they quit the government, the Maoists have started hardening their stance towards Nepal's southern neighbour. They have flayed the recent visit to Kathmandu by India's special envoy Shyam Saran, who asked the government to hold the stalled general election at the earliest and not to abolish monarchy through a vote in parliament. The rebels have called his comments naked intervention by India. India's diplomatic policy towards Nepal has been floundering since it helped a multi-party government end King Gyanendra's regime and come to power. China, on the other hand, enjoys the best possible relations with Kathmandu though it supported the royal regime and sold it arms and ammunition to hunt down the Maoists.

Source: Hindustan Times, October 16, 2007

Erosion of our Democratic Values and Unconcern of Political Parties

Chaturanan Mishra

Despite the fact that more and more downtrodden people have begun to exercise their right of casting votes and there is a new consciousness among Dalits, tribals, women and Other Backward Castes which deepen the roots of our democracy, this in itself does not result in strengthening the rights of the people. More Dalits are killed in India than what happened to the Blacks in South Africa during the apartheid period. Even elected Dalit Presidents of village Panchayats in Tamil Nadu are not allowed to function. Untouchability persists. Now the OBC people are launching more offensives against Dalits. Something new has happened in UP: Brahmins accepting the leadership of Mayawatiji; but it is too early to assess how far the Brahmins in general agree to end untouchability and give social respect to the Dalits. This has to be watched. More girl children in pregnancy are killed. There is no political movement for social reform though the society itself is reforming slowly. Gandhiji mixed political movement with social reform also to some extent.

The bureaucracy is uncontrollable. The colonial tradition of bureaucrats as the rulers and people as the ruled is continuing. Corruption even at the local level of administration has increased so much that people do not get even one-fourth of what is budgeted in Parliament and Assemblies for them. Rajiv Gandhi said people get only 16 per cent of what is allotted in the Budget for them. People are unable to check it. It has spread even to village Panchayats. The police has become more tyrannical. Lathicharges and shootings by the police are quite common. Even the Left Government of West Bengal is now no exception after what happened at Nandigram. In 2005 alone, 44 persons were killed in police firings. Between 1990 and 1999 the police opened fire 5994 times resulting in 1753 deaths and 6886 injuries. The same police is unable to check criminals who rule in cities also. Children are kidnapped and killed if firauti is not paid to them. Even in the central Capital of Delhi women are not safe. The days of Pattam Thanu Pillai, when he was forced to resign for firing, are gone. Politicians are party to it. There is a general feeling that all politicians, barring a few, are for making money. The old respect for politicians is no longer there. Similar is the feeling about political parties since now they don’t go to the people to solve their problems. This is the most dangerous feature since healthy political parties and politicians are a must for the strengthening of democracy. Members of Legislatures change parties for personal benefit. Politicians behave in such a manner as to prove that they have no ideology.

Though in our Constitution every citizen has the right to be elected to Parliament and Assemblies, as the election now costs a crores of rupees ninetyfive per cent of our citizens can’t think of contesting elections. Our janatantra is becoming dhanatantra. Though the Election Commission has recently taken some strict reformist measures, political parties are voicing their protest. Due to casteism, fear and communalism more and more veteran criminals are elected to Parliament and Assemblies as candidates of political parties. It is not safe to oppose such criminal candidates. Parliament is helpless in the case of Gujarat where thousands of Muslims, including women and children as well as even pregnant women, were massacred and so our janatantra is becoming gun-tantra.

Courts can help to provide some remedy and in fact the Supreme Court acted sometimes but courts are so much overburdened with a number of cases that it takes years to have a final judgement. It is so time consuming and costly that the mass of people don’t go there. Rich people use it to harass the poor. It is happening since the days of British rule and continues till today.

Political parties are a must for democracy. The old national parties are getting weakened and caste based regional parties are coming up. This gives us coalition governments. Though the formation of regional parties take democracy to so far unawakened people, the absence of a national party can weaken the Centre. This danger is there. However, so far regional parties have helped to strengthen federalism.

National parties failed to understand the new feeling of the caste people. Different castes of people want their development through their own caste or group of castes. National parties are dominated by high-caste leaders and they run the government. Backward castes united to change this and this they did through caste or group of castes organisations. While Hindu castes were earlier based on religious faith, now they are based on politics and they are changing their position from time to time. This may lead to weakening of the caste system. This problem needs to be tackled in the national interest. Now Dalits strongly protest and what happened in Rajasthan for reservation of Gujjars as tribal people is a serious warning. The tribal people’s position is worse than even the Dalits and poor Muslims. All over India except the North-East they are coming under the influence of Maoists. Very often policemen are killed by them. Terrorised government officials, contractors, truck owners pay them levy. They are equipping themselves with modern arms. They are spreading now in the plains too. Farmers are also paying them do kathia, that is, the produce of two kathas per acre. With its present policy towards the poor the government cannot stop this development.

