Concrete Agenda

Political parties have set up a concrete agenda to discuss and arrive at a settlement of issues to further the process of peace building in the country. The contents of the agenda thrashed out by the parties include reshuffling of the government, announcing the date for the polls to the Constituent Assembly, evaluation of the compliance to the terms of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and setting a modality for the implementation of the motions registered in the Parliament, among others. Though new and difficult issues are being added to the otherwise two-point agenda, that is, declaring a republic and adopting a full and inclusive proportional representation mode for the polls - mooted often by the Maoists in particular - concretisation of the issues in the present context may help to find a lasting and durable solution to the problems faced by the country. The political parties need to delve into these issues seriously, discuss them threadbare and arrive at a settlement so that there will be no room for raising hackles and contentions times and again to suit one's political interests. In a democracy, deliberations and discussions are always needed to arrive at unanimity of views. The decisions reached through discussion and evaluation of the pros and cons of the issues contribute to strengthening a democratic culture and help in finding a legitimate and acceptable solution to the problems. The moot point that should not be overlooked is that further delaying of the polls to the Constituent Assembly without showing any readiness and interest to fix a new date would amount to apathy and indifference on the part of the political stakeholders. This could mean a prolonged and unsettled transition, instability and uncertainty in the country's politics. Some political elements in the country may not be in favour of holding the polls as continued uncertainty could provide room for them to compound the troubles. What is needed at this juncture, therefore, is the understanding and commitment among the political forces to discuss the agenda and announce a new date for the Constituent Assembly polls. The immediate fixing of the new date will send a very positive message to both the national as well as the international community though some issues could remain unresolved and unsettled for some time to come. Holding the polls and framing a new constitution through a democratic process will bring a new era of peace and prosperity in the country.

Source: The Rising Nepal, December 3, 2007

Thinking anew

The Interim Constitution needs to be amended within this Nepali calendar month to avoid a constitutional crisis triggered by the postponement of the November 22 constituent assembly (CA) election, if for nothing else. The outstanding issues that the seven parties continue to discuss, such as the timing of the declaration of the republic and the electoral system, are political ones, which have caused an impasse in the transition but are not constitutionally urgent decisions. The question is, however, that without political agreement on other issues, the constitutional amendment even to change an election date is unlikely to happen. But, a fresh date may not by itself lead to the CA polls, though certain quarters, including some friendly countries, appear to be insisting on a fresh date. At best, a new date could give the parties more time to resolve the crisis. In the first place, it was not necessary to incorporate an election date in the constitution but it was so done in order to make the election doubly sure. But, it did not work.

Things now stand at such a point that the major disputants in the seven-party alliance cannot afford to go it alone. They have either to take forward the peace process or to break it up. The second option would be too costly to the alliance, collectively and individually, as well as to much else that the Nepalis hold dear. The key differences exist between the Nepali Congress and the CPN-Maoist. Therefore, both need to come away a little further from their present positions to make the political transition successful. Besides, once the polls were postponed, the alliance partners have thought it better to set new agendas to bring the country out of the present muddle. Thus, they have decided on five agendas – implementation of republican declaration and full proportional representation, compliance with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, reconstitution of the Council of Ministers and a change in working style, review of the 12-point understanding, as well as all subsequent understandings and agreements, and announcement of a new election date.

These issues could have been taken up earlier to shorten the period of confusion and uncertainty that has reigned over the country because of the second deferral of the polls. However, a discussion of these with a view to coming to a new understanding and removing the existing shortcomings can be expected to facilitate the peace process. Doubts are not entirely unfounded that mere agreement on republicanism and electoral system might not be enough at this stage, because, tomorrow, other outstanding issues could well impede progress towards the election and beyond. This requires that the political parties should sort out all important differences and misunderstandings, so that once a fresh election date was set, it would not be deferred yet again. The main point is that the outcome of the peace process should attain the noble objectives set in the political agreements and understandings based on institutionalisation of a fully democratic order and a restructuring of the state to respond to the needs of the Nepalis better.

