Implications of a hung CA
By DR BIPIN ADHIKARI
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=146272
The Kathmandu Post, May 8, २००८
The Interim Constitution of Nepal 2007, which pledged a Constituent Assembly (CA) to the people, has done so without enumerating its constituent powers whatsoever.
All that this constitution provides for is a guarantee of the basic rights of the Nepali people to participate in a free and impartial election to the CA and frame a constitution for themselves through this organ। The Interim Constitution does not guarantee that the sovereign house will have no limitations in its constituent powers or that it will not be constrained by the decisions of the interim legislature or the interim government on the basis of this constitution or by any executive agreement that it has signed with rebellious groups in the pre-election period.
As such, the guarantee of the basic rights of the Nepali people to frame a new constitution does not imply the unencumbered sovereign capacity of the CA to draft a new constitution of its choice without any limitations on its powers.
The assembly is intended to operate within two concrete a priori formulations। Article 159 declares that (a) Nepal shall be a federal state and (b) a country with a democratic republican setup। The first formulation concerns sharing of sovereign powers between political units, which do not exist till now in the Nepali consciousness, and the second concerns dispensing with the monarchy, which allegedly lost its credibility in the fight against the Maoists.
As to these preconditions, while the nature of the federal state is something still to be worked on, Article 159 requires that the transition to a republic be made at the first meeting of the CA। To give effect to this formulation, the parties in the alliance even dropped the clause requiring a simple parliamentary majority by the third amendment to the Constitution.
It is just by chance that the operation of this provision is tied to Article 75 which ensures that all questions submitted for a decision to the CA, except as otherwise provided in Part 7 of the constitution, must be decided by a majority vote of the members present and voting. Accordingly, the alleged first meeting must also pass a motion to this effect by a working majority in the House in order to abolish the monarchy.
Similarly, the constitutional declaration that Nepal shall be a federal state comes ahead of its due date। Ordinarily, it is the elected delegates of the CA, who have the responsibility of deciding what form of government is best for Nepal, who should make the decision. With this clause inserted into the constitution, the debate has now been carefully shifted to the issue of autonomy, which had not been the demand of the natives of this country so far.
This shows the enormity of the contradictions that the CA finds itself in. A genuine CA by definition can only be convoked under conditions of full democratic liberties of the delegates, permitting the participation of all the parties concerned, and without any external or internal limitations on its constitution making powers.
A CA is not a legislature that is supposed to be governed under express or implied limitations on its constituent powers। It is a self-sufficient source of power from which all specifics of a state are to be derived. As a corollary, it should be able to exert paramount control over the constitution while making the frame of the government and its administration. While the Interim Constitution might have given birth to the CA in the normal course of political development, the assembly can chart out its future ways without any guidance from the parent document and forge ahead with its own terms and conditions. Otherwise, there is no difference between a normal legislature and a CA intending to give a fresh start.
However, the faulty Interim Constitution has outsmarted its architects in two very surprising ways. First, as far as the general rule of the constitution is concerned, the members of the CA must vote on each and every article of the draft constitution in order to pass it; and failing unanimous passage of the motion, at least two-thirds of the total members of the CA must give it a unanimous exit to turn it into the new constitution.
So, even if the first meeting of the assembly, for example, were to abolish the monarchy and establish a republican state by a simple majority, the move cannot in anyway pre-empt the power of the CA members to reintroduce a new motion restoring the monarchy in due time and pass it by a two-thirds majority। There is nothing in the constitution which can restrain this motion; and as long as there are people in the House to table such a motion and to support it by a required strength, the monarch is here to stay. This means that, contrary to popular belief, the king's fate will remain undecided until the new constitution is promulgated. Same with the declaration of a federal state.
Secondly, the faulty system of proportional representation that the architects of the Interim Constitution introduced with little knowledge of the ensuing structure has already generated a mixed political lot in the assembly. As no party has an outright majority, what we have is a hung CA, and there are many parties in the House which do not share the political platform of the Seven-Party Alliance (which had monopolized the process of drafting the Interim Constitution). The House is compelled to work with these uneasy political partners.
As the constitution does not provide for the dissolution of the assembly on any ground, except when the objective has been accomplished, a hung assembly is bound to work out either a coalition government or a minority government with the support of these backbenchers। The requirement of a two-thirds majority in the constitution making process will force the ruling elite to redefine issues like federalism and monarchy in the overall context of the state's restructuring. The smaller parties in power will make a lot of difference when major constitutional policies are sorted out in the House.
There are some who have already started an exercise (in futility) to help produce a national government eliminating the prospect of any opposition in the constitution making process. The Seven-Party Alliance is almost an exercise of this type, which has already served its purpose. But it is inconceivable that it can continue any longer in the new scenario. In any case, such a national government has a very poor reputation historically. Whether it is the national government of GP Koirala (2006-08) or of British Prime Ministers Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain (which held office from 1931 until 1940), all have been a liability to the nation. Fortunately, a loyal opposition is going to be prominent in Nepal for the next two years. This opposition is going to make sure that the nation is in safe hands.
Additionally, a coalition government led by a party which has lost its credibility before the majority of the people can be equally destructive to the cause of the nation। Nepal is surely familiar with the hung parliament after 1995. It is perhaps not out of place to mention that even in the 1974 general election in the UK, sitting Prime Minister Edward Heath had refused to resign at first, attempting to build a coalition government despite winning fewer seats than the then opposition Labour Party. So if Prime Minister Koirala is still trying to hang on to his post, it should come as no surprise. But the House itself is going to take offence against such ambitions.
The structural limits on the power of the CA and unauthorized normative or inspirational impositions are going to grow fainter due to the operation of the hung CA. This is good for the country.
