The Madhesis of Nepal

K Yhome



Dramatic events in the past one year since the 2006 “April Revolution” in Nepal have been redefining the political landscape of the Himalayan nation in more ways than one. One important change is the visible rise of “marginalized” groups in national politics. The “excluded” groups - cutting across ethnic, religious and language lines - are demanding their due rights. In the midst of these changes is the rise of the Madhesis.2 This paper attempts to assess the response of the Nepalese government towards the Madhesi uprising, the shaping of the contours of the ethnic problem in the future, and its impact on peace in Nepal up in coming days and weeks and the prospects for peace in the country. The article ends with an assessment on India’s role in Nepal.

The Madhesis3

Madhesis are an important segment of the population in Nepal.4 They occupy economically the most significant region of the country with 70-80 per cent of the country’s industries being located in the Terai region. It accounts for 65 per cent of Nepal‘s agricultural production. Needless to say, the country’s economy depends heavily on the region. Strategically, the Terai belt constitutes the lifeline of Nepal. All the key transportation routes from India pass through this region, making it the gateway to the landlocked country. Almost all the country’s import and export takes place through this region. Given these factors, any disturbance in the region involving the Madhesis becomes extremely critical as it has the potential to seriously jeopardise the country.

With strikes, bans, and road blockades that continue to mark the unrest in Terai, economic activities have been brought to a virtual halt. Trade has been severely affected with goods worth millions of rupees stranded at border points and many manufacturing industries in Birgunj and Biratnagar shut down owing to crisis of raw materials. A recent report released by Nepal Rastra Bank, indicates that the country’s foreign trade recorded dismal performance during the first nine months of 2006/07, with 2.9 per cent fall in total exports. The report identifies the Terai unrest as one of the major factors for the poor performance of the export sector.

The size of the Madhesis has been a contested issue. According to the Population Census 2001 based on mother tongue for Village Development Committees (VBCs), the Madhesis population was 6781111.5 If one were to go by this figure, the Madhesis formed 29.2 per cent of the total population of Nepal in 2001. However, Madhesi political leaders, scholars, and activists have long questioned these figures. They claim that the Madhesis form 40-50 per cent of the total population of Nepal today. For instance, Jwala Singh, leader of the Janatantrik Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Singh) has claimed that Madhesis population is 14 million.6 While the truth is difficult to establish, one can safely say that the Madhesis constitute a major chunk of Nepal’s demography.

The Unrest in Terai7

Two issues need to be highlighted. First, the Madhesi issue is not a communal issue. Secondly, the Madhesi issue has not emerged in January 2007. The Madhesi question is not one of Madhesis (‘people of the plains’) vs Pahadis (‘people of the hills’). This misinterpretation of the Madhesi nomenclature by making it a community-based issue could have grave implications for the country.8 The Madhesi issue in Nepal relates to a movement against the state’s ‘discriminatory’ politics. It is a fight for recognition of rights - political, cultural as well as economic - and a struggle for equal representation and opportunity. 9

The current Madhesi protests began to surface in late 2006. The interim constitution became the rallying point, which the Madhesis claim, has failed to address the issues related to their rights. The trouble soon took a different turn when the country’s draft interim constitution came into effect on 15 January. Rapidly, the largely peaceful protests snowballed into widespread violent demonstrations, strikes and bans. Since then, the situation has only deteriorated. Three Madhesi outfits have been leading the agitations. The outfits are:

Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) or Madhesi Peoples’ Right Forum (MPRF) headed by Upendra Yadav. The outfit has been spearheading the ongoing Madhesi agitation in Terai. MJF’s main demands are: amendments to the interim constitution to include provisions for ethnic and regional autonomy with the right to self-determination and proportional representation based on ethnic population for the elections to Constituent Assembly (CA). Yadav has also been criticised from several quarters for his alleged ties with “palace forces”. The outfit’s student wing, Nepal Madhesi Student Front severed its allegiance in March accusing their leader of working with the “royalist” to subvert the CA elections.10 Interestingly, on April 26, the MJF submitted an application for party registration at the Election Commission and said that it will participate in the CA elections as a political party.

Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Singh faction) led by Nagendra Paswan alias Jwala Singh. JTMM-Singh group is a breakaway faction of the Maoists that has been active mainly in Siraha and Saptari districts of Terai. The group spilt from JTMM led by Jaya Krishna Goit in mid-2006. The JTMM-Singh faction has been demanding for an autonomous and separate independent Terai state; equal participation of Madhesis in government security forces. In fact, on March 30, the outfit declared the Terai region a “Republican Free Terai State.”11 The group has been accused of fueling communal feelings between “people of hill origin” and “people of Terai region”, however, Singh reportedly claimed that his group is against the “system of unitary communal hill state power” and not people of hill origin.12

Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM-Goit faction) led by Jaya Krishna Goit. Some of the conditions that the group has put forth for talks include declaring Terai an independent state, fresh delimitation of electoral constituencies based on populations, eviction of non-Terai officials and administrators from Terai region, among others. Both the JTMM groups want UN mediation in the talks. The group has been alleged of “divisive” campaign for its demand from industries to remove “people of hill origin” and replace them with Madhesi people or “people of plain origin” in eastern Terai region.13

Another outfit, Madhesi Tigers, a splinter group of the Maoists re-emerged in March after a long period of inaction. Madhesi Tigers is a splinter group of the CPN-Maoist formed a few years ago. Reportedly, its leader was killed in April 2005. According to the news reports, the Madhesi Tigers abducted eleven persons from Haripur area on March 1 but were released few days later.14 The past months have also seen emergence of new outfits. A group calling itself Terai Cobra has emerged in central Terai. Not much is known about this outfit. The first time it came out in public was on May 9, when it called a bandh in Bara, Parsa, and Rautahat districts in central Terai. Normal life was affected as markets and schools remain closed and traffic was disrupted.15 On 14 May, yet another outfit called Terai Army Dal, unheard of before, claimed responsibility of the bomb blast in Rautahat district that injured 14 people.16

Government Response

Has the government mishandled the Madhesi uprising? Arguably yes, if the worsening situation in the Terai is any indication. During the initial phase of violence in the Terai, the government perhaps failed to respond to the problem effectively. It was busy with other issues at hand, particularly, the peace process and the formation of government.17 The government’s indifference was compounded by differences between the government and the CPN-Maoist leadership (the Maoists joined the government in 1 April) over how to approach the problem. On 22 January a meeting of the eight-party alliance was called by Prime Minister GP Koirala to discuss the Terai situation. While the Prime Minister (PM) felt that the issues raised by the Madhesis and other groups can be resolved through dialogue, the CPN-Maoist chairman Prachanda and senior leader Babu Ram Bhattarai ruled out the possibility of dialogue with the Maoist splinter groups claiming that these groups were supported by “royalists elements and fundamental Hindu activists”.18

The Prime Minister’s address to the nation on January 31 and February 7, calling upon the agitating groups for dialogue evoked mixed reactions. While the PM’s address received positive response from some groups, it failed to improve the deteriorating situation. Under intense pressure from various quarters, the government formed a committee for talks with the agitators on February 2 under Mahanth Thakur, the Minister of Agriculture. Despite this initiative, the government was increasingly coming under criticism from both within the SPA and other political parties.19 Amid growing pressure from Madhesi and other communities, the government on February 2 decided to amend the two-week old interim constitution and assured the inclusion of all communities in the organs of the state.20 However, differences among the parties delayed the PM’s second address to the February 7. The eight-party alliance voiced its collective support to the PM’s address and signed a commitment paper that they were serious about the movement in Terai and would want to resolve it by addressing the Madhesi people’s demands and aspiration.

Meanwhile, the MJF responded positively to the PM’s second address by suspending their protest programme for ten days. On the other hand, the JTMM-Goit faction criticised the PM’s address. While the JTMM-Singh faction and the MJF initially showed willingness for dialogue, the JTMM-Goit rejected talks offer saying that the government has not created conducive atmosphere for talks. Soon the MJF followed suit and on 19 February, it said it would resume agitation alleging that the government did not show seriousness. The Thakur committee’s invitation for dialogue with the agitating groups never took off. Rather more conditionalities were put before the government to start the government for the dialogue. The interminable unrest in the Terai also pushed the NSP-A to take a tougher position, even threatening to pull out of the SPA if the government did not adopt the proposal to amend the constitution before March 6.