Source: The Himalayan Times, December 3, 2007

Nepali polity: Where paradoxes reign supreme

Ganga Thapa

There are strong indications of fresh political realignments in Nepal, which is one of the most unsuccessful third-wave democracies. Despite a long history of authoritarian rule, extensive international support for the peace process should have been sufficient for the transition. But the government has been consistently incapable of pursuing social and economic reforms. Studies have shown that an ideological left-right spectrum can be immensely useful to citizens.Since the collapse of King Gyanendra’ regime, progress towards democratic transition — which would have ensured human freedom (liberalism), rule of law and legal equality (constitutionalism), and representative government (democracy) — has been too slow to come by. The circumstances are highly polarised and factional. A state is regarded as the actor with power, competence, authority and legitimacy to carry out a policy decision. Yet, doubts remain whether it can effectively address demands for freedom and human dignity. In the liberal peace-building process in Nepal, state actors have evidently been unable to recognise the reality and limits of democratic pluralism.

Political democracy usually emerges from nonlinear, highly uncertain, and imminently reversible processes. Democracy may not be a springboard for political equality, but Nepali ruling elite has, time and again, satisfied itself with political concessions it has carved out after petty wrangling. Nepali politics has deteriorated into a parochial fixation as a result of non-institutionalised nature of politics and sprawling patron-client network which, according to Dwight King, is “a pattern of politics in which the ruler’s power derives primarily from his capacity to win and retain the loyalty of some sections of political elite.” Nepal is losing hopes due also to Russian-style oligarchy under Premier Koirala, who is inexorably aloof, arrogant, authoritarian, and a satellite of alien interests. Little wonder, there are growing communal unrest, rampant corruption and criminalisation in politics. If those having influence insist on monopolising power, peace and democracy-building process will face a titanic crisis.

A number of emerging countries share remarkable commitment to democracy despite intractable barriers like weak economy, post-conflict tensions, little participatory tradition, bureaucratic incapacity, and corruption. Nepal’s post-insurgency political process could be a bargaining process between the opposition, who want to share the governing power, and those in the government, who tend to shed it only for expediency to produce apparent improvisations. With institutions acutely lacking clarity and responsibility, scarcely organised popular sector, rampant political disaffection and social exclusion, and with civil society frequently divided on the lines of interest, Nepal is prone to miss essential realities of democracy. Indeed, electoral reforms are imperative to increase competition and strengthen institutions that aggregate and articulate citizens’ preferences. In theory, if the role of executive is merely to translate what the legislators decide, proportional representation is the best. But in contemporary politics, it is the executive that really conducts politics; so democracy is secure if the legislative power is in conformity with the popular will.

More precisely, the question of who takes responsibility for politically sensitive issues and under what circumstances should be treated very earnestly. Rather than allowing the people to set priorities and make mistakes, those unelected, criminal and thug legislators and unscrupulous politicians in the interim legislature-parliament insist on deciding everything. It is a high paradoxical situation. Thrusting a diktat is tantamount to implementing it.States lacking legitimate and effective governmental institutions are more prone to instability and conflict. Nepal is a victim of intra-party rivalry and interest-group politics with political elites having monopoly on power without an electoral mandate. Societies tacitly agree on certain rules to regulate the game of politics. The guiding principle of democracy is that it should be equally accountable and accessible to all members of the polity. For the popular will to be reflected in politics, it must first be expressed.

Nepal is mired in arrogance and hypocrisy with wheeler-dealers. Although Western political and institutional arrangements are not readily applicable everywhere, Nepal needs intelligent and responsible participation by the people in choosing those who govern and approving of policies by which they are to be governed. Otherwise a democratic deficit would ensue. Unequivocally, the April awakening was a gateway to liberate impoverished masses from plethora of injustices. It is fast turning into an illusory revolution. Nepal has endured bloody violence before, and, if the past is any guide, today’s strife does not presage the unravelling of state.