lawyers_inc_nepal@yahoo।com
Posted on: 2008-05-07 20:01:25 (Server Time)
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
संघीय शासनको सान्दर्भिकता
डा विपिन अधिकारी
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnepalinews.php?nid=141810
The Kantipur Daily, March 25, 2008 (Chait 12, 2064)
क्यानाडाको क्विन्स विश्वविद्यालयका प्राध्यापक रोनाल्ड वाट्सको 'एकात्मक राज्यप्रणाली विखण्डनकारी हुन्छ' शर्ीष्ाकमा दि काठमाडौं पोष्टमा छापिएको एउटा अन्तर्वार्ताले धेरैको ध्यानाकर्षा गरेको छ । संघीयताका विद्वान र अनुभवी वाट्सको दाबी के छ भने जात, धर्म, जातीयताका आधारमा नभए पनि जनसंख्या, भूगोल, आर्थिक विकासजस्ता विविध आधारमा नेपाललाई संघीय संरचनामा बदल्न सकिन्छ । उनको भनाइमा विखण्डन रोक्न संघीयता जरुरी छ । यसो त विखण्डनका आन्दोलन संघीय राज्यमा पनि भएका छन् । यसै आधारमा मात्र मुलुकको संविधान एकात्मक हुने वा संघीय हुने विवेचना गरिनु हु“दैन । यसबाहेक पनि वाट्सका अन्य भनाइ नेपालका लागि कति सान्दर्भिक छन्, यकिन गर्न जरुरी छ ।
संघीयता आफैंमा नराम्रो प्रचलन होइन । विश्वका करिब दर्ुइ दर्जनबाहेक सबै मुलुकमा एकात्मक राज्यप्रणाली छ । कतिपय मुलुक पर्ूण्ा प्रजातान्त्रिक छन् र आर्थिक विकासका दृष्टिले प्रगतिशील पनि मानिन्छन् । संघीयता अपनाउने मुलुकमध्ये पनि मलेसिया तथा भारतजस्ता आधाभन्दा बढी मुलुकको शक्ति विभाजन केन्द्रीयताको पक्षमै देखिन्छ । औंलामा गन्न सकिने देशले मात्र राज्य र संघलाई समान हैसियतमा स्वीकार गरेका छन् । तथाकथित आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकार ग्यारेन्टी गर्ने मुलुक
दर्ुलभ छन् ।
प्रचार-प्रसार गरिएजति एकात्मक शासन लोकप्रिय शासन प्रणाली होइन भन्ने दाबी शंंकास्पद मान्नर्ुपर्छ । स्पेन तथा बेल्जियमजस्ता देशले आफूलाई निश्चित राजनीतिक यथार्थका आधारमा संघीयतामा परिणत गरेको सत्य हो । परिवर्तित अवस्थामा पनि उनीहरूम्ााझ एकात्मक विशेषता नभएका होइनन् । कपडाको जुत्ता लगाउने कि छालाको भन्ने प्रश्नको निरूपण कुनै पनि देशको धरातलीय यथार्थका आधारमा गरिनर्ुपर्छ । त्यस आधारमा नेपालले संघीयतामा हामफाली हाल्नुपर्ने कुनै विशेष आकर्षा छैन ।
संघीय शासन पद्धति किन भन्ने उचित जवाफ भेटिएको छैन । नेकपा -माओवादी) को राजनीतिक कार्यक्रमको रूपमा सुरुदेखि स्थापित यो विषय हाल मधेसमुखी दलले ज्ाोडतोडले उठाएका छन् । उनीहरूका एजेन्डा बढी आक्रामक तथा सनातनी संघीयताको व्यवस्था - जस्तो संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका वा क्यानाडा) तर्फउन्मुख प्रस्टै छ । यसका दर्ुइ कारण छन्, पहिलो, संघीयताको आधार भनेको राजनीतिक इकाइका रूपमा राज्यहरूको स्वतन्त्र अस्तित्व तथा आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकार प्रयोग गर्न सकिने स्थिति हो । दोस्रो, विगतमा स्पष्ट आधार नभेटिए पनि ऐतिहासिक राजनीतिक इकाइको रूपमा आफूलाई स्थापित गराउने चाहना हो । अन्य दल मूलभूत रूपमा पछाडि परेका जाति तथा समुदायको सशक्तिकरणको उद्देश्यबाट निर्देशित देखिन्छन् । संघीयतै किन भन्नेमा उनीहरू दिग्भ्रमित छन् । मधेसमुखी दलहरूले संघीयतालाई सामरिक दृष्टिकोणले हेरिदि“दा उनीहरूका अप्ठेरा झन् दर्ुइ गुना बढेका छन् । कुनै पार्टर्ीीनि एकात्मक राज्य पद्धति विरोधी देखि“दैनन् । अहिलेको बाह्य प्रभाव र निर्देशित राजनीतिक वातावरणमा धान्नैपर्ने राजनीतिक कार्यक्रमका रूपमा संघीयता स्वीकार गर्न बाध्य देखिन्छछन् ।
एकात्मक राज्यकै रूपमा रहनु नेपालको राष्ट्रिय स्वार्थ अनुकूल छ । एकात्मकता राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक हो । एकात्मक राज्यमा दक्ष एवं कुशल शासन तथा नीति निर्धारण तथा राज्य सञ्चालन कार्य सजिलो हुन्छ । राष्ट्रप्रतिको निष्ठा तथा भक्तिलाई अंशबन्डा गर्नुपर्ने स्थिति हु“दैन । राज्य इकाइ र संघबीच शक्ति विभाजन दुर्बोध्य काम हो । मुलुकलाई विभिन्न राज्य इकाइबीच संर्घष्ाको घानमा हाल्नुु हु“दैन । संविधान तथा कानुनमा संशोधन पनि एकात्मक व्यवस्थामै सजिलो हुन्छ । अप्ठेरा परिस्थिति तथा विशेष अवसर तथा चुनौती सामना गर्ने क्षमता पनि एकात्मक सरकारमा बढी हुन्छ । र्
खर्चको हिसाबले अहिलेको परिपाटी संघीय परिपाटीभन्दा फाइदाजनक हुन्छ । शान्ति सुरक्षाजस्ता विषय र त्यसभन्दा पनि संकटकालीन स्थितिमा अहिलेको प्रणाली र्सवाधिक उपयुक्त हुन्छ । नेपाल आर्थिक विकासका सम्भावना तथा भूमण्डलीकरणको परिपे्रक्ष्यमा साहसी निर्ण्र्ाालिने क्षमतावान तथा फर्ुर्तिलो हुन आवश्यक छ । आज अमेरिका तथा क्यानाडा जस्ता देशले नया“ संविधान बनाउने हो भने यस्तो संविधान बनाउनेछन्, जसले शक्तिशाली केन्द्रीय सरकार सुनिश्चित गर्न सकोस् । त्यस्तो सरकारले मात्र राष्ट्रको सुरक्षा तथा प्रतिरक्षा गर्न सक्छ ।
नेपालमा नेपाली जातिको इच्छा र आकांक्षा परिवर्तनको बाहक हुनपाएको छैन । शदीऔंदेखि एकात्मक राज्यका रूपमा रहेको नेपाल तथा सामाजिक-आर्थिक तथा भावनात्मक रूपमा पनि अखण्ड राष्ट्रको स्वाभिमान स्थापित भइसकेको मुलुकको राजनीतिक धरातल बलपर्ूवक परिवर्तन गरी सिमान्तीकृत गर्नुपर्ने कारण बुझ्न सकिएको छैन । संघीयताको नाममा देशलाई दस चिरा पारेर यसबाट अक्षम राजनीतिज्ञ तथा संंकर्ीण्ा पक्षपोषकका लागि अवसर सिर्जना भने गर्न सकिन्छ ।
जतिसुकै ढिपी गरे पनि ऊबेलाको अमेरिकामाजस्तो नेपालीम्ाा राज्य वा समुदायहरूको संघीय राज्य बनाउने सांगठनिक क्षमता तथा त्यसलाई निर्देशन दिने जेर्फसन वा जेम्स मेडिसनजस्ता क्षमतावान नेता प्ानि छैनन् । हाम्रो राजनीतिक नेतृत्वको क्षमता, स्तर वा विवेक निकट भविष्यमै चमत्कारिक ढंगले बढ्ने सम्भावना पनि छैन । विभाजित राज्यप्रणाली समन्वय गरी एकताको सूत्रमा बा“ध्नसक्ने सांगठनिक क्षमता तथा नेतृत्व विकास हुन समय लाग्नेछ ।