As though the rapidly growing tension and violence was not enough, the Gaur incident, in which a clash between the MJF and the CPN-Maoist aligned Madhesi Mukti Morcha (MMM) took place on March 21, 27 people were killed and many injured, further excerbated the tension.21 Reacting to the incident the eight-party alliance in a press statement said that the government must take stern measures against such acts and safeguard life and property of the people. In the wake of the Gaur incident and in the midst of CPN-Maoists demand to ban the MJF, the government prohibited any MJF programmes.

Efforts to curb the increasing violence remained ineffective as also the invitation for dialogue remained a non-starter. In the face of the deteriorating law and order situation, the government formed the Peace and Reconstruction Ministry and appointed a new three-member committee on April 11 headed by Ram Chandra Poudel entrusted with the task to hold talks with all the protesting groups. By appointing a new ministry and a new team for talk, the government wanted to send a message that it was serious about the issues raised by the agitators. In a significant development, the MJF and the government held their first formal talks on June 1 in Janakpur. It was reported that the two sides agreed on some of the demands raised by the MJF.22 However, a final agreement is yet to be reached.

While the government expressed its concern over the continued incidents of violence and called all agitating groups for talks, the situation in many parts of Terai remained chaotic with killings, extortions and strikes marking the protests. The violence has been taken a new direction with the rise in clashes between Madhesi outfits and Maoist sister organisations. This has further complicated matters.

Prospects and Recommendations

The situation in Terai remains grim with no signs of improvement. There is nothing to suggest that protests and violence will subside in the near future. Killings, strikes, demonstrations and clashes may continue. Even as the government insists on talks with the agitating groups, there has been a reluctance to address the core Madhesi problems and demands.

In the event of any outfit entering into an agreement with the government, the level of violence may be brought down. However, so long as other groups indulge in violent activities, the situation may only worsen in the coming weeks with serious implications, given the explosive nature of the issue. And now with new outfits emerging, the complexities are only growing for the government because even if any outfit enters into dialogue with the government, the possibility of dissidents joining the new groups to carry on their violent activities cannot be ruled out.
It is feared that the situation if allowed to deteriorate further, may result into ethnic riots. However, the recent incidents indicate that the danger seems to have been averted owing to the new dimension that the violence has acquired i.e. - the Madhesi vs the Maoists, which is as dangerous.
The urgent imperative is that all the agitating groups including the Maoists must desist from violence. The first priority of the government should be to seriously address the demands of the protesters. The Madhesi groups should not forget that their real cause is political. The present political situation in Nepal provides all ethnic groups the opportunity to resolve their problems amicably. Therefore, it would be folly on the part of the Madhesis to play the spoiler. The SPA and the CPN-Maoist also need to display more maturity.

India’s Role

India has been playing a constructive role in Nepal’s political transition. On several occasions New Delhi has expressed its desire to see Nepal resolve its internal problems and move towards establishing a stable democracy. On the development front, India has been engaged in education, infrastructure, and health projects in Nepal. Since India’s shares a long porous border with Nepal’s Terai, the trouble in the region is of great concern to it. Trade between the two countries depends on this region, as all the trading points are located there. Since violence has erupted in the Terai, India has shown serious concern over the volatile situation. Also of major concerns to India is the possiblity of the spill over of violence in Terai into India. The Indian government has been closely watching the developments in the Terai and has constantly been in touch with Nepal’s government.23

Notes:

1. The assessments in this essay are based on developments till June 2007.
2. Several other “marginalized” groups such as the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN), am umbrella organisation of 54 indigenous and ethnic groups, the Kirats; the Tharus; the Muslims among other groups have been protesting and demand the government to address the issues of ethnic groups.
3. The term Madhesi is derived from the word Madhesh meaning “mid-land” in Nepali and is defined as the lowland plains in the southern slopes of Nepal bordering Indian states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Uttaranchal. It refers to the Terai region (See Figure I). The foothill of the Chure hill is considered the dividing line between the Pahar (the hills) and the Madhesh (the plains). Hence, the people occupying the Terai belt are called Madhesis. The name is a generic term and also a topographic reference. The Madhesis include different cultural and linguistic groups - Maithili, Bhojpuri, Awadhi, Tharu, Hindi, Urdu, and other local dialects.
4. There is currently a debate in the academic discourse on whether all groups in the Terai can be considered Madhesis. I have argued elsewhere that a Madhesi “identity” has came about as a result of long state “discriminatory” politics. See “Constructing Identity: The case of the Madhesis of Nepal Terai” Paper presented at Social Science Baha conference on Nepal Terai: Context and Possibilities in Kathmandu on 10-12 March 2005.
5. This figure included all the mother tongues spoken in the Terai - Bhojpuri, Maithili, Awadhi, Tharu, as also Hindi, Urdu, Bangla, Rajbansi, Santhali including Punjabi and Marwari (though their share is marginal).
6. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 15, 2007.
7. The origin of the movement can be traced back to early 1950s. Several political parties and organisations - the Terai Congress in the 1950s; the Nepal Sadbhavna Council in the 1980s and later the Nepal Sadbhavna Party (NSP) in the 1990s - emerged at different point of time to fight for the Madhesi cause. All these organisations have fought against state’s “discriminatory” laws of citizenship and language as well as recruitment policies to the armed forces and bureaucracy. However, the problems persisted undressed under different regimes for decades. It was in this context that when the “People’s War” of the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) emerged in the mid-1990s some sections of the Madhesis joined the Maoists, which had promised political, economic and social rights. With this background, an attempt is made to understand the current Madhesi agitations in Nepal.

