Antinomies Of Democracy

C. D. Bhatta

The successful April uprising of 2006 has brought some sort of relief to the public and hope for a new kind of politics based on justice, equality and honesty. There is, however, a great deal of fear lurking due mainly to the existing nature of political practices, structure of the political parties, extant state of internal democracy within the political parties, their interpretation and application of democracy, and composition of the civil society per se. These are some of the most important factors, among others, which need to be revisited to understand the broader dynamics of democracy and the peace process in the country.

Coming together
Let me begin with the current talkathon on the unification of the professional political forces of different ideologies that is, communists, democrats and (far) rightists. The logic behind the unification, being floated by the respective political parties, is based on the mere rhetoric of sustainable democracy with republicanism in place. And the political parties are proposing their own prescriptions. However, going by the run-down history of political events in the past twelve months, it looks as if the 'conditions' that could provide political stability in the country are still missing.

This is because the current political actors, as in the past, have failed to accommodate all the societal forces in the institutional life of the state. The Nepali state is dictated by the Hobbesian nature of element(s). For example, three factors that have immensely dominated Nepali state affairs after Jana Andolan II are the eight political parties, civil society and mushrooming number of 'interest groups'. These elements, in one way or the other, are engaged in preserving their political, social, economic and, to some extent, even personal interests (power seekers) at the historic political juncture. What has been certainly missing from the current political scene is the 'citizen' - people who cannot or are not in a position to organise on their own. They are mentioned nowhere. The embedded elitism in every sector of governance and mere ranting of loktantrik ganatantra (not exhibited in practice) by the political parties and the civil society indicate that regime change came about through an 'elite settlement' among the political parties.

The civil society, although it played a crucial role in the regime change, has failed to instil democratic values. The convergence between the 'old class' and 'new class' of political leaders is motivated by vested interests as against the cause for democracy. The unstable and mushrooming networks of opposition, the lack of connections between the civil society and citizenry at large and absence of a nationalist agenda from the political discourse are resulting in the resignation of the mass population from elite politics. And this certainly does not herald a prosperous future for the country. The expansion of the political society and the elite shift of the civil society members to the political society have corroded the very notion of civil society. In fact state and citizens have been colonised by the political and (un)civil society. The shift of civil society organisations and colonisation of the public sphere by the political society, especially after Jana Andolan II (like in the earlier Andolan) is not considered a normal pattern in democratic politics. It is rather a somewhat abnormal condition and implies a thin quality of the state of democracy and civil society.

This shift of the civil society from the civic sphere to the political sphere, mere expansion of the political society and the rise of various interest groups are helping to maintain a "revolutionary situation" in the country. The reason behind this phenomenon is that the professional political class has grossly ignored the genuine interest of the citizens, and they are simply treating the Nepali state as their personal enterprise. It appears that the ownership of the state is shifting towards the 'eight political parties' and the Kathmandu-centred civil society members. Perhaps, this could be the reason, among others, why the citizens are forming their own groups and exerting pressure on the state under different themes - a case of citizens against the state. Our political leaders have yet to understand this broader public uprising. In contrast, they have virtually closed the channels of communication with the groups that are outside the purview of the parties and parliaments. The hijacking of the public sphere by the political society, urban middle class elite, official civil society and marginalisation of peripheral civil society organisations also beg some fundamental questions on state ownership, the popular sovereignty for that matter. The fundamental problem, in this regard, primarily stems from politicisation and elite shift of the civil sphere into the political sphere and vice versa; elite domination in the civil society and missing link between members and leaders in the civil society organisations and civil society and citizens; and patron-client relationship between civil society, political society and their masters (donors and foreign powers). These factors, indeed, are contributing towards incivility, and the civic euphoria of 2006 is slowly evaporating.

Turbulence

To sum up, the challenges that lie ahead for the Nepali state are multiple and immense. Nepal is now on the throes of a major turbulence. Changes are already taking place. The wide-ranging upsurge of the marginalised and oppressed strata of society has forced us to think beyond formal politics and tap the deeper dimensions of the reality. The political parties and leaders can create chaos, but no longer can they fool the society.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 4, 2007

Muslims want quota system in Nepal

Muslim minority in Nepal want guarantees and quotas for their minority. Other minorities agree, but want a secular Nepalese state.