प्रजातन्त्र विकासको औजार पनि हो । नेपालमा स्थानीय स्वशासनलाई धेरै वर्षेखि यसै अर्थमा हेरि“दैछ । कतिपय क्षेत्रमा राम्रा तथा उल्लेखनीय काम भएका छन् भने कतिपयमा सुधारका टड्कारा सम्भावना देखिएका छन् । एकात्मक स्वरूपभित्र राज्यको पुनःसंरचना हुनसक्ने तथा पीडित वा उपेक्षित जाति तथा समुदायको अधिकारको ग्यारेन्टी तथा स्थानीय स्वशासन गर्न सकिने स्थिति सधैं छ । उनीहरूले खोजेको समानता तथा सहभागिता कार्यान्वयन गर्न देशको शक्ति तथा सम्भावना निर्वाध प्रयोग गर्न सकिने स्थिति छ । यति हु“दाहु“दै पनि यो मुलुकलाई सम्झौताबाट स्थापित राज्यका रूपमा पुनःलेखन गर्न किन पर्यो, आर्श्चर्य लाग्छ । दलित, जनजाति वा मधेसीलाई सशक्तिकरण गर्ने उद्देश्य हो भने केन्द्रीय शासनको मूलधारमा उनीहरूलाई सिधै स्थापित किन गरि“दैन -
नेपाललाई एकात्मक राज्यको अवधारणामै विकास निर्माण गरिनर्ुपर्छ भन्नु अहिलेको राजनीतिक वा प्रशासनिक स्वरूपलाई निरन्तरता दिनर्ुपर्छ भन्ने होइन । सही कार्यका लागि कर्ुतर्कले जित्न आवश्यक छैन । क्षेत्रीय विकासका आवश्यकता तथा राष्ट्रिय एकतालाई स“गस“गै लान सकिन्छ । स्थानीय स्वशासन बलियो बनाई संघीयताका आधार निरन्तर प्रयासबाट बिस्तारै आर्जन गर्न सकिन्छ । स्थानीय स्तरमा र्सार्वजनिक कार्यहरूप्रति उदासीनता हटाउन सकिन्छ । हरेक धर्म, जातजाति, संस्कृति तथा क्षेत्रलाई समान सुविधा तथा पीडित तथा उपेक्षित समुदायलाई अतिरिक्त संरक्षण गर्न देशको अंशबन्डा जरुरी छैन । नत केन्द्र र इकाइ सरकारलाई परस्पर स्वतन्त्र तथा समकक्ष बनाउन जरुरी छ । प्रजातान्त्रिक संगठन र कानुनी राज्यको परम्परा कमजोर हु“दै गएको मुलुकमा संवैधानिक क्लिष्टता वा सत्ता बा“डफा“डले देशको पुनःनिर्माणमा जटिलतामात्र थप्न सक्छ । मुलुकको विकेन्द्रीकरण कार्यक्रम अर्न्तर्गत वर्षोनि सरकारबाट विनियोजित पा“च-सात लाख खर्च गर्ने क्षमता नभइसकेको गाउ“घरलाई संघीयता कति सजिलो होला अनुमान गर्न सकिन्छ ।
प्रा वाट्सका विचार धेरै प्राज्ञिक छन् । उनले नेपालको भू-राजनीतिक स्थितिलाई उक्त अन्तर्वार्ता तथा उनले जीटीजेट तथा युएनडीपीद्वारा आयोजित कार्यशालामा प्रस्तुत गरेको कार्यपत्रमा विवेचना गर्न भ्याएनन् । छिमेक असल हु“दो हो त नेपालले हालको दुरवस्था खप्नुपर्ने थिएन । मुलुक भित्रको आतंकवाद वा औपनिवेशिक चलखेल कसले धान्न सक्छ सधैं - यो पक्ष उचित मूल्याङ्कन गर्दा संघीयताबारे धेरै दाबी यसै खुकुलो भएर जानेछन् । यस स्थितिमा संघीयता केवल बोकाको मुखमा कुभिन्डो चरितार्थ नहोला र -
Posted on: 2008-03-24 22:05:13
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnepalinews.php?nid=141810
The Kantipur Daily, March 25, 2008 (Chait 12, 2064)
क्यानाडाको क्विन्स विश्वविद्यालयका प्राध्यापक रोनाल्ड वाट्सको 'एकात्मक राज्यप्रणाली विखण्डनकारी हुन्छ' शर्ीष्ाकमा दि काठमाडौं पोष्टमा छापिएको एउटा अन्तर्वार्ताले धेरैको ध्यानाकर्षा गरेको छ । संघीयताका विद्वान र अनुभवी वाट्सको दाबी के छ भने जात, धर्म, जातीयताका आधारमा नभए पनि जनसंख्या, भूगोल, आर्थिक विकासजस्ता विविध आधारमा नेपाललाई संघीय संरचनामा बदल्न सकिन्छ । उनको भनाइमा विखण्डन रोक्न संघीयता जरुरी छ । यसो त विखण्डनका आन्दोलन संघीय राज्यमा पनि भएका छन् । यसै आधारमा मात्र मुलुकको संविधान एकात्मक हुने वा संघीय हुने विवेचना गरिनु हु“दैन । यसबाहेक पनि वाट्सका अन्य भनाइ नेपालका लागि कति सान्दर्भिक छन्, यकिन गर्न जरुरी छ ।
संघीयता आफैंमा नराम्रो प्रचलन होइन । विश्वका करिब दर्ुइ दर्जनबाहेक सबै मुलुकमा एकात्मक राज्यप्रणाली छ । कतिपय मुलुक पर्ूण्ा प्रजातान्त्रिक छन् र आर्थिक विकासका दृष्टिले प्रगतिशील पनि मानिन्छन् । संघीयता अपनाउने मुलुकमध्ये पनि मलेसिया तथा भारतजस्ता आधाभन्दा बढी मुलुकको शक्ति विभाजन केन्द्रीयताको पक्षमै देखिन्छ । औंलामा गन्न सकिने देशले मात्र राज्य र संघलाई समान हैसियतमा स्वीकार गरेका छन् । तथाकथित आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकार ग्यारेन्टी गर्ने मुलुक
दर्ुलभ छन् ।
प्रचार-प्रसार गरिएजति एकात्मक शासन लोकप्रिय शासन प्रणाली होइन भन्ने दाबी शंंकास्पद मान्नर्ुपर्छ । स्पेन तथा बेल्जियमजस्ता देशले आफूलाई निश्चित राजनीतिक यथार्थका आधारमा संघीयतामा परिणत गरेको सत्य हो । परिवर्तित अवस्थामा पनि उनीहरूम्ााझ एकात्मक विशेषता नभएका होइनन् । कपडाको जुत्ता लगाउने कि छालाको भन्ने प्रश्नको निरूपण कुनै पनि देशको धरातलीय यथार्थका आधारमा गरिनर्ुपर्छ । त्यस आधारमा नेपालले संघीयतामा हामफाली हाल्नुपर्ने कुनै विशेष आकर्षा छैन ।
संघीय शासन पद्धति किन भन्ने उचित जवाफ भेटिएको छैन । नेकपा -माओवादी) को राजनीतिक कार्यक्रमको रूपमा सुरुदेखि स्थापित यो विषय हाल मधेसमुखी दलले ज्ाोडतोडले उठाएका छन् । उनीहरूका एजेन्डा बढी आक्रामक तथा सनातनी संघीयताको व्यवस्था - जस्तो संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका वा क्यानाडा) तर्फउन्मुख प्रस्टै छ । यसका दर्ुइ कारण छन्, पहिलो, संघीयताको आधार भनेको राजनीतिक इकाइका रूपमा राज्यहरूको स्वतन्त्र अस्तित्व तथा आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकार प्रयोग गर्न सकिने स्थिति हो । दोस्रो, विगतमा स्पष्ट आधार नभेटिए पनि ऐतिहासिक राजनीतिक इकाइको रूपमा आफूलाई स्थापित गराउने चाहना हो । अन्य दल मूलभूत रूपमा पछाडि परेका जाति तथा समुदायको सशक्तिकरणको उद्देश्यबाट निर्देशित देखिन्छन् । संघीयतै किन भन्नेमा उनीहरू दिग्भ्रमित छन् । मधेसमुखी दलहरूले संघीयतालाई सामरिक दृष्टिकोणले हेरिदि“दा उनीहरूका अप्ठेरा झन् दर्ुइ गुना बढेका छन् । कुनै पार्टर्ीीनि एकात्मक राज्य पद्धति विरोधी देखि“दैनन् । अहिलेको बाह्य प्रभाव र निर्देशित राजनीतिक वातावरणमा धान्नैपर्ने राजनीतिक कार्यक्रमका रूपमा संघीयता स्वीकार गर्न बाध्य देखिन्छछन् ।