8. K. Yhome, “Madhesis: A Political Force in the Making?,” Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, Article no. 2058, 5 July 2006
9. K. Yhome, “The Madhesi Issue in Nepal”, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, Article no. 2228, 2 March 2007
10. See “Nepal News”, March 25, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
11. See “The Himalayan Times”, March 31, 2007.
12. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 15, 2007
13. See “Nepal News”, January 19, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
14.See “Kantipur Online”, March 1, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com; also see “Nepal News”, March 4, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
15.See “Nepal News”, May 10, 2007, http://nepalnews.com
16.See “Kantipur Online”, May 15, 2007, www.http://www.kantipuronline.com
17. A source close to the government told this author in March that the government had initially “underestimated the potential of the Madhesi uprising.” For political reasons the name of the source is keep undisclosed.
18.See “Kantipur Online”, January 24, 2007, http://kantipuronline.com; also see “Nepal News”, January 23, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
19.NSP-A on February 2 announced that it would participate only in those meetings that discuss Madhesi issues. The traditionally “royalist” party, Rashtriya Prajatankri Party (RPP) accused the government of not been serious toward the real issue of the Madhesis and that the attitude has been fueling more crises in the country. See “Nepal News”, February 3, 2007, http://www.nepalnews.com
20. On February 5, top leaders of five political parties, namely the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-Maoist, Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), Nepali Congress-Democratic (NC-D) and NSP-A agreed on three major political issues: the interim constitution would be amended with firm commitment to a federal structure of governance in future; the election constituencies will be delineated in proportion to the population with special provision for sparely populated districts in the hill region; and to express commitment for representation of people from all castes and creed in state organ. See “Kantipur Online”, February 3 & 5, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com/
21. See “Kantipur Online”, March 21, 2007, http://www.kantipuronline.com
22. See. “Nepal News”, June 2 2007. http://www.nepalnews.com
23. A Nepali delegation met India’s Prime Minister and External Affairs Minister in New Delhi on January 30 where both the Indian leaders expressed their concern over the violence in Terai. Again, India’s External Affairs Minister reiterated India’s concern to a delegation of Nepali politicians when the latter called on him in New Delhi on January 31, 2007. See “The Himalayan Times”, January 31 and February 1, 2007. A Nepali delegation comprising senior leaders of the eight-political parties came to New Delhi on May 31 to held talks with Indian leaders, see http://www.nepalnews.com May 31, 2007.

Source: Indian Defence Review, Vol. 22.3, Decemeber 4, 2007

Barriers Of Dalits Inclusion

Bharat Nepali

Nepali people are eagerly waiting to see the materialisation of the republic free from violence and unrest. The historic Jana Aandolan II (Peoples Movement II) 2062/063 gave the seven political parties and their leaders the mandate to work in the direction for materializing this dream of the Nepali people. However, the postponement of Constituent Assembly elections twice was disappointing. The parties within the seven party alliance were responsible for the postponement of the polls. Everyone expects that the polls won?t be postponed for the third time.