Muslims claim that despite the end of the theocratic monarchy Nepal remains a Hindu state. They want guarantees and quotas for their minority. Members of other minorities agree. For them it is essential that Nepal become a secular state. Nepal’s Muslims want the government to set aside quotas for Muslims in parliament and the civil service. The demands were made by the National Forum of Nepalese Muslims at a conference that was held last Sunday and Monday in Kathmandu.

The meeting brought together about a thousand delegates in representation of the country’s 954,000 Muslims (4.2 per cent of the total). At the end, participants released a statement in which they demanded reserved seats in the Constituent Assembly that is called to draft a new constitution beginning on June 20. They also want Muslim quotas in the civil service, a permanent Hajj committee and Muslim religious holidays recognised as statutory holidays.

Hajji Munir Alam, a member of the Muslim Forum, said that whilst parliament has declared Nepal a secular state (after 238 years as a Hindu theocratic state), the “government has done nothing to give Muslims an adequate place in the country’s political system and public life.” He complained for instance that “the only national holidays are Hindu.” Another delegate, Jameer Ansari, said that almost all Muslims live in the Madhesi-inhabited area. Since the Madhesi, who are of Indian origin, “have been guaranteed seats,” so should Muslims in order “to have a voice and represent their interests.” Other minorities have expressed similar concerns. Bhante Jaydeo, a Buddhist monk, said that “religious minorities should be adequately represented in each department.”

But more than that, in a country where Hindus represent 83 per cent, religious minorities (Muslims, Buddhist and Christians) should join forces to demand their quotas. “Buddhists are more than 7 per cent of the population, Christians about 5 per cent, and all three groups [Muslims included] come to 17 per cent,” he said. “Their vote can be of great political importance.” Nirmal Thulung, a Christian from the Good Hope Church, agrees. “The voice of religious minorities would be stronger if we could stand together,” he said. If Muslims make demands on their own they can only split minority interests. “In any event,” he added, “the first goal is to favour the establishment of a secular state in the country. Only this can guarantee us the right to freely profess our faith.”

Source: Asia News, April 15, 2007

US Terrorism Report on Nepal

Through April 2006, Nepal's primary counterterrorism focus remained the Maoist insurgency but the focus shifted dramatically after Nepal's political parties, the Maoists, and civil society led a popular uprising against the King. King Gyanendra was compelled to restore parliament and cede his authoritarian powers to a government run by an alliance of the seven main political parties. The Maoists declared a unilateral cease-fire on April 27. The government followed suit on May 3, formally lifting its designation of the Maoists as a terrorist organization. Months of negotiations resulted in a comprehensive peace agreement on November 21 that formally ended the insurgency. The agreement also provided that the Maoists would be admitted into an interim government once Maoist combatants were in camps and relinquished their weapons under UN monitoring.

From January to November, Maoist rebels were responsible for the deaths of 165 security personnel and 46 civilians. During the same time period, the government killed 182 suspected Maoist militants. Nepal's National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) reported that murders by Maoists lessened after the cease-fire in April, but still totaled 28 from May until November. Security force killings of Maoist insurgents were also significantly lower after the cease-fire, totaling nine during the same period.
Despite the cease-fire, Maoist rebels continued to conduct abductions, extortion, and violence. In the Kathmandu Valley, Maoists took advantage of their dramatically increased presence and the government's reluctance to upset the peace process to expand their use of extortion and efforts to undermine trade unions and student groups affiliated with the political parties. They also continued forced recruitment of schoolchildren, with thousands targeted after the signing of the initial November 8 peace accord. On September 20, and again on December 19, the Maoists declared nationwide transportation strikes. Both events were accompanied by the stoning of vehicles, and each lasted only for the declared period, demonstrating Maoist command and control.