एकात्मक राज्यकै रूपमा रहनु नेपालको राष्ट्रिय स्वार्थ अनुकूल छ । एकात्मकता राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक हो । एकात्मक राज्यमा दक्ष एवं कुशल शासन तथा नीति निर्धारण तथा राज्य सञ्चालन कार्य सजिलो हुन्छ । राष्ट्रप्रतिको निष्ठा तथा भक्तिलाई अंशबन्डा गर्नुपर्ने स्थिति हु“दैन । राज्य इकाइ र संघबीच शक्ति विभाजन दुर्बोध्य काम हो । मुलुकलाई विभिन्न राज्य इकाइबीच संर्घष्ाको घानमा हाल्नुु हु“दैन । संविधान तथा कानुनमा संशोधन पनि एकात्मक व्यवस्थामै सजिलो हुन्छ । अप्ठेरा परिस्थिति तथा विशेष अवसर तथा चुनौती सामना गर्ने क्षमता पनि एकात्मक सरकारमा बढी हुन्छ । र्
खर्चको हिसाबले अहिलेको परिपाटी संघीय परिपाटीभन्दा फाइदाजनक हुन्छ । शान्ति सुरक्षाजस्ता विषय र त्यसभन्दा पनि संकटकालीन स्थितिमा अहिलेको प्रणाली र्सवाधिक उपयुक्त हुन्छ । नेपाल आर्थिक विकासका सम्भावना तथा भूमण्डलीकरणको परिपे्रक्ष्यमा साहसी निर्ण्र्ाालिने क्षमतावान तथा फर्ुर्तिलो हुन आवश्यक छ । आज अमेरिका तथा क्यानाडा जस्ता देशले नया“ संविधान बनाउने हो भने यस्तो संविधान बनाउनेछन्, जसले शक्तिशाली केन्द्रीय सरकार सुनिश्चित गर्न सकोस् । त्यस्तो सरकारले मात्र राष्ट्रको सुरक्षा तथा प्रतिरक्षा गर्न सक्छ ।
नेपालमा नेपाली जातिको इच्छा र आकांक्षा परिवर्तनको बाहक हुनपाएको छैन । शदीऔंदेखि एकात्मक राज्यका रूपमा रहेको नेपाल तथा सामाजिक-आर्थिक तथा भावनात्मक रूपमा पनि अखण्ड राष्ट्रको स्वाभिमान स्थापित भइसकेको मुलुकको राजनीतिक धरातल बलपर्ूवक परिवर्तन गरी सिमान्तीकृत गर्नुपर्ने कारण बुझ्न सकिएको छैन । संघीयताको नाममा देशलाई दस चिरा पारेर यसबाट अक्षम राजनीतिज्ञ तथा संंकर्ीण्ा पक्षपोषकका लागि अवसर सिर्जना भने गर्न सकिन्छ ।
जतिसुकै ढिपी गरे पनि ऊबेलाको अमेरिकामाजस्तो नेपालीम्ाा राज्य वा समुदायहरूको संघीय राज्य बनाउने सांगठनिक क्षमता तथा त्यसलाई निर्देशन दिने जेर्फसन वा जेम्स मेडिसनजस्ता क्षमतावान नेता प्ानि छैनन् । हाम्रो राजनीतिक नेतृत्वको क्षमता, स्तर वा विवेक निकट भविष्यमै चमत्कारिक ढंगले बढ्ने सम्भावना पनि छैन । विभाजित राज्यप्रणाली समन्वय गरी एकताको सूत्रमा बा“ध्नसक्ने सांगठनिक क्षमता तथा नेतृत्व विकास हुन समय लाग्नेछ ।
प्रजातन्त्र विकासको औजार पनि हो । नेपालमा स्थानीय स्वशासनलाई धेरै वर्षेखि यसै अर्थमा हेरि“दैछ । कतिपय क्षेत्रमा राम्रा तथा उल्लेखनीय काम भएका छन् भने कतिपयमा सुधारका टड्कारा सम्भावना देखिएका छन् । एकात्मक स्वरूपभित्र राज्यको पुनःसंरचना हुनसक्ने तथा पीडित वा उपेक्षित जाति तथा समुदायको अधिकारको ग्यारेन्टी तथा स्थानीय स्वशासन गर्न सकिने स्थिति सधैं छ । उनीहरूले खोजेको समानता तथा सहभागिता कार्यान्वयन गर्न देशको शक्ति तथा सम्भावना निर्वाध प्रयोग गर्न सकिने स्थिति छ । यति हु“दाहु“दै पनि यो मुलुकलाई सम्झौताबाट स्थापित राज्यका रूपमा पुनःलेखन गर्न किन पर्यो, आर्श्चर्य लाग्छ । दलित, जनजाति वा मधेसीलाई सशक्तिकरण गर्ने उद्देश्य हो भने केन्द्रीय शासनको मूलधारमा उनीहरूलाई सिधै स्थापित किन गरि“दैन -
नेपाललाई एकात्मक राज्यको अवधारणामै विकास निर्माण गरिनर्ुपर्छ भन्नु अहिलेको राजनीतिक वा प्रशासनिक स्वरूपलाई निरन्तरता दिनर्ुपर्छ भन्ने होइन । सही कार्यका लागि कर्ुतर्कले जित्न आवश्यक छैन । क्षेत्रीय विकासका आवश्यकता तथा राष्ट्रिय एकतालाई स“गस“गै लान सकिन्छ । स्थानीय स्वशासन बलियो बनाई संघीयताका आधार निरन्तर प्रयासबाट बिस्तारै आर्जन गर्न सकिन्छ । स्थानीय स्तरमा र्सार्वजनिक कार्यहरूप्रति उदासीनता हटाउन सकिन्छ । हरेक धर्म, जातजाति, संस्कृति तथा क्षेत्रलाई समान सुविधा तथा पीडित तथा उपेक्षित समुदायलाई अतिरिक्त संरक्षण गर्न देशको अंशबन्डा जरुरी छैन । नत केन्द्र र इकाइ सरकारलाई परस्पर स्वतन्त्र तथा समकक्ष बनाउन जरुरी छ । प्रजातान्त्रिक संगठन र कानुनी राज्यको परम्परा कमजोर हु“दै गएको मुलुकमा संवैधानिक क्लिष्टता वा सत्ता बा“डफा“डले देशको पुनःनिर्माणमा जटिलतामात्र थप्न सक्छ । मुलुकको विकेन्द्रीकरण कार्यक्रम अर्न्तर्गत वर्षोनि सरकारबाट विनियोजित पा“च-सात लाख खर्च गर्ने क्षमता नभइसकेको गाउ“घरलाई संघीयता कति सजिलो होला अनुमान गर्न सकिन्छ ।
प्रा वाट्सका विचार धेरै प्राज्ञिक छन् । उनले नेपालको भू-राजनीतिक स्थितिलाई उक्त अन्तर्वार्ता तथा उनले जीटीजेट तथा युएनडीपीद्वारा आयोजित कार्यशालामा प्रस्तुत गरेको कार्यपत्रमा विवेचना गर्न भ्याएनन् । छिमेक असल हु“दो हो त नेपालले हालको दुरवस्था खप्नुपर्ने थिएन । मुलुक भित्रको आतंकवाद वा औपनिवेशिक चलखेल कसले धान्न सक्छ सधैं - यो पक्ष उचित मूल्याङ्कन गर्दा संघीयताबारे धेरै दाबी यसै खुकुलो भएर जानेछन् । यस स्थितिमा संघीयता केवल बोकाको मुखमा कुभिन्डो चरितार्थ नहोला र -
Posted on: 2008-03-24 22:05:13
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
“Knowing federalism as a concept is one thing; but devising it as a workable model for Nepal is quite another” – Bipin Adhikari
“Knowing federalism as a concept is one thing; but devising it as a workable model for Nepal is quite another” – Bipin Adhikari
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/contents/2008/englishweekly/spotlight/mar/mar14/interview.php#2
SPOTLIGHT, VOL. 27, NO. 27, March 14, 2008 (Chaitra 01 2064 B.S.)
