Ensuring A Free Press

AS journalists and media persons celebrated World Press Freedom Day Wednesday, experts pointed out the challenges still being faced by the Nepalese media sector and sought measures to fully ensure and institutionalise press freedom and the freedom of expression. After the political change last year, the Nepalese press has definitely heaved a sigh of relief. During the king's authoritarian regime, the press came under direct attack because Nepalese journalists and media persons were on the forefront struggling for democracy and freedom. After the success of the Jana Andolan, the press has been free, in principle. There is no pressure and attack from the state. However, the press is not fully secure and free as newer kinds of threats are merging. The attack, threat and intimidation against the press and the media persons continue to exist. But this is not from the state but from the non-state sector. During the agitation in the Terai, Nepalese journalists came under heavy attack and threats were issued by the organisers of the agitation. As a result, some journalists had to flee from their original places or to quit their job. This is a testimony that the press is still not fully secure and safe.

Media persons are the messengers. When the messengers are not safe and secure, the job of carrying the messages to the target group cannot be accomplished. Thus, the process of informing and educating the people is obstructed. Freedom of press is a hallmark of a democratic and open society. A democratic system of governance cannot be vibrant in the absence of a free press, while meaningful and effective press freedom cannot exist without democracy and open society. Thus, democracy and free press are, in a way, synonymous. In a democracy, people's right to information must be safeguarded and realised. A free, vibrant and functioning media alone can ensure the right to information of the people. The right to information has been taken as one of the fundamental rights of the people. People have the right to know about government affairs. Only informed citizens can make the right decision in every sphere of the society. Thus, people must be informed about the acts and decision of the government. This is the spirit and essence of democracy. Although there is no threat from the government against the press, the government is yet to make legal and other frameworks for press freedom and guarantee access to information. Despite demands from the journalists, the law regarding right to information has not been enacted. It is the need of the hour, which alone will guarantee people's easy access to information.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 4, 2007

Firm Conviction

Minister for Peace and Reconstruction Ram Chandra Poudel, talking to media persons at a reception organised by the Nepal Press Union on Wednesday, said with firm conviction that the eight party unity would not and should not break. However, in recent times there have been hints from the eight party leaders as to a lull in the relationship among the eight party members. Despite the events going their own way, Minister Poudel stressed that there was a need to build an "atmosphere of trust" so that the envisaged change in the country could be brought about by the eight political parties. This is also an indication that the Nepali Congress believes that unity among the eight parties is crucial to charting the path ahead, though statements are coming forth from some quarters that the unity may break down. But, considering the situation that the country is in, the need to maintain unity and trust among the parties is crucial.

In fact, it was because of the unity among the concerned parties that the country has come this far. A united stand would only give passage to the country from the pressing challenges. It is true that the constituent assembly poll date has not been announced so far. This is of concern to all as the goal at present is holding the CA polls as soon as possible. For this, mutual trust among the eight parties must be strengthened. The recent weeks have not proved fruitful in this direction. The top leadership of the eight parties knows that their silence on the matter is prolonging the declaration of the poll date. They must urgently meet and sort out the issues that have been hampering the fixing of the date for the polls. In the meantime, the government, too, must focus on the demands made by the various agitating groups so that the maintenance of law and order can be done. Grievances will be there, the concerned parties know it well, but the need is to address them in the best possible manner. At the same time, it is essential that the legislature-parliament proceedings, too, must go smoothly so that the statute amendment and the much needed election laws can be passed to facilitate the CA poll to be held efficiently and effectively.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 4, 2007

Time To Set Things Right

Prem N. Kakkar

THERE is more delay with each passing day. This is in connection with the holding of the constituent assembly (CA) elections. There is a commitment from all to the CA polls. However, the delay is sending the wrong message to the people. In fact, with the varied statements of many a political leader, the people seem to be confused about the polls.

Practical problems

It is true that the polls will be held at a later date, as the date fixed earlier is not practical. But there are some who have been saying that the polls will not be held, which is totally baseless. The CA polls will be held, but the date is yet to be agreed upon by the eight political parties. This is important, but in recent days, there is growing concern over whether the unity among the eight parties will last any longer.

Earlier, there used to be regular meetings of the top leaders of the concerned parties, but now they have become fewer. This may lead to the assumption of some coldness in the relationship. However, all the top leaders talk of maintaining unity and trust among the parties. All the parties have given their word to keep the unity intact, but action speaks otherwise. It is rather unfortunate that the leaders talk their way and do not listen to the people in general. The people, after all their sacrifices, expect the leaders to act responsibly and sincerely.Meanwhile, rhetoric is making inroads instead of real action to convert the gains made since the April uprising into tangible results. The foremost is the holding of the elections that will the biggest event in the history of the country. The demand for the CA elections has been there since the past half a century. The opportunity is here, and it has to be tapped. This so at a time when the sovereignty and supremacy of the people have been established. Of course, there are complexities that need to be addressed so that the path ahead can be clear.

As every change since the past one year has been decided by the eight political parties, they cannot shy away from their responsibilities now and come up with conflicting agendas. The agenda had long been fixed, and it has to be adhered to by all the eight parties. There may be differences in opinion among them, but they have to be resolved.Herein, the importance of talks is important. In the past, many historic decisions were made on the basis of mutual understanding and trust. There is no doubt that the same thing can continue now. The contentious issues have to be discussed so that a way out can be decided upon. Instead of trying to evade each other, all must sit down and work.There may be lapses on the part of one party or the other. They must be pointed out so that they can be rectified. This is necessary because all the parties are responsible to the people, and petty party interests must not be allowed to disturb the smooth peace process that is underway.

In this respect, blaming one leader or the other cannot solve the problem. What is needed is a straight and frank discussion among the concerned. When all sit together, the problems can be discussed, and the appropriate panacea sought. This is where mutual trust and understanding can play a big role. One thing to be kept in mind is that the all the participants of the eight political parties have their own ideologies, and they stick to it.Despite all this, it was quite encouraging to see them join hands in overthrowing the regressive regime. When so much was done on the basis of eight-party unity, it is not understandable why all of a sudden there is uncertainty. In this, all the leaders of the eight parties must think and warm their relations. This is necessary because the mission with which they forged unity is yet to be accomplished, namely, the constituent assembly elections.

Hurdles

It is, therefore, clear that the unity must be maintained at all cost till the CA polls. This is obvious as there are elements that want to create hurdles on the way to the polls. It makes it all the more imperative for the eight parties to tread the path unitedly to thwart any malevolent activities of those who do not want to see all inclusive and lasting peace established in the country.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 4, 2007

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