The poor people are unable to maintain themselves in the rural areas due to the agricultural crisis; they are coming to cities and get shelter in slums making jhopris. Now the government and even the courts are evicting them without giving shelter. No political party takes up their cause and ultimately they may go over to the Maoists. Farmers are in a serious crises. According to 59th National Sample Survey, a majority of small and marginal farmers are unable to make both ends meet. In the post-liberalisation period and after India joined the WTO, production and productivity of agriculture has been heavily reduced. The growth of agriculture has reduced from 3.08 per cent in 1980-90 to 2.65 per cent in 1991-2000 due to reduction of the Plan outlay in agriculture and also in public sector work in agriculture like irrigation and scientific research etc. While the input price of agriculture has heavily increased, the price of agricultural produce has been reduced. Because of this condition, 40 per cent of farmers have desired to leave agriculture if they get an alternative job. As many as 48.6 per cent of farmers are debt-ridden; of them 42.3 per cent are indebted to moneylenders at high interest and forcible realisation. We are again dependent on import of food at higher prices. Starvation and malnutrition have become commonplace for a long time. Now thousands of farmers commit suicides every year. No political party takes up their cause seriously to force the government to act. On the nuclear agreement with the USA political crisis has been created but on the issue of peasant suicides or for unorganised workers or against price rise no such political crisis was engendered.

There is a vast and big population in the poverty zone of Bihar, Jharkhand, UP and Orissa etc. Despite our high national GDP growth, they are becoming poorer. Every year floods from Nepal destroy them. Nepal being a foreign land it is the Central Government’s constitutional responsibility to tackle the problem but it does not. One can be certain that a time will come in the near future when this poverty zone will rise against the Centre and the Centre will be unable to suppress it.

Our people have deep faith in democracy but such issues as mentioned here are fast eroding that faith. It is time that political parties reform themselves to restore the people’s faith in democracy. At present people are highly frustrated and angry. Frequent spontaneous violent outbreaks are taking place. The police is the target. This has no backing of any party. If these violent outbreaks are coordinated which the Maoists can, then it will result in a countrywide or Statewide violent attack directed against the democratic set-up.

Source: Mainstream, October 16, 2007

Electoral system : Slight modifications can get results

Birendra P Mishra

It would have been a miracle if CA polls could have been held on Nov. 22 without implementing the commitments stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Accord,such as making public the status of people taken in government custody as well as the names and addresses of the people disappeared by both sides (and also killed during the war), returning land and property seized by the Maoists to the victims of the insurgency, constituting the national Peace and Rehabilitation Commission, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, a high-level Recommendation commission for Restructuring of the state, verification of People’s Liberation Army (PLA), removal of combatants recruited after signing of ceasefire and proper maintenance of the PLA in their cantonments.Ironically, the election has been postponed to sort out the differences on two issues — declaration of republic and the adoption of full Proportional Representation.

Similarly, the Interim Parliament has been summoned to solve the political problems that need be solved by the seven party alliance outside the House, not inside it.The clear mandate of Jana Andolan II was to establish a federal republican democracy in Nepal. Accordingly, there should not have been any hitch on the elected CA declaring the country a republic or even the Interim Parliament doing so. Similarly, the adoption of Mixed System or the full Proportional Representation system should not have been turned into hot issues as the present controversy can be solved by bringing slight modifications in each of the two systems.

It reminds one of Immanuel Kant, who, while propounding his critical philosophy for reconciling the two conflicting epistemological theories of Rationalism and Empiricism, asserts that both are right in what they affirm and both are wrong in what they deny. The Maoists are right when they insist on proportionality of votes and electoral seats. But, they are wrong when they deny the close relationship between the voters and the elected representatives. Similarly, the Nepali Congress leaders are right when they insist on the close relation between the voters and the elected representatives. They are wrong when they ignore the importance of proportionality of the votes received by any political party and the seats won.

The above controversy has been stretched far, threatening the very peace process. Ironically, the Interim Constitution (IC) has provided for Mixed Electoral system for holding CA polls without specifying about its two variants — Parallel system (PS) and Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP). Since the CA Members Election Act does not mention the adoption of MMP system, PS was adopted compulsorily.In PS, First-Past-the-Post system (FPtP) and List Proportional Representation (LPR) system operate simultaneously and independently.

Therefore, the greatest demerit of this system is the increased disproportionality in the votes translated into seats elected. The gap betweenthe votes polled by a political party and the total number of seats it gets in return is unbridgeable. But, in the case of MMP the gap between the votes received and seats won is bridged through compensation. Since this system too has two electoral systems operating simultaneously but dependently, the votes polled under PR component compensate for the loss the party suffers under FPtP component.

Keeping these facts in clear view, the Maoist demand of replacing the Mixed system with full PR system can be addressed if MMP system is accepted. Since disproporionality can be compensated in MMP, the final result will be proportionate — of course, not fully proportionate.Moreover, there are some inherent demerits in LPR system as well. It should not be adopted with a national list in a country like Nepal, home to more than 100 castes and ethnic groups.

The national list system also makes for weak bond between the electors and the elected. Also, since the size of ballot papers sometimes becomes very big, it has to be shortened to facilitate the voter, especially, the illiterate ones in identifying their favourite symbols without wasting much time. These reasons warrant the adoption of Regional list system in place of national list system.There should be 21 to 25 regions, purely for electoral purposes, each consisting of no more than 12 to 15 seats, which can be further lowered to 10 to 13 seats by clubbing together three to four small districts or two to three big districts. The regional boundary should be drawn based on language, ethnic composition, accessibility and development status of the area. The existing administrative boundaries of the districts will remain intact. Local people will be represented by those in their midst, thus giving political identity to ethnic and cultural groups. This will, indeed, be the first step towards state restructuring.