A consulting lawyer and constitutional analyst, Bipin Adhikari is a keen observer of the ongoing transitional process in Nepal. The Commentatory on the Nepalese Constitution that he co-authored with other constitutional lawyers in 1998 remains an outstanding piece of work on the 1990 Constitution and Nepal’s experiment with constitutionalism. A doctor of constitutional law, Adhikari spoke to SPOTLIGHT about the issue of federalism that Nepal has been confronting in recent months. Excerpts:
How do you see the rule of law situation in the country?
It is undoubtedly pathetic. There is lawlessness, wariness and lack of due process everywhere. The concept of legality seems to have become a fairy tale.
Why is the situation like this?
There are many reasons. But this situation mainly owes to the system of unlimited government that has been installed in the country. It is bringing changes through means that are not legal or legitimate.
Some lawyers argue that there is already an interim Constitution and a representative legislature, although not elected, to check the government?
If constitutionalism merely meant having a written constitution, then virtually every country could claim to be constitutional, as every country that has a written Constitution does. The main question is – ‘does the interim constitution check anybody?’ ‘does it restrain exercise of power, protect our freedoms and safeguard our national interests?’ Constitutional institutions work when there are separation of powers, checks and balance, rule of law, judicial review, periodic elections, ombudsman and effective and independent constitutional bodies. The interim constitution is devoid of these institutions. It does not seek to prevent the government from abusing the power of the state. Everybody knows that it is not the legislature which decides; it only rubber-stamps what has been brought to it from outside.
What type of federal system you recommend for Nepal?
I don’t think there is any perfect model. Perfection is a goal. Even the countries like Canada and the United States, which have built on federalism as forerunners in this area have outstanding problems to be resolved. What India has achieved by now has also been achieved with continued dedication and commitment. It takes years to develop a workable system. You need sincerity and genuine commitment.
Do the 7-party government, the Maoists and other political constituencies have that sincerity and commitment …?
Is it not clear to you that the idea of federalism has come in Nepal not as a development tool, but as a strategic prescription from outside?
Ours has been a small unitary state since long. It has already developed enough historical, political, geographical, and emotional ties among our people. There are geographical, environmental and infrastructural realities behind the unitary character of the state. Our natural and cultural eco-system is so closely connected. Equally strong is the aspiration of our people to continue living as an independent and indivisible country, and with distinct national identity. This is not to deny the problems that we need to address. They are there. But it is not necessary to build on wrong arguments to establish a right case.
What is the right case then?
We need to continue with the unitary character of the state. The demand of the time is to identify the problems the unitary state has created in all subtleties, and then discuss whether federalism is what is necessary to deal with the situation; or there are other efficient ways to handle them. One must understand that federalism cannot be a remedy for all ills of our society. Especially, it is a hapless tool when the politicians are vile and have little national interest to protect.
What makes federalism different from the ‘devolution of power’ in your opinion?
There is nothing in words like ‘federalism’ and ‘devolution.’ The real issue is what do you want? What is your purpose? Do you want to take the country back to the 17th century Malla and Khas principalities in order to deal with issues that are smaller than the size of the remedy being prescribed? Or your purpose is only to bring those people and areas in the mainstream, which are still left behind in the process of our political development.
How do you see the British experience with devolution of powers? Can we learn something from them?
Well, we can always learn from those who have more experience and skills. The United Kingdom has historically been a unitary state with efforts to devolve power to its different territories according to the necessity. The powers of the central government have been devolved to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London and Elected Mayors according to their specific requirements. But there is a strong unitary character even now.
Can you elaborate further?
What I mean is devolution was not a part of a grand constitutional design in the UK; rather the approach in each case needs to be understood in relation to their situations. In fact, the devolution legislation has produced an asymmetrical distribution of powers in the country. For example, the extent of powers given to the Scottish Parliament and the Assemblies to Wales and Northern Ireland are different. The Northern Ireland Assembly has also lawmaking powers, but over more restricted policy areas. The form of London-wide government is different that both these types. By way of contrast, Wales has been closely integrated with England for the purpose of law and administration. They were very clear about their problems; and the solutions they fashioned were also case sensitive. Each devolution statute includes elaborate safeguards to prevent sovereignty from being undermined.
How is the relationship between the centre and the units coordinated in this scheme of devolution?
As far as I know, the coordination of administration between central and devolved government has been managed to a large extent without resort to legislation but by means of a series of informal agreements. But the system has been underpinned by a secure financial base. Each of these territories has been able to count upon a consistent overall level of funding. That has helped devolution significantly.
What is the alternative for Nepal then?
Knowing federalism as a concept is one thing; but devising it as a model that can satisfy all constituencies and can also work in practice is quite another.
Therefore, it is good to build on our own experience as a unitary state. It has always been a functioning system. There are some lessons learnt; and efforts could be made to reform it. Some interventions at the constitutional level to respond to some of our problems could be necessary. But most of the problems of devolution of power could be handled through an enhanced local self-government system. It can not only restrain exercise of power and protect our freedoms, but also make the transition manageable and safeguard our national interests. There is wisdom in the proverb – “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.”
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/contents/2008/englishweekly/spotlight/mar/mar14/interview.php#2
SPOTLIGHT, VOL. 27, NO. 27, March 14, 2008 (Chaitra 01 2064 B.S.)
A consulting lawyer and constitutional analyst, Bipin Adhikari is a keen observer of the ongoing transitional process in Nepal. The Commentatory on the Nepalese Constitution that he co-authored with other constitutional lawyers in 1998 remains an outstanding piece of work on the 1990 Constitution and Nepal’s experiment with constitutionalism. A doctor of constitutional law, Adhikari spoke to SPOTLIGHT about the issue of federalism that Nepal has been confronting in recent months. Excerpts:
How do you see the rule of law situation in the country?
It is undoubtedly pathetic. There is lawlessness, wariness and lack of due process everywhere. The concept of legality seems to have become a fairy tale.
Why is the situation like this?
There are many reasons. But this situation mainly owes to the system of unlimited government that has been installed in the country. It is bringing changes through means that are not legal or legitimate.