Source: The Himalayan Times, December 3, 2007

Chinese Delegation Meets Maoist Leaders

Kathmandu, December 3The visiting Chinese delegation headed by Wang Jiarui, Minister of Foreign Department of Chinese Communist Party met the chairman of CPN-Maoist Prachanda and other senior Maoist leaders at Hotel Dwarikas in Kathmandu this morning.During the meeting, the Chinese team raised concern over the deferral of constituent assembly elections in Nepal. Maoist leaders informed the delegation that they were committed to make ongoing peace process a success. Maoist leaders and Chinese team also discussed the current political deadlock and other contemporary issues, sources said. Maoist second-in-command Dr Baburam Bhattarai and senior leader Ram Bahadur Thapa 'Badal' among others were present in the meeting.Yeterday, the Chinese team met former Prime Minister and Nepali Congress (NC) leader Sher Bahadur Deuba and Nepal Workers and Peasants Party (NWPP) leader Narayan Man Bijukche. The Chinese team will wrap up its Nepal visit tomorrow.

Source: The Himalayan Times, December 3, 2007

Guerrilla strike

Yubaraj Ghimire

As Nepal’s politics takes new twists and turns, holding elections for the Constituent Assembly appears more and more uncertain, if not impossible. And that puts the seven-party unity under further strain.

For the purpose of elections, these seven parties had accepted G.P. Koirala as their patriarch. Prime Minister Koirala was also vested with the power of the king as the monarchy remains in a state of suspension. But now, with two deadlines for the CA polls having been missed — first June and then in November — the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (CPN-M) is not only demanding elections solely on its terms, it has also threatened to depose Koirala as PM. CPN-M chief Prachanda declared recently that Koirala was behaving more like King Gyanendra, undermining the role of his guerrillas in bringing the current political change that catapulted him to power. Prachanda has also asserted that the CA elections cannot take place without these guerrillas being integrated into the national army.

This, in effect, is the third pre-condition that Prachanda has put forward for the CA polls. His party’s other two demands — adoption of the proportional system of election and abolition of monarchy — have not found adequate support among the seven parties, and the latest one is certainly going to be resisted by many as there are increasing protests in several parts of the country against the Young Communist League (YCL). YCL is the youth wing of the party, with a large number of former guerrillas in it, who maintain parallel governments and kangaroo courts even today. Although the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), the third largest party in the coalition, has come forward in support of the first two demands of the Maoists, the induction of the politically indoctrinated guerrillas into the national army is unacceptable to them as well.

The number of guerrillas lodged in cantonments as the United Nations Mission to Nepal (UNMIN) began its work stood at 31,000. But in less than a year, at least 7,000 have already deserted those camps, while around 10,000 are found disqualified by UNMIN, as they were found either under age or recruited after May 6, 2006, the cut-off date for enrollment. The Maoist threat to depose Koirala if he failed to reintegrate these guerrillas in the army also followed Prachanda’s declaration that they are ready to raise their guns again and fight for another 40 years to establish their rule in the country.

While that makes Koirala’s position shaky, Prachanda also runs the risk of losing whatever support and encouragement he has been able to gather in peace time. Former US President Jimmy Carter recently suggested that 70 per cent of the proposed 480 seats in CA be filled up under the proportional system leaving the rest to be fought under the first-past-the-post system, a gesture to the Maoists who have demanded a 100 per cent PR system. But within 24 hours of Carter leaving Nepal, the Maoists put forth the new condition for the CA polls.

Of late, Koirala seems to be toying with the idea of going to the polls without the Maoists as “they have used the peace process only tactically and not as a commitment to democracy”. But that comes at a time when Koirala is being seen as a total failure, both at home and abroad. The fact that Delhi has not sent the agreemo, despite Shailaja Acharya, a senior Nepali Congress leader and Koirala’s niece, being recommended as ambassador, shows how seriously Delhi takes Koirala now. Out of 18 ambassadors Nepal appointed recently, five are yet to receive the agreemo. The other four: France, Denmark, Australia and Malaysia may not accept them as Nepal’s representatives to their countries since the Maoists have failed to show that they have faith in democracy and elections. But Delhi’s delay has been taken as an indication of Koirala’s legitimacy being on the decline. Sadly, the home assessment about the Koirala regime is equally negative.

Source: The Indian Express, November 28, 2007