Source: The Himalayan Times, October 16, 2007

Challenges Ahead for CA Polls

Somnath Ghimire

Nepal is edging through the long process of normalization and reform, following a 10-year Maoist declared "People's War", which cost more than 12,000 lives. Now the Maoists are part of the peace process and a constituent assembly will be elected in November 22 to design Nepal's future democratic constitution. But the CA elections could be derailed by a number of factors, including the lingering influence of a king who still dreams of a return to feudal absolutism and, crucially, the willingness of Army Chief, Rukmand Katuwal to lead his army into a democratic future. The Eight Party alliance must move cautiously and united with a single agenda now to hold the CA elections on time. Let us not make the CA elections an individual party's agenda; this is our agenda, the people's agenda. We are in the process of making a "New Constitution" of Nepal, which will sort out all political issues and empower Nepali citizens.

After a "spontaneous and unprecedented" uprising in Nepal in April 2006, King Gyanendra was reduced to the status of a figurehead, providing the people of Nepal a historic opportunity to "get rid of the monarchy" and establish a true, genuine, and people-centered democratic order i.e. a republic state with federalism. Yet elections for the constituent assembly, which were supposed to occur in June, have already been pushed back to November 22. "Cultural mistrust" abounds—"nobody is confident" that the elections will actually occur. If the elections don't take place in November, it will be "disastrous" for Nepal and its future as a democratic state. Let us be united to hold the Nov 22 CA elections.

Nepal's transformation is dependent on a credible peace process. Although the Maoists declared a cease fire on June 2006, they continue to use intimidation, violence and extortion. The upcoming elections offer the Maoists an opportunity to transform themselves into a responsible political party. The CA elections must be held in November, then the new constituent assembly will have two years to create and adopt a new constitution. The constitution should ensure: a republican state, a democratically accountable military, inclusiveness, human rights, an effective judiciary and a federalist structure.Considering Nepal's history, a king and a democratic assembly cannot coexist. In the 1950s, 1960s and 1990s, such an experiment failed, and the king used his traditional authority to dismantle the constitution. Instead, Nepal's new constitution should call for a democratically elected head of state, which will make nepali citizens sovereign. We cannot accept that some people are born superior to others, with a natural right to rule.

The constitution should also guarantee that the military is accountable to the democratically elected assembly. The military has to be restructured so that it is more professional and politically neutral, and so that it doesn't dismantle the democratic process. We want more "inclusive, broad-based" participation in the democratic process. Exclusion is the biggest issue in Nepal and the process of developing a new constitution should seek to empower indigenous, dalits & marginalized groups. Broadly defined human rights, ranging from prototypical civil and political rights to economic, social and cultural human rights and protection of the environment should all be included in the new constitution. Human rights should be a kind of lighthouse, or central theme of the new constitution.

The new constitution should define the judiciary as the guardian or protector of the supremacy of the constitution, so that it cannot be as easily dismantled as Nepalese constitutions have been in recent history. The new constitution must create a federal state. Many would not think of Nepal as requiring a federalist structure because it's relatively small, but federalism is a matter of diversity, not size. Nepal is much diversified, and needs federalism to create local autonomy and ensure better access to resources.We need to be very careful that there is credence to concerns about Monarchists and Maoists during this democratic transformation. There is cause for serious doubt that the king and the military will accept a legitimate democratic transformation. And there is some evidence that the military did not fight wholeheartedly against the Maoist insurgency, bringing into question the Maoists' commitment to participating as a democratically elected political party.With these concerns, international support and pressure, especially in the form of media and civil society presence, are crucial to Nepal's current democratic transformation. Nepal got an opportunity to become a "new model" for legitimate democratic transformation. The behavior of monarchists and Maoists and the involvement of the international community will largely determine the success of Nepal's push for a democratically elected constituent assembly and its drafting of a new constitution.

On behalf of the North America Nepali Community, I urge the leaders of the Eight Parties to strengthen their unity and build an election atmosphere across the country to conduct CA elections fairly and peacefully. This is not the time to blame and quarrel each-other, leave your petty and self interests aside and work for the people's interest.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, August 1, 2007

Sustainability of Federalism in Nepal

Shirish Bhat

Abstract

Ethnic, linguistic, racial and religious conflicts have become the dominant issues facing the world order today. Nepal is not an exception. While many Nepalese politicians look on federalism enthusiastically and involve themselves profoundly on the process, many others are in ferment over the federal idea. Federalism provides no “one size fits all” type of solution. Each Country has to examine and adopt arrangements conducive and suitable for individual needs. Nepal too needs to explore the federal idea intensively and fully before deciding whether to accept or reject it or adopt it with appropriate innovation. We need to explore the federal idea and have an informed debate about its pros and cons and also on deciding whether we adopt or reject it.

Federalism

To date, many countries in the world including Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, Comoros, Ethiopia, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico, The federated states of Micronesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, St. Kitts and Nevis, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, and Venezuela have federal and/or quasi-federal structures of government. Though federal, none of these countries share exactly the same system. Each country has different administrative arrangements and internal structures. They also vary greatly in size. Russia has republics and many types of regions within; India has states and union territories; Switzerland has cantons while Germany and Austria have landers. Belgium has three regions and three cultural communities while Spain has autonomous regions; the USA has states, unincorporated territories and Native American domestic dependent nations. Canada has provinces, territories and aboriginal organizations. Venezuela has states, territories, federal dependencies.