Some lawyers argue that there is already an interim Constitution and a representative legislature, although not elected, to check the government?
If constitutionalism merely meant having a written constitution, then virtually every country could claim to be constitutional, as every country that has a written Constitution does. The main question is – ‘does the interim constitution check anybody?’ ‘does it restrain exercise of power, protect our freedoms and safeguard our national interests?’ Constitutional institutions work when there are separation of powers, checks and balance, rule of law, judicial review, periodic elections, ombudsman and effective and independent constitutional bodies. The interim constitution is devoid of these institutions. It does not seek to prevent the government from abusing the power of the state. Everybody knows that it is not the legislature which decides; it only rubber-stamps what has been brought to it from outside.
What type of federal system you recommend for Nepal?
I don’t think there is any perfect model. Perfection is a goal. Even the countries like Canada and the United States, which have built on federalism as forerunners in this area have outstanding problems to be resolved. What India has achieved by now has also been achieved with continued dedication and commitment. It takes years to develop a workable system. You need sincerity and genuine commitment.
Do the 7-party government, the Maoists and other political constituencies have that sincerity and commitment …?
Is it not clear to you that the idea of federalism has come in Nepal not as a development tool, but as a strategic prescription from outside?
Ours has been a small unitary state since long. It has already developed enough historical, political, geographical, and emotional ties among our people. There are geographical, environmental and infrastructural realities behind the unitary character of the state. Our natural and cultural eco-system is so closely connected. Equally strong is the aspiration of our people to continue living as an independent and indivisible country, and with distinct national identity. This is not to deny the problems that we need to address. They are there. But it is not necessary to build on wrong arguments to establish a right case.
What is the right case then?
We need to continue with the unitary character of the state. The demand of the time is to identify the problems the unitary state has created in all subtleties, and then discuss whether federalism is what is necessary to deal with the situation; or there are other efficient ways to handle them. One must understand that federalism cannot be a remedy for all ills of our society. Especially, it is a hapless tool when the politicians are vile and have little national interest to protect.
What makes federalism different from the ‘devolution of power’ in your opinion?
There is nothing in words like ‘federalism’ and ‘devolution.’ The real issue is what do you want? What is your purpose? Do you want to take the country back to the 17th century Malla and Khas principalities in order to deal with issues that are smaller than the size of the remedy being prescribed? Or your purpose is only to bring those people and areas in the mainstream, which are still left behind in the process of our political development.
How do you see the British experience with devolution of powers? Can we learn something from them?
Well, we can always learn from those who have more experience and skills. The United Kingdom has historically been a unitary state with efforts to devolve power to its different territories according to the necessity. The powers of the central government have been devolved to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London and Elected Mayors according to their specific requirements. But there is a strong unitary character even now.
Can you elaborate further?
What I mean is devolution was not a part of a grand constitutional design in the UK; rather the approach in each case needs to be understood in relation to their situations. In fact, the devolution legislation has produced an asymmetrical distribution of powers in the country. For example, the extent of powers given to the Scottish Parliament and the Assemblies to Wales and Northern Ireland are different. The Northern Ireland Assembly has also lawmaking powers, but over more restricted policy areas. The form of London-wide government is different that both these types. By way of contrast, Wales has been closely integrated with England for the purpose of law and administration. They were very clear about their problems; and the solutions they fashioned were also case sensitive. Each devolution statute includes elaborate safeguards to prevent sovereignty from being undermined.
How is the relationship between the centre and the units coordinated in this scheme of devolution?
As far as I know, the coordination of administration between central and devolved government has been managed to a large extent without resort to legislation but by means of a series of informal agreements. But the system has been underpinned by a secure financial base. Each of these territories has been able to count upon a consistent overall level of funding. That has helped devolution significantly.
What is the alternative for Nepal then?
Knowing federalism as a concept is one thing; but devising it as a model that can satisfy all constituencies and can also work in practice is quite another.
Therefore, it is good to build on our own experience as a unitary state. It has always been a functioning system. There are some lessons learnt; and efforts could be made to reform it. Some interventions at the constitutional level to respond to some of our problems could be necessary. But most of the problems of devolution of power could be handled through an enhanced local self-government system. It can not only restrain exercise of power and protect our freedoms, but also make the transition manageable and safeguard our national interests. There is wisdom in the proverb – “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.”
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Nepal: Uncertain Consquences
Dr. Chandrakala
February 20, 2007
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=20983
The government is now committed to federalism, the details of which are yet to be worked out. Whether both of these would be in the long term national interest remain to be seen or is anybody's guess. But one supposes that such random acts wouldn't have been possible as long as the King had some say as to how the affairs of the nation should be run. Any nationalist can see now, who would benefit and who would suffer in the future.
In the meantime, it remains to be seen:
(i) how the SPAM would come to an agreement regarding the amendment of the interim constitution within one week, given the competing claims of population, geography, language and ethnicity,
(ii) whether vindictiveness would be obvious in the CIAA dealings towards former ministers recommended to be punished by the government on the basis of the High Level Probe Commission or the usual process followed up to now would be adopted,
(iii) how effective would be the Shivratri celebration and the rumoured demand by Hindus for reestablishing a Hindu Kingdom,
(iv) how are the addresses by Comrade Prachanda all over the country and the preparations and fund raising leading to those events going to be played out, and
(v) how is the Election Commission's warning, that constituent assembly polls can't be held in June if the government and political parties are not going to fall in place, going to be heeded.
After all, Prachanda had nothing new to say, efforts at different rendering of the same. However, the inconvenience of putting up all those who were herded into town and the amount of forced contribution that business organizations and ordinary motorists had to cough up left a bad taste in the mouth.
Despite the agreement made between the government and Maoists three months ago, atrocities by Maoists continue.
They abducted and killed Nava Raj Bhandari of Oat VDC of Rolpa district. They abducted the deceased's father Ashi Ram and his neighbour Mane Khattri who are still in their custody.
They are still holding the property of Chetnath Regmi of Sankhuwasabha district.
Their cadres looted voters' lists and other documents from Kavre VDC of Dolakha and Salyantar VDC of Dhading on February 9 and attacked and injured 18 activists of RPP in Bensisahar in Lamjung district on February 10.
They forcefully took school children to attend their anniversary on February 13.
Their cadres threatened President and Chief Executive Officer of Link Tree Pvt. Ltd. that he and his company will be harmed if he didn't give a voluntary donation to their party.
February 20, 2007
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=20983
The government is now committed to federalism, the details of which are yet to be worked out. Whether both of these would be in the long term national interest remain to be seen or is anybody's guess. But one supposes that such random acts wouldn't have been possible as long as the King had some say as to how the affairs of the nation should be run. Any nationalist can see now, who would benefit and who would suffer in the future.
In the meantime, it remains to be seen:
(i) how the SPAM would come to an agreement regarding the amendment of the interim constitution within one week, given the competing claims of population, geography, language and ethnicity,
(ii) whether vindictiveness would be obvious in the CIAA dealings towards former ministers recommended to be punished by the government on the basis of the High Level Probe Commission or the usual process followed up to now would be adopted,
(iii) how effective would be the Shivratri celebration and the rumoured demand by Hindus for reestablishing a Hindu Kingdom,
(iv) how are the addresses by Comrade Prachanda all over the country and the preparations and fund raising leading to those events going to be played out, and
(v) how is the Election Commission's warning, that constituent assembly polls can't be held in June if the government and political parties are not going to fall in place, going to be heeded.