Efforts

Currently, political obstacles are gradually diminishing with the government?s genuine efforts to address the issues raised by various excluded groups. The issue of Dalit inclusion should not be kept apart in respect to the sacrifices and participation of the Dalits in the peaceful joint people?s movement. No doubt, the Dalits have suffered from discrimination and deprived of many facilities in the country and they want the CA elections to be held as soon as possible because they expect the CA will do the needful as regards their problems. Nepal is a country inhabited by various caste/ethnic groups with distinct cultures and languages and different religion persuasions. Dalits, as shown by the latest census, constitute around 14 per cent of the total population. They are discriminated by the so-called upper caste because of the deep-rooted belief fostered by the religion itself. Dalits are not only deprived from development opportunities but also from exercising their basic human rights. For bringing Dalits on an equal footing, special provisions are needed in every process of the making of the new Nepal. The issue of social exclusion is coming up as one of the major problems in the country. It is slowly getting magnified affecting the lives of Dalit, which is a matter of grave concern for all.

A study on ?Essence and Challenges of Special Provisions for Dalit Inclusion: An Institutional Analysis of Various Organizations? published by NNDSWO shows a sad situation of Dalits? participation and inclusion in the development field. A total of 36 organizations from government, NGOs, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral organizations jointly carried out the study to find out the essence and challenges of Dalit inclusion within the efforts and processes. The study obviously showed that the mandate of the organization were to contribute towards the promotion of human rights, establishment of equitable society and reduction of poverty.

Out of the 36 organizations, 37 per cent practice the programming approach of poverty reduction. It reveals that the executive board/management committee was dominated by the so-called upper caste people accounting for 36 per cent while only 1.7 % Dalits worked as members. The composition of staff according to caste and ethnicity shows a great disparity of Brahmin (24.58 %) to that of Dalits (4.5 %). Senior positions have been occupied by Brahmins (40.9 %), Chhetri (27.3 %) and Newar (22.7 %) among the INGOs. In government offices also the senior positions have been occupied by the upper caste Brahmin (77.8 %) whereas there were no Dalits. The fact is that the Brahmins have a larger pool of highly qualified and competitive people which the Dalits lack.

Organizations working for development need to provide strong commitment to improve the status of Dalits through the provision of positive discrimination. Lack of competent people for leadership among the Dalits, intra-Dalit discrimination, lack of awareness and narrow mentality, religious belief, superstition, rigid hierarchical social structure, poverty, inadequate policy implementation, lack of commitment and willingness from concerned authorities are the major barriers to develop and implement special provisions for the participation and inclusion of Dalits. While many government, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral agencies in Nepal have made effective efforts towards improving the situation of marginalized communities they serve, the truth is that Dalits still remain oppressed and excluded. The government and non-government sectors look less serious in trying to remove these foremost barriers.

The problem of caste discrimination is a fundamental barrier to poverty reduction, and social injustice and requires every political and social organization so as to increase the access of Dalits to resources and opportunities. Dalits will remain excluded if the problem of caste discrimination is not properly addressed. All the government and non government organizations working for the development of the society should increase the level of commitment and efforts for Dalit development programmes and should invest more in this area. They should implement measures to ensure the participation and inclusion of Dalits in its structure and contribute for the positive discrimination to benefit the Dalits. Therefore, there is a need to do more to sensitize the state and non-government sectors (NGOs, INGOs, bilateral and multilateral agencies) in promoting Dalit rights and bringing them in the national mainstream by removing barriers and creating conducive environment for Dalit inclusion.

Wide Gap

The gap between commitment from the decision-makers and implementation of inclusive policies remains wide within the organization, especially in the institutional and policy levels. Political parties and civil society organizations should play a vital role to increase the proportional representation of Dalits in the political process. Therefore, the need of the hour is to ensure the representation of the Dalits in the new Nepal which may definitely help to formulate the required plans and policies for their upliftment.

Source: The Rising Nepal, January 14, 2008

Two Armies: A War Of Words

Shyam Bhandari

The Nepali media is awash with opinions, allegations and counter allegations on the question of the integration of the two armies - People's Liberation Army (PLA) and Nepal Army (NA). The whole thing seems to have been triggered off by Chief of Army Staff (CoAS) Rukmangud Katwal's reaction to the 23-point agreement chalked out between the Maoists and the government regarding the integration of the verified PLA personnel with the NA. Speaking to reporters at the airport before embarking on his China visit on January 8, the CoAS is quoted as saying, "In the name of institutionalising the peace process, any political 'ism' or ideology should not be introduced in the Nepali Army. The Nepali Army operates under the people's chain of command, and it should be kept untainted. There should be no political influence on the Nepali Army. Political influence on the Nepali Army will only invite bigger problems in the country."