The proponents of federalism argue that adopting it will strengthen unity and territorial integrity. Switzerland, India, Malaysia, Belgium, Germany, Spain etc are cited as examples. But it cannot be denied that federalism has failed to prevent secession too. The disintegration of Soviet Union and Yugoslavia are well - known examples. The Malaysia - Singapore and Pakistan - Bangladesh splits in the past as well as modern break-ups of Czech and Slovakia, Serbia and Montenegro are also lessons. In Canada, separatism flourished in Quebec despite federalism. Britain devolved power to Scotland and Wales but secessionism seems to have gained ground there. Nigerian federalism did not prevent the Biafran civil war. There are, however, many nuances to take into account when analyzing the countries in question.

Current Political Shift in Nepal

Ideas cannot be ‘killed’; these can only be defeated by greater or better ideas. Another truism is no force can stop an idea whose time has come. Nepal can be a perfect example of this truism.
A recent policy shift of a major political party, Nepali Congress, from ‘multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy’ to ‘federal democratic republic’ has created ripples in fluid politics of Nepal. Now, it seems supporters of federalism have increased in Nepal. The main supporters of the federalism are the Maoists and other communist parties. But none of them have started open and meaningful discussions for and against the system they want establish. There are both supporting and opposing arguments to federalism; however, the real issue is the desirability and sustainability of a federal set-up in a small and landlocked country which is diverse both religiously and ethnically. Many people think that in Nepal’s deeply polarized society, federalism can be worse. At one end there are the “unitarists” who are adamant that the unitary structure of the country should not be changed. At the other end are the “federalist” who want the country to make several “autonomous states with right to self-determination.” On this ground, one sees the federalism as a conspiracy to break up the nation while the other views it as a quest for “new Nepal.”

Can Federalism Bring Peace in Nepal?

Many questions raised by opposing to federalism are: can it bring lasting peace? Can it save our territorial integrity? Can it save our “unity in diversity”? Can it save our ages-long tradition of tolerance, harmony and brotherhood? As all the political leaders and interest groups haven’t done enough exercise or enough study on these questions and there has not been proper explanation on the suitability of federalism to the ordinary citizens, the answer is still uncertain. Many proponents of federalism may argue that a utopian devolution mechanism will cause things to happen in favor of bringing peace. But the causal connection is too remote to rely on. The bitter reality is that there can never be any practical devolution unit/mechanism/degree that all stakeholders can agree upon. Suppose a federal structure was put in place; then what? If the Maoist armed forces continue to remain thereafter, many fear a jobless army can be more dangerous. More complex issues exist about the police force. Therefore, federalism may not bring peace. For peace to hold, firstly, unlawful armed groups should be disarmed and lawful armed groups should uphold the law. Above all, rule of law and total end of impunity can secure us from socioeconomic disaster and political instability so deeply rooted in the nation.

Is Federalism a Sustainable Solution for Nepal?

The international communities (it is said) pressurize the political parties and the government to agree to a federal set-up, the question arises how sustainable would it be? Assuming a federal solution is put in place after a lot of haggling, pressurizing, etc. If it cannot bring about economic and political betterment in tangible proportions, the opposing forces will amass votes to bust it and that’s exactly what they will do when elected. Therefore, federal systems will not be able to be sustained unless they can add sizable amount of value to the aspirations of the majority. It is regrettable that most ‘political solutions’ disregard the aspirations of the majority in our country. It is apparent in Nepal that most of the political leaders and their ‘political solutions’ are guided by foreigners, specifically Indians. Moreover, it is very unlikely that the international community suppress the opposing forces forever and they continue to sustain the fragile ‘yes’ vote in favor of it.

Economics of Federalism and Conflicts over Water Resources

Who should benefit from the economic benefits of the natural resources? Should it be the residents in these regions or the nation as a whole? These are the questions that can cripple any federal set-up. Regional leaders and national leaders will have widely opposing views. It is easy to say the whole country will eventually benefit, but practically it is very difficult as evidenced from around the world. Matters will get even worse if foreign parties enter the fray, which is very likely to happen. A classic example on conflict over water resources is the Murray- Darling Basin development program of the Australian federal government. The basin drains roughly three-quarters of New South Wales, half of Victoria, a substantial portion of southern Queensland, and a small part of eastern South Australia The basin development program is not supported by states amidst a severe drought that has hit Australia. Victoria has repeatedly and decisively declined to cooperate as it has enough water resources. Nepal is not too far away in getting into such inter-region conflict once it is federalized. It will be unimaginably chaotic in a federal set-up and the army will have to be called-in to settle the matter given the fact that water is as important as gold in the dry zone. Prolonged and persistent conflicts can take a heavy toll and things will surely escalate when political forces interplay with them.

Diplomacy

Should the regions be allowed to formulate their diplomatic priorities or should they follow the central government? If they do not have such powers, the regions will surely demand it. It is no secret that Nepali Congress wants much closer ties with India, USA, Japan, and UK. Maoists want closer ties with China, North Korea, and Cuba. Other communist parties want to be closer with socialist countries around the world. Hindus want closer link with India, similarly Muslims would want closer link-ups with the Islamic world. These situations would heighten diplomatic importance to the various regions. Apart from obvious conflicting interests, how can Indian interest, for example, be managed by the central government and the regions? These conflicting interests may lead the nation into diplomatic anarchy under federalism. On the other hand, if the regions’ rights to diplomatic interests are curtailed, would federalism achieve its desired targets?