This year also saw the beginning of a disturbing new trend with the activation of the separatist Maoist-splinter terrorist group called the Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM), which aimed to bring about the secession of the southern Terai plains from the rest of Nepal. This group was responsible for the assassination of a Nepali Member of Parliament in September.
"Imperialist" United States and "expansionist" India were the targets of considerable Maoist venom, especially in the period leading up to the April uprising. A trip by Maoist Supremo Prachanda to New Delhi on November 18, however, seemed to mark the culmination of a shift in the Maoist view of Nepal's large neighbor to the south. At the end of the year, the United States was the only country to maintain its designation of the Maoist insurgency as a terrorist organization. Several countries, including India, were waiting for the Maoist entry into government to authorize open contacts at all levels. The United States provided substantial antiterrorism assistance and training to Nepal's security forces, including courses on crisis management and critical incident management.

Source: The Telegraph Nepal, May 3, 2007

United States: India Changed Its Views On Nepal's Maoists

Kathmandu, Nepal (AHN) - The United States said that India changed its view of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) after Maoist Chairman Prachanda traveled to New Delhi in November last year.
The "Country Reports on Terrorism," released by the U.S. Department of State's Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism on April 30, said the U.S. was the only country that still classified the Maoist insurgency as a terrorist organization at the end of 2006.
"Imperialist" United States and "expansionist" India were the targets of a considerable amount of Maoist venom, especially in the period leading up to the April uprising.

Prachanda's trip to New Delhi on November 18, however, seemed to mark the culmination of a shift in the Maoist view of Nepal's large neighbor to the south, the report said under its "Nepal" section.
"Several countries, including India, were waiting for the Maoist entry into government to authorize open contacts at all levels," the report added.
The report said that despite the ceasefire "Maoist rebels" continued to conduct abductions, extortion and violence.
"In the Kathmandu Valley, Maoists took advantage of their dramatically increased presence and the government's reluctance to upset the peace process to expand their use of extortion and efforts to undermine trade unions and student groups affiliated with the political parties," the report said.

Source: AHN Media Corp, May 2, 2007

Time to be right

At a time when the trust deficit among the alliance partners seems to be spiralling after the deferral of the constituent assembly polls, Monday’s Maoist attack on a police post in Banke sends a wrong signal to the public. Reports indicate a dispute between a Maoist district member and a police constable over the latter’s attempt to conduct a security check on the former ultimately developed into this untoward incident. Thankfully, there was no casualty, and four of the policemen who had gone missing during the Maoist attack are reported to have come into contact. Accusations and counter-accusations have surfaced. But the attack cannot be justified by the nature of the dispute, and Maoist cadres should also understand that they have now become a part of the government and their responsibility has increased. This certainly stresses the need for them to adapt their ways to the new situation fully and soon.

The Maoists and the other constituents of the eight-party alliance should tackle such unfortunate incidents as this through consultation and talks. There are also sporadic reports of activists of the Maoist-aligned Young Communist League (YCL) resorting to high-handedness such as physical action over disputes with others. This week they also clashed with the Armed Police Force in Bardiya over a difference concerning the use of a building. There have also been reports of clashes between workers of other political parties and YCL cadres from time to time. Though informed comment on individual cases can only be made after an independent verification of the facts, the number of reports alleging the YCL’s wrongdoings should, by itself, be enough to draw the serious attention of top Maoist leaders, who should identify areas of YCL misconduct and take corrective action.But other parties should also self-introspect whether their cadres have been in the wrong or where. Rival parties have almost always taken the sides of their sister organisations or cadres even if they were wrong and tend only to blame the others for wrongdoing. As for the YCL, it has done good work too — its cadres have been involved in social work as represented, for example, in their “New Kathmandu Valley Campaign” launched to make it clean and organised, and under which they have, among other things, helped to widen the road along the Kalanki-Soaltee section, facilitated garbage disposal, planted trees at certain places along the Bagmati and Vishnumati.

But, if any YCL cadres, and for that matter anybody else, are engaged in criminal activities, the government should show the courage to bring them to book. The public will not support the wrongdoers. But the practice of indulging only in criticism without matching action won’t help. The growing distrust between the political parties over certain major political issues, particularly the one relating to monarchy v republic, is threatening to break the eight-party alliance. Then much worse things are likely to happen. Displaying statesmanship in such a critical hour is a must, as it will test the leadership of the major constituents of the alliance.

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 3, 2007