After all, Prachanda had nothing new to say, efforts at different rendering of the same. However, the inconvenience of putting up all those who were herded into town and the amount of forced contribution that business organizations and ordinary motorists had to cough up left a bad taste in the mouth.
Despite the agreement made between the government and Maoists three months ago, atrocities by Maoists continue.
They abducted and killed Nava Raj Bhandari of Oat VDC of Rolpa district. They abducted the deceased's father Ashi Ram and his neighbour Mane Khattri who are still in their custody.
They are still holding the property of Chetnath Regmi of Sankhuwasabha district.
Their cadres looted voters' lists and other documents from Kavre VDC of Dolakha and Salyantar VDC of Dhading on February 9 and attacked and injured 18 activists of RPP in Bensisahar in Lamjung district on February 10.
They forcefully took school children to attend their anniversary on February 13.
Their cadres threatened President and Chief Executive Officer of Link Tree Pvt. Ltd. that he and his company will be harmed if he didn't give a voluntary donation to their party.
Federal System In Nepal Call For Caution
Federal System In Nepal Call For Caution [ 2007-2-25 ]
By Madhavji Shrestha
http://www.gorkhapatra.org.np/content.php?nid=13349
TO the 26 million people of Nepal, a federal polity, if it becomes a reality, will be a new political experience. For about two centuries and a half, the Nepali people have been ruled by a central authority, but never governed in a proper way to provide even minimal services to them. Even the popularly elected governments could not commit themselves to the decentralised political and administrative process to enable various deserving regions and areas to move ahead as self-sustaining units.
Had they carried the decentralisation programmes to their hilt soon after the political change in 1990, certainly, the present boiling question of state restructuring would not have arisen. Their failure to accommodate the demand for a federal system even in the recently framed interim constitution pushed the Terai people to engage in protests and vandalism. As a result, the inherent omission coupled with deliberate negligence is now engaging the leading politicians? energy and time to their own disadvantage and discomfiture. The situation has reached a decisive point of no return.
Irreversible policy
Indications are that if the major demands of the Terai people are not met, the country will once again plunge into a pool of continued violence and vandalism. Political sagacity is highly warranted to save the country from further disruption and disturbance. Can the interim legislative parliament exhibit capability to construct an acceptable federation with appropriate amendments to the interim constitution now in debate?
The demand for a federal polity has now come to stay as a reality. It seems irreversible and, therefore, needs to be addressed with care and caution. Delay and dithering on the part of the leading political actors will prove costly for them and may push the country to the brink of further troubles, to the extent of even threatening the integrity of the country.
While giving serious thought to the making of a federal political system in Nepal, which has been ruled under a unitary structure for a pretty long time, major factors such as geography, economy, ethnicity and societal fabric deserve deep consideration and discussion before any concrete decision is arrived at. Of these, the geography and economy occupy places of prime concern while mapping out a federal system of governance.
Geographically, Nepal is broadly divided into three prominent divisions, i.e., the high mountain range, the broad hill track and the Terai belt. These three east-west running long strips of territory can be divided into several sub-divisions with a variety of bio-diversity and uniqueness present in them. The mountain range and the hill track are endowed with perennial sources of water and natural resources that still remain unexplored and untapped. There is immense prospect for developing Nepal if there is a commitment on the part of the government. The urban areas situated in the midst of the hill track have already become service centres for banking, insurance, IT, education, health and tourism. From the viewpoint of the national economy, the Terai belt has immense potential for agricultural development, manufacturing and service sector growth.
At present, Nepal has some 60 ethnic groups, which are divided into 103 sub-groups, living in all those broadly divided three regions, with languages and dialects of their own. However, no ethnic group has a pre-dominant position barring some districts. Therefore, there are great challenges in demarcating and dividing the country while going for a federal system of governance.
Given the past agitations and likely turn of events in the coming days, the question of social harmony also may not be that easy to handle as various districts, regions and sub-regions are populated by a number of ethnic groups and sub-groups. Managing these problems in a short span of time poses an uphill task for the political actors of all leanings involved in the federation building process.
In addition to those challenging works, the concerns of both division and devolution of state powers are also not simple functions to perform. Of course, national policy matters relating to foreign affairs, defense responsibility, currency and central banking provision and postal management come within the purview of central government activities, in general, with other internal affairs to be divided under the list to be agreed upon. However, the question of residual power of the economy and other important concerns, which may appear controversial, will consume a great deal of debate and deliberation.
Political actors in their quick snap activities can map out a federal structure and chart the lists of power- sharing provisions. But when the implementation phase approaches, several unseen problems and issues may come up. The federal system is a modern pattern of government that executes state affairs in a democratic manner so as to enable the concerned political representatives and authorities to meet the demands of the people of various regions and ethnicities. There is no space to cast doubt over the question of good and efficient governance in the country.
To navigate the centrally long ruled society toward the direction of a federal polity, strongly built political parties with their national bases reaching to the grass root levels are primarily required to work as an unbreakable linkage between the centre and unit and among various units. In the absence of such political parties, the federal system, in actuality, will not work as expected. Instead it may lead to centrifugal activities and create havoc and chaos that may disintegrate the country as there is no strong connectivity to keep the country politically united.
The presence of such widespread bases will also render great services and give an impetus to providing an acceptably functioning government. In such circumstance the complexity of putting in place good governance in a federal system will not be a hard nut to crack, because the political parties with democratically motivated programmes will certainly be a great political asset for the country.
The strength of such political parties would naturally work as a uniting force to bring in social and cultural unity among the numerous socio-ethnic groups, which, in reality, is the basic need of a country that has plunged into political turmoil and social unrest. Nationalistic feelings kept alive with active participation in the national polity and regional administrative and development activities based on the autonomy of units will help maintain national unity. Unity amidst diversity is a great strength for a newly emerging democratic society of Nepal.
Nepali politicians have yet to consolidate the democratic political forces in the democratisation process. At times such as now, external forces try to interfere in the domestic politics of Nepal. Therefore, one more quintessential element is that those at the helm of power should be able to steer the external policy of Nepal along with the highly required consolidation of the democratic forces to repel the interfering tendency of foreign elements from doing any damage to Nepal. The difficult journey of Nepal from a unitary system to a federal polity will be a real test for both the politicians and the people.
National unity
A significant line from the well-known political scientist, Arend Lijphart, should draw the attention of interested politicians and people. He has written that federalism ?is the result of special historical circumstances? in the cases of Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Switzerland and the US. Commonality of interests and needs seen in their historical perspectives has united them in a federation. However, in Nepal, the federal system, if it materialises, will be the outcome of the hard-pressed demands of various ethnic and regional groups. How far the umbilical cord of national unity through a federation can be held together is a grave question to each and every Nepali citizen
By Madhavji Shrestha
http://www.gorkhapatra.org.np/content.php?nid=13349
TO the 26 million people of Nepal, a federal polity, if it becomes a reality, will be a new political experience. For about two centuries and a half, the Nepali people have been ruled by a central authority, but never governed in a proper way to provide even minimal services to them. Even the popularly elected governments could not commit themselves to the decentralised political and administrative process to enable various deserving regions and areas to move ahead as self-sustaining units.
Had they carried the decentralisation programmes to their hilt soon after the political change in 1990, certainly, the present boiling question of state restructuring would not have arisen. Their failure to accommodate the demand for a federal system even in the recently framed interim constitution pushed the Terai people to engage in protests and vandalism. As a result, the inherent omission coupled with deliberate negligence is now engaging the leading politicians? energy and time to their own disadvantage and discomfiture. The situation has reached a decisive point of no return.