The Risk of Outside Interferers

Another big risk for the country and the regions is the risk of heightened outside interference.

NGOs and even the UN may run their own zones within some regions. In the absence of an acceptable regulator to both the regional and the central governments, these issues are likely to take the centre stage in any federal setting in Nepal. A ‘racial-federalism’ can be considered much more dangerous than federalism itself in Nepal. This doesn’t sound well but that’s exactly what most politicians in favor of federalism demand. A separate Muslim unit within the Hindu territory? Separate ‘Pahaadee’ unit within ‘Madhesi’ area? ‘Rai/Limbu’ area within ‘Newari’ territory? How ridiculously racial? We are likely to fall into a bigger ‘ethnic’ trap if we try to solve the ‘ethnic’ conflict by federalism. We should be moving in a different direction that can integrate the ethnic groups. We don’t differentiate ethnic celebrations, ethnic foodstuff and ethnic attire. We need our fellow citizens who run them to live and thrive in our nation among……

Final Remarks

Ethnic, linguistic, racial and religious conflicts have become the dominant issue facing the world order today. Wars after 1945 have been as much within countries as between them, with disastrous consequences for peace and security. While many Nepalese politicians (not silent majority of Nepalese people) in Nepal look on federalism enthusiastically and involve themselves profoundly on the process, the rest of the world is in ferment over the federal idea. There was a time when federalism was seen as the ideal remedy for many of the world’s political maladies. It was perceived as the universal device to achieve unity in diversity. Experience has shown that this is not necessarily true in all situations.

Federalism provides no “one size fits all” type of solution. Each Country has to examine and adopt arrangements conducive and suitable for individual needs. Nepal too needs to explore the federal idea intensively and fully before deciding whether to accept or reject it or adopt it with appropriate innovation. The federal idea is dynamic and constantly evolving. What we in Nepal need to do is to explore the federal idea and have an informed debate about its pros and cons and also on deciding whether we adopt or reject it.

Federalism will create new and never ending conflicts and confrontations on the issues of:
# Fixation and safeguarding of borders between states.
# Distribution and utilization of natural resources
# Rights to majority and minority in political, racial, religious, cultural issues (we should remember ill-fated Bhutanese Refugees in Nepal); Madhesi and Pahadi; backward and forward etc.
# Unlimited and unbearable economic burden to the nation ( for example, expenditure to one federal govt and ten state govts; one pm and ten chief ministers; one president and ten governors, one federal parliament and ten state parliaments etc …..)
Nepal, small in size and population, can be managed and governed by inclusive, constructive and cooperative system of representation. Let many ideas play. Let different parties contest and compete with a spirit of “rule of the games.” Let the sovereign people decide freely. Decentralization of power to the local governments with zero interference of the center can make a magic change. Living peace, political stability and the rule of law (good governance) are the basic conditions to flourish and strengthen democracy. Socioeconomic development is possible only in an atmosphere of national unity and mutual confidence among all stakeholders.

Source: Spotlight, VOL. 27, NO. 9, October 12, 2007

CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY: Real or Farcical ?

Every body has been talking about Constituent Assembly; however, no body knows whether it is going to be farcical or real?

KESHAB POUDEL

"I will hold the elections for Constituent Assembly at any cost. That was the mandate given by the people." prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala (May 21, Kantipur 2007) "I will not compromise with anybody on holding the election for Constituent Assembly. I will not postpone it." Prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala ( October 4, 2004 meeting with Finish Minister).

Seven party unity needs to maintain and the new election date must be announced soon." Prime minister Koirala October 2007. Although he has already hold off the election twice, prime minister Koirala, the leader of the government, is still assuring the people that the elections will be conducted at any cost. Instead of dealing with the problems - which were hindering holding of free and fair election, prime minister Koirala was taken aback by ongoing situation.

People -who believed him - were too shocked by the postponement of the election. There are also some noted "experts and analysts" among people who were enjoying their wishful drive against the real decisive force. However, they were also disappointed by the decision to defer the election. "The postponement of elections shattered our notion that prime minister Koirala is man of action," said lawyer and member of civil society Bhimarjun Acharya. "I don't think election for CA. will be conducted"

Conducting the elections for Constituent Assembly and making a constitution through it is a very difficult task. Delaying of the election several times in recent days has proved that what elder generation of politicians did was right as elder politician showed respecting the drafts of the constitutions is more significant than the ritual of holding the elections for that. However, a group of communist, all the time, has taken a stand against the main trend of democratic forces to formulate the constitution by consensus rather than to make it an issue of contesting farcical election for Constituent Assembly.

One has to take the postponement of CA elections as a bitter truth on the basis of ground reality. An unseen power, which has decisive influence in the government and the decision making process of all the members of the alliance of ruling coalition, does not want it. The conflict between the prevailing public opinion and the unseen power seems to be incompatible. Thus, the present deadlock- the postponement of CA elections- supports that apprehension," said the political analyst.

Past Experiments

At the grass root level, everybody needs political stability and social order as a foremost priority. To achieve stability and order, a strong parliament, elected through electoral process, is required. Nepal's past experiences have proved that a first-past-post system of elections comes out with major parties; thus, they forms strong and stable governments. The brief experiments of the first parliamentary form between 1958 and 1960 and the second parliamentary form between 1991 and 2002 were the successful examples of strong and stable governments. Nonetheless, these governments suffered reversal through unconstitutional methods or by other kinds of extra constitutional machinations.