This was immediately followed by Maoist leader Krishna Bahadur Mahara's reaction: "The army chief's statement is against the spirit of the comprehensive peace treaty (CPA) between the government and the CPN-Maoist. The statement is ill-timed and unfortunate." The PM is reported to have supported the CoAS's stand "all-out" on January 9, and denouncing it the very next day. The prime minister retorted to his usual lame excuse of "the media distorted my views", which could well have been the fallout of Prachanda's allegation the previous day that the prime minister's statement was against the letter and spirit of all the agreements signed so far.Add to that Sher Bahadur Deuba's ignorant revelation that nowhere has it been mentioned that the Maoist army will be adjusted in the NA in any accords, including the comprehensive peace accord, interim constitution and the latest 23-point agreement, and there could be nothing more confounding.

Justified

The CoAS may or may not be justified in his stand. What he has said may or may not be in the best interest of the country's future, if not the present. Not to overstate, the NA is the institution that has been free from politics. Those who distort the views of the army vis-୶is its desire of remaining free from 'isms' are doing injustice to an institution which has demonstrated time and again that it is on the side of the country and the people far more than any of the people's parties can claim in their wildest misjudgement of themselves. What better proof do we need than the fact that this institution has always stood quietly in the sidelines allowing the people's desires to take precedence even when opportunity provided for it to overstep its jurisdiction? How else can one explain the NA's readiness to side with democracy rather than the monarchy that it has served ever since its existence? The Maoists have every right to demand that the provisions in the interim constitution be implemented so that their former combatants can be integrated back into the society. Their demand is also justified as they have sought to stick to the demand that the government implement the provision in the interim constitution regarding the armies 'word for word'.

The Way Out

The Nepalese people have had enough of politicking in every imaginable place and entity, in the schools and colleges, offices and organisations, in the streets and what not. We have already witnessed what politicised students can do to the country, and we have experienced what blending the bureaucracy with ideology begets. As if that has not been enough, they are now talking of infesting the army with hardened, indoctrinated ideologues. Imagine the outcome in the long run - uniformed, gun-totting politicos dictating democracy to us in a New Nepal. All said and done, there is still the question of reintegration of the PLA members for which there are several options other than integrating them with the NA. How about creating an unarmed reconstruction and development force out of the former Maoists combatants? They could be entrusted with building roads, bridges, schools, community hospitals and other much-needed infrastructure. The government could pay them at par with the NA, while still saving huge sums on arms and ammunition that it would need to buy for them otherwise. This would also serve as a purgatory for the Maoists that so pitilessly destroyed the infrastructure of this country during their people's war.

Source: The Rising Nepal, January 14, 2008

Test of resolve

The government on Friday announced April 10 as the fresh date for the election to the Constituent Assembly (CA). As they are used to postponements (first in June last year and then in November), it is not entirely surprising that many people appear still unsure that the event will come off on schedule. Many others, including politicos, are expressing doubts, whereas leaders of the three biggest parties - the Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML andthe CPN-Maoist - are striking optimistic notes. The CPN-Maoist, whose 22-point demand was the apparent cause of the deferral of the November 22 election, has decided to kick off its election campaign from tomorrow. The Election Commission has decided to implement the election code of conduct from the day after tomorrow. The new poll date has also given most of Nepal’s important friendly countries a measure of satisfaction — the US has already welcomed it.

But even then there is no dearth of doubters. Some may associate this lack of confidence with the SPA’s ‘lack of resolve’. Others suspect that as the monarchy will lose even its present suspended status with the election, its internal and external backers willnot look on but do their last bit to spoil the polls, by resorting to all possible means. The third principal source of doubt for many is groups like Janajatis and Madhesis who are pushing their various demands before the election, threatening to torpedo it unless they are satisfied. Particularly disturbing is the separatist overtones of some Tarai outfits. While the earlier agreements with them should be carried out, the government should not go on appeasing such groups.