After the dismissal of Sher Bahadur Deuba's government by King Gyanendra on October 3, 2002, subsequent events were not in accordance with the constitution. As a result, the last experiment of parliamentary democracy was jeopardized. Like democratic minded people, the institution of monarchy has also faced a great crisis. A wishful thinking of monarch could not change the situation in his favor. The situation is similar with the seven party's leadership when they delayed the election repeatedly. "The King failed once in his push but this coalition has failed twice to hold the election. Prime minister Koirala expressed his wish that in an abnormal situation in his country, the elections too would be abnormal. He failed miserably even to hold that kind of elections which he had visualized," said the analyst.

Prime minister Koirala has several alternatives for the people and the parties of alliance. Nevertheless, both the people and parties seem to have no alternative for prime minister. Even after the postponement of Constituent Assembly for uncertain period, Koirala has assured the people about the continuation of his leadership to next poll. "This is time to show that there need a strong unity among seven parties alliance. This unity needs to persist till the elections will be held." prime minister reportedly told CPN-UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal. Prime minister Koirala's indication is that he has capability to retain this unity. CPN-UML backs Koirala as an incontrovertible leader.

Functioning of Party

As Nepal's political parties are not guided by grass root level popular opinion, there is slim possibility to produce impartial outcome. The way political party functions in Nepal does not truly reflect the opinion of the grass root. Instead, it reflects the opinion of the center of patronage. In normal democratic process, leadership is influenced by the people but in a handicapped democracy like in Nepal, people are forced to decide in accordance to their party or patrons.

Leo Rose and John T. Scholz have written in their book Nepal Profile of a Himalayan Kingdom, "The structure of these early party organizations reflected the patron-client relationship characteristic of the Rana social order, although there was considerable more variety in party recruitment techniques than Rana patrons had. Some leaders gathered followers through personal charisma or ideological persuasion, other through previous acquaintances in schools, the British or Indian army, or earlier political activities, still others by extension of more traditional relationships or ethnic identity. Successful party leaders attracted followers who themselves were patrons with their own following, thus creating party linkages based on personal support through several intermediate patrons."

"Loyalty varied considerably in intensity and longevity, with numerous intermediate patrons shifting their allegiance when conditions changed. Ethnic identities, status, conflicts, and regional factors, of course, limited the interchangeability of these intermediaries- if a powerful notable joined one party, local factions opposed him would seek the support of a competing party," write authors duo. The recent convention of Nepali Congress is an example of how senior party leader forced his juniors to accept decision as he wished. Despite absolute majority in the central committee who favors that the fate of monarchy be decided by the Constituent Assembly, the party endorsed republican agenda. As Congress president and prime minister Koirala knew that the party leaders were against his move, he ruled out the issues in debate and vote. Moreover, he declared that his fellow members should endorse his proposal for republic form."If a credible and liberal democratic party like Nepali Congress has that kind of working behavior, one cannot imagine the lowest ebb of other parties of the alliance in which almost all are of one party totalitarian ethos of communist dogmas," said the analyst.

With half of the population illiterate and more than 30 percent of the population living below poverty line, the country is handicapped in several senses. In addition to these, the country has not developed infrastructures well as mechanisms to guarantee the rule of law. As there are ways to rig election in a handicapped country like Nepal, it is just a wishful thinking to hold free and fair election. "Above all these, there are other serious constraints of zonal conflict which has its disguise and influence. A prolonged crisis of political instability has made all previous efforts to build up required infrastructures and procedures to govern ineffective and irregular. In such a background, it is unthinkable that people in Nepal will be able to decide their fate fairly and fearlessly," said the analyst. "When all these things have already been destroyed by a ruling syndicate under the blessing of an unseen power, the sovereign people would be force to accept the fate accompli"

In search of a better constitutional order, Maoists faction of communist led an insurrection in which about 15000 persons lost their lives. There was irreparable loss in every aspect. Despite all these, Maoists failed to materialize their dreams after they got stuck in their conflicting choice between personal ambitions and political ideals. Leaders of previous parliamentary parties have lost their will to adhere to the "ideal" constitution of 1990. Like Maoist, they have also failed to formulate better alternative constitution than what the nation has practiced through previous parliaments. "In such a situation, an honest soul searching require from all segments of society instead of roaming in the wilderness for a better constitutional order. Let there be a direct decision of the people through referendum as Maoist and CPN-UML demanded as an alternative proposal to end deadlock. It would be very logical and prudent to let the people decide whether they support the same constitution of 1990 which was an outcome of Janadolan I or they want a new one based upon republican model," said the analyst.

"It is unnecessary to put monarchy into referendum if the previous constitution is out voted in the referendum. The fate of monarchy would consider shield and if people don't want another form of constitution and the whole extremist pressure will be subsided and the country would much ahead to tackle its all round progress and development," said the analyst. However, none of the political parties has clear perceptions about the firms and contents of the coming constitution. They have repeatedly declared to the people that the election will be held on time. Nonetheless, they have already postponed the election twice. Despite their failure to substantiate their promises, they still have reasons to believe that the elections for Constituent Assembly will be held on time. The eight parties have again promised to conduct impartial election on time. However, people still have reasons to question, "Is the election going to be real or farcical?"

Source: Spotlight, VOL. 27, NO. 9, October 12, 2007

Is Nepal's democracy in danger?

Rabindra Mishra

A political crisis in Nepal is set to worsen after the postponement, for the third time, of elections for a Constituent Assembly (CA) that has to draw up a blueprint for the country's future.

Many analysts are doubting if the polls will be held at all.

They also say the latest postponement of the polls will only benefit the monarchy, which is ironic given that all the major parties have agreed on the abolition of the monarchy. The Maoist rebels have been blamed for the postponement of the elections for coming up with two new demands:

• That the monarchy be abolished immediately by the present, interim parliament
• That the CA elections be held on a fully proportional voting system

Both the demands contradicted their earlier agreement with seven political parties who they joined in opposition to King Gyanendra. The postponement of the polls should be viewed against the wider Maoist strategy.

Change

In their days as a guerrilla force, their fundamental strategy was to gain influence in the countryside before surrounding and entering the capital, Kathmandu, for a final strike. A decade of insurgency left them dominating much of rural Nepal. But when the Maoists realised intimidation and violence were less effective in Kathmandu, they changed their strategy. In late 2004, they decided to work with mainstream political parties to further their goals. The strategy received a boost when King Gyanendra sacked the democratic government and took over power in February 2005. Enraged by the king's action, the mainstream political parties, who had in the past refused to collaborate with the Maoists, decided to accept the rebels into their fold. Together, the Maoists and the seven mainstream parties took on the king in a series of street protests in April 2006 that resulted in the king handing back power. In subsequent months, the Maoists became part of the interim parliament and the government. They also went about gaining as much influence as possible in commerce, the media and other areas of public life in the capital. So having established themselves in Kathmandu, they have one final objective left - to capture power.

Pressure

Most analysts agree that the Maoists have little chance of doing this through competitive politics. They have lost much of their influence in the countryside, and are unpopular in the cities. That seems to be why they wanted November's elections put off. In the meantime they will try to pressure other parties to agree to their demands for the immediate ending of the monarchy and for the CA polls to be held under a fully proportional voting system. They have also shown an ability to outwit their opponents in a way that erodes the authority of much of the state. It was the failure of the democratic parties, the king, the army and other security agencies which made the Maoists' journey to the capital possible in the first place. Now they have reached a point where they seem able to put a break on a national objective like holding elections, something that virtually the entire country had agreed on. This, many say, has severely weakened the public's confidence in its legitimate institutions.

Bloodshed fears

Many people have begun to talk about Nepal entering an era of either ultra-rightist (military or military-backed) or ultra-leftist (Maoist) dictatorship. They are not ruling out bloodshed between the army and the Maoists, who have concentrated a large number of their members in Kathmandu. The coming days and months are crucial for Nepal's fragile peace process. So is the special session of parliament on Thursday which will look into various options to address the prevailing crisis. It is understood that the army has already opposed the idea of the current interim parliament declaring Nepal a republic. Sources say the army is also unhappy about Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's Nepali Congress Party's recent decision to vote for the abolition of the monarchy when the Constituent Assembly meets. The Maoists have now hinted that they are ready to compromise on the timing of the abolition of the monarchy. But they look far less likely to compromise on the proportional representation issue. Whatever is decided - and other options are up for discussion - the result could well need amendments to the constitution and relevant electoral laws. From all this mess, it is King Gyanendra who is gaining.

From a position of rock-bottom unpopularity, when he had to give up power in April, 2006, his standing has been gradually picking up - thanks to the chaos and discord among the political parties and Maoists. Some leaders now say that democracy in Nepal is in serious danger. They are arguing that a broader coalition should be formed which would also take into its fold the pro-monarchy forces to stop the country from sliding into dictatorship. But the wider held view is that a final showdown between the army and the Maoists in Kathmandu is more likely than ever. If such a situation arises, nobody knows who will prevail. However, one Indian expert on Nepal, retired Gen Ashok Mehta, believes that Delhi would be prepared to give military help to the government in Kathmandu rather than see the Maoists seizing power by force.

Source: BBC News Service, October 8, 2007

India for legitimate poll process in Nepal

Kathmandu, (PTI): India would support any political system chosen by the Nepalese people as long as it is through a legitimate election process, Indian Prime Minister's envoy, Shyam Saran, said here Friday, stressing full support to the peace process in the Himalayan nation. India would support whatever political system the people of Nepal would decide, Saran said, adding that the best way to get the mandate of the people is through the legitimate means of election.

India regards holding free and fair constituent assembly election of central importance for ensuring lasting peace and multi-party democracy in Nepal," said Saran, who held high-level discussions with a wide range of political leaders including Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, CPN-UML general secretary, Madhav Kumar Nepal, and Maoist chief Prachanda among others.
"In India's view, election is the only way for the people of Nepal to choose their future, including the manner in which they want to be governed," said Saran, a former Indian Foreign Secretary.
The special envoy of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is on a three-day visit to Nepal to assess the political situation and convey the message of the Indian leader after the crucial November constituent assembly elections were postponed.

India remained committed to help the peace process in every way possible to achieve the goal of a democratic, stable and prosperous Nepal," the former Indian Ambassador to Nepal told mediapersons ahead of his departure for New Delhi Friday. Saran's remarks came at a time when the Maoists have walked out of the government, forced the postponement of the polls and registered a motion in the interim Parliament seeking the abolition of the monarchy and adoption of a proportional-based electoral system as precondition for participating in the polls.
Indian envoy Saran said he is "optimistic" that the current political crisis facing Nepal can be resolved on the basis of an understanding among the major political parties.