What the government needs to keep in mind is that the various small groups in the Tarai have assumed oversize importance, because of its lack of timely and appropriate response. Unreasonable demands include the recall of all government employees not of ‘Madhesi’ stock from the Tarai, ‘right to self-determination’ and creation of the entire Tarai as a single state within the federal structure. Nowhere in South Asia, can such demands be fulfilled. Whether the election can be held on schedule will also depend, to a considerable extent, on how the government handles some of the Tarai or Janajati groups. Some Tarai groups have given the government the deadline of January 19 to meet their demands. The making offull proportionality a condition for the polls at this stage raises questions of intent. Its position should be to appeal to all groups to take part in the election. However, if any of them persists in boycotting it, let it do so, because it comes within democratic rights; but, under no circumstances can the government be expected to let anybody create the disturbancesto foil the CA election, for which the Nepali people have fought so long and so hard. If the government cannot keep the date this time, its claim to power will weaken, particularly of Prime Minister Koirala and the Nepali Congress, because they run the most important ministries and agencies necessary to hold the CA polls.

Source: The Himalayan Times, January 14, 2008

CA election : Settle political questions first

Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay

Once again the people have been assured by SPA government that Constituent Assembly polls would be held before the end of 2064 BS. This announcement has given people new hope. However, the Adivasi Janajati Mahasangh and the newly formed Tarai-Madhes Party have expressed dissatisfaction and blamed the government for ignoring their demands. This has compelled people to remain cautious and not get carried away.

The issues raised by Janajatis and Madhesis have to be addressed and resolved for holding of free and fair election participated by all sections of the population. Since failure to hold the polls twice has already tarnished the image of the government, further uncertainty would only add fuel to the question of its legitimacy and push the country towards anarchy. Therefore, certain tasks have to be accomplished before the ballot date.One of the main demands of dissident groups is an agreement about the rights of the units in the future federal state. In the Tarai region, there is demand for a single unit encompassing the whole Tarai region. There are also demands for a Tharu unit or units based on Maithili, Bhojpuri and Awadhi language-speaking areas. In order to resolve the issue, either a political conference of all stakeholders in Tarai (including the political parties) has to be held or a referendum should be called to determine the aspirations of the Tarai people.

Holding a referendum before the CA polls looks neither easy nor feasible; the only alternative is to hold a political conference. The other means could be holding a referendum simultaneously with CA election. It would put an additional burden on the Election Commission (EC) but would ensure larger participation of the people that would help the government take crucial decisions on the formation of new units composing a federal state. Since the interim constitution has already declared that the structure of Nepal would be federal, the constituent assembly has to determine the shape and size of federal units. An agreement among the stakeholders on the formulae for creation of new federal units, therefore, has to be found.

In the hilly areas, there seems to be an overwhelming desire among the public for the creation of federal units on the basis of dominant ethnic groups — that takes care of the language issue as well, as each ethnic group has its own language and culture. In the Tarai, however, the language issue and the issue concerning the cultural heritage of Tharu people remain sensitive. Naturally, in order to determine the aspiration of the sovereign people a mechanism has to be developed which does not hamper the constituent assembly election and also ensures peaceful, free and fair polls.

A new state structure in itself is not sufficient to build a new Nepal where all the citizens would have equitable share in policy-making and administration. The rights of an individual cannot be compromised on any ground. The essence of inclusive democracy is respect for the rights of every individual, no matter what community or group s/he belongs to and irrespective of the place s/he resides. There should be no move to evict any individual or group on any ground whatsoever and any such attempt must be punished as a criminal offence. The dominant groups would play the major role in the federal units but the minorities too would have their say as individuals and groups in a secure atmosphere. The issue of the right to self-determination has to be defined clearly and addressed in earnest. The people of each area under the federation ought to enjoy the right to determine the administrative, legislative and judicial apparatus, but not the right to secede, declare independence or merge with another nation. Abraham Lincoln, the most admired president of the then largest democracy, could not tolerate the act of secession by the southern states of the USA. The new units in the federation ought to have total control over their territories in all governance-related matters.Though we do not have sufficient time to linger in discussions, we have enough to convene a political conference on the limited agenda of formation of the new units and its basis and leave the details to be worked out by the constituent assembly in which all the stakeholders would have equitable participation. The need of the hour is to pay attention and show the willingness to accommodate the demands of Janajatis and Tarai in all seriousness.No amount of poll preparations will be enough to hold the election in peaceful, free and fair atmosphere unless the political questions are first resolved. The technical aspects of the polls have been laid out by the Election Commission well in advance, however the political aspects remain unresolved as yet. The only way to ensure polls is to motivate people to participate in the election with a clear mind that can weigh sensitive issues on their merit.

Source: The Himalayan Times, January 14, 2008