"There is no reason why the peace process should fail, we should look towards the positive achievements of Nepal made over the past two years," he said. "We would like to see this peace process and electoral process remain on track," Saran said. "The sooner the elections are held, the better it would be for progress of the peace process." He repeatedly stressed that it is the right of the people of Nepal to decide how they want to be governed and what type of political system they want, and the only legitimate way of doing so is holding the Constituent Assembly elections at the earliest. "India will support whatever mandate the people of Nepal will give and the international community believes that election is the only credible way to get the people's mandate," he noted. Saran also stressed that the genuine demands of the Terai region must be addressed while resolving the political issues in the country.

"But we must be able to distinguish between the genuine political demands of the Terai groups and the criminal activities being carried out by some groups taking the advantage of the open border," he said. Nepal's six-party alliance running the interim government has been insisting that a fresh mandate was necessary to decide the fate of the 238-year old monarchy in a legitimate manner. The Maoists and their allies command only 85 seats in the 330 seat parliament and their motion cannot be endorsed without the support of the other parties in the ruling alliance.

Source: The Hindu, Chennai, October 13, 2007

Nepal debates monarchy's future

The interim parliament in Nepal is holding an emergency debate on the future of King Gyanendra.

The meeting is being held at the instigation of former Maoist rebels, who pulled out of the coalition government last month. The Maoists are demanding the immediate abolition of the monarchy. But the governing Nepali Congress party is insisting that a new parliament should first be elected which will decide the future of the royal family. Elections, which were earlier scheduled for 22 November, have now been postponed and no new date has been set for the vote.

Deadlock

"We are confident that our proposal will be adopted by the parliament. We are negotiating with other parties to persuade them to back our proposal," Maoist spokesman Dev Gurung said. Nepal's Home Minister Krishna Prasad Situala said that the government was confident that the crisis will be resolved through the debate in parliament. He said that talks would be held with all parties to reach an agreement. The two sides have been trying to find a solution to the deadlock since the Maoists withdrew from the government. Elections to the constituent assembly were delayed earlier this month after the two sides failed to come to an agreement on the fate of the monarchy. The elections are a key element of a peace deal signed in 2006 that ended 10 years of Maoist insurgency. One of the first tasks facing the new constituent assembly when it is elected is to decide the monarchy's future. But the former rebels now demand a republic be announced before elections are held. Last week, the Nepali Congress announced its support for a republic - but only once elections had been held.

Source: BBC NEWS: October 11, 2007

Prime Minister Who Would Be King

Yubaraj Ghimire

G.P. koirala was arguably the most powerful prime minister the country ever had, going by the powers vested in him. For the past 16 months, he has been acting not only as the country's prime minister, but also discharging all the roles of the head of state. And King Gyanendra has become a political recluse.

Koirala has of late come in for sharp criticism for representing the state in various Hindu religious functions like the kings have been doing for a century in 'Hindu Nepal'. With the country declared secular in May 2007, it was expected that the government or head of state would maintain no direct link with such activities. On September 30, about half an hour after Koirala offered puja to Kumari, known as living Goddess, as head of the state and left the durbar square area, King Gyanendra arrived there without fanfare. He offered puja to Kumari, a tradition the kings have been maintaining for the past 250 years, and returned home. The crowd that booed Prime Minister Koirala when he visited there, greeted the king — something Gyanendra perhaps did not anticipate.

That clearly irked PM Koirala who not only sought an explanation from the chief of army staff a day later, but also ordered that half the army personnel currently deployed in the palace be removed. But many who supported the pro-democracy movement when King Gyanendra assumed absolute power are now fed up with Koirala and refuse to support him on the issue.

In fact, the crowd that hooted him delivered a simple message — Koirala is a prime minister and he should not be acting like a king, at least during religious functions. Nepali society with more than 80 per cent Hindu population, and the rest being Buddhists, Muslims and Christians, still remains a religious society and favours the king or any other individual's right to religion, something that the interim constitution guarantees as a fundamental right. Koirala has been denying that right to King Gyanendra of late.

Gyanendra, despite his unpopularity at the peak with absolute powers, was able to secure lots of sympathy, if not support from the people, when he was literally put under quarantine since February 18 when he issued a customary message in the name of the people on the occasion of Democracy Day. Since then, thrice in the past, the king was denied permission by the prime minister when he expressed his desire to be part of the tradition of the kings. Instead, Koirala took the king's role unto himself.

But what he apparently heard from the chief of army staff on the morning of October 1 must have added to that insecurity. COAS Katawal made it clear that while the Nepal army was a disciplined institution and willing to carry every order of a democratically elected government, it was worried about the complete surrender that the prime minister had made to the Maoists. He also made it clear that the army would honour each and every provision of the interim constitution and the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), the basis of Maoists joining the interim government, parliament and announcing that they had renounced the politics of violence. The army is unhappy with initiating a deal with the Maoists to become a republic even before the election to the constituent assembly takes place, against the pledge in the interim constitution that the first CA meeting will decide the fate of the monarchy.

With elections unlikely in November given the present political impasse, Koirala not only loses the political but also the mass support that he enjoyed only 16 months ago. His imminent fall now seems triggered by the army's likely non-cooperation as well.

Source: The Indian Experss, October 4, 2007