Irreversible policy
Indications are that if the major demands of the Terai people are not met, the country will once again plunge into a pool of continued violence and vandalism. Political sagacity is highly warranted to save the country from further disruption and disturbance. Can the interim legislative parliament exhibit capability to construct an acceptable federation with appropriate amendments to the interim constitution now in debate?
The demand for a federal polity has now come to stay as a reality. It seems irreversible and, therefore, needs to be addressed with care and caution. Delay and dithering on the part of the leading political actors will prove costly for them and may push the country to the brink of further troubles, to the extent of even threatening the integrity of the country.
While giving serious thought to the making of a federal political system in Nepal, which has been ruled under a unitary structure for a pretty long time, major factors such as geography, economy, ethnicity and societal fabric deserve deep consideration and discussion before any concrete decision is arrived at. Of these, the geography and economy occupy places of prime concern while mapping out a federal system of governance.
Geographically, Nepal is broadly divided into three prominent divisions, i.e., the high mountain range, the broad hill track and the Terai belt. These three east-west running long strips of territory can be divided into several sub-divisions with a variety of bio-diversity and uniqueness present in them. The mountain range and the hill track are endowed with perennial sources of water and natural resources that still remain unexplored and untapped. There is immense prospect for developing Nepal if there is a commitment on the part of the government. The urban areas situated in the midst of the hill track have already become service centres for banking, insurance, IT, education, health and tourism. From the viewpoint of the national economy, the Terai belt has immense potential for agricultural development, manufacturing and service sector growth.
At present, Nepal has some 60 ethnic groups, which are divided into 103 sub-groups, living in all those broadly divided three regions, with languages and dialects of their own. However, no ethnic group has a pre-dominant position barring some districts. Therefore, there are great challenges in demarcating and dividing the country while going for a federal system of governance.
Given the past agitations and likely turn of events in the coming days, the question of social harmony also may not be that easy to handle as various districts, regions and sub-regions are populated by a number of ethnic groups and sub-groups. Managing these problems in a short span of time poses an uphill task for the political actors of all leanings involved in the federation building process.
In addition to those challenging works, the concerns of both division and devolution of state powers are also not simple functions to perform. Of course, national policy matters relating to foreign affairs, defense responsibility, currency and central banking provision and postal management come within the purview of central government activities, in general, with other internal affairs to be divided under the list to be agreed upon. However, the question of residual power of the economy and other important concerns, which may appear controversial, will consume a great deal of debate and deliberation.
Political actors in their quick snap activities can map out a federal structure and chart the lists of power- sharing provisions. But when the implementation phase approaches, several unseen problems and issues may come up. The federal system is a modern pattern of government that executes state affairs in a democratic manner so as to enable the concerned political representatives and authorities to meet the demands of the people of various regions and ethnicities. There is no space to cast doubt over the question of good and efficient governance in the country.
To navigate the centrally long ruled society toward the direction of a federal polity, strongly built political parties with their national bases reaching to the grass root levels are primarily required to work as an unbreakable linkage between the centre and unit and among various units. In the absence of such political parties, the federal system, in actuality, will not work as expected. Instead it may lead to centrifugal activities and create havoc and chaos that may disintegrate the country as there is no strong connectivity to keep the country politically united.
The presence of such widespread bases will also render great services and give an impetus to providing an acceptably functioning government. In such circumstance the complexity of putting in place good governance in a federal system will not be a hard nut to crack, because the political parties with democratically motivated programmes will certainly be a great political asset for the country.
The strength of such political parties would naturally work as a uniting force to bring in social and cultural unity among the numerous socio-ethnic groups, which, in reality, is the basic need of a country that has plunged into political turmoil and social unrest. Nationalistic feelings kept alive with active participation in the national polity and regional administrative and development activities based on the autonomy of units will help maintain national unity. Unity amidst diversity is a great strength for a newly emerging democratic society of Nepal.
Nepali politicians have yet to consolidate the democratic political forces in the democratisation process. At times such as now, external forces try to interfere in the domestic politics of Nepal. Therefore, one more quintessential element is that those at the helm of power should be able to steer the external policy of Nepal along with the highly required consolidation of the democratic forces to repel the interfering tendency of foreign elements from doing any damage to Nepal. The difficult journey of Nepal from a unitary system to a federal polity will be a real test for both the politicians and the people.
National unity
A significant line from the well-known political scientist, Arend Lijphart, should draw the attention of interested politicians and people. He has written that federalism ?is the result of special historical circumstances? in the cases of Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Switzerland and the US. Commonality of interests and needs seen in their historical perspectives has united them in a federation. However, in Nepal, the federal system, if it materialises, will be the outcome of the hard-pressed demands of various ethnic and regional groups. How far the umbilical cord of national unity through a federation can be held together is a grave question to each and every Nepali citizen
Nepal: A Rude Awakening For Civil Society
Nepal: A Rude Awakening For Civil Society
By Maila Baje
http://newsblaze.com/story/20070311095530baje.nb/newsblaze/OPINIONS/Opinions.html
March 11, 2007
Nepal Janatantrik Party (NJP) seems to have it right. Taking responsibility for planting bombs in the residences of human right activists Krishna Pahadi and Dr Devendra Raj Pandey, the party said: "Foreign interference in our internal affairs is increasing. On top of that national puppets of foreigners and several groups are cheating us and are playing the game of dividing the nation in the name of federalism, ethnicity, and right to self-determination."
Describing the duo as among those who are into the game behind the "mask" of human right activists, the NJP certainly went further than Maila Baje's rants. No wonder, the NJP's effect has been stronger. Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula informed the interim legislature last week that Police Headquarters has started investigating the incident by setting up a special team.
The political parties that prevented the Pandey-Pahadi fraternity from claiming that big chunk of seats in the legislature were the first to rise to their defence. Despite all the nastiness for the spoils now, both elites know they would become the first victims should right-wing authoritarianism really raise its head again. Since the implication here would be a military coup, the "historic" House of Representatives Proclamation won't allow them to blame the palace.
And that's what hurts them the most. They just can't understand what really keeps King Gyanendra going. They tried the depression and Internet-gambling story lines in vain. The day after the monarch is denounced as Asia's most humiliated man, he issues a statement enthusiastically welcoming the comprehensive peace accord. Two days after he is pelted with stones at Pashupati, the he comes out with a Democracy Day message defending his takeover. He takes responsibility for the failures as well as the successes of his direct rule.
Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala concedes he's in favor of a ceremonial monarchy, not out of any shared affinity for dynasties, but to ensure stability by providing space to everyone. Maoist supremo Prachanda acknowledges that a mere vote in the interim legislature establishing a republic won't force King Gyanendra out.
The SPA, Maoists and their civil society collaborators just can't acknowledge that their current resurgence is a direct outcome of the royal takeover. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice may have been the first to speak about the crystallization of political events in 2005. It was New Delhi's glassiness that really set things in motion.
Without King Gyanendra's northern alliance - cemented at the Dhaka SAARC summit - the SPA and Maoists could never have come together. On the morning of February 1, 2005, the monarch promised to restore peace and democracy in three years. He took less than half as long. And what do we get? An amendment to the interim constitution in less than 100 days of its promulgation. And who knows how many other ones these clusters of grievances will produce.
Yeah, yeah, the NJP didn't have to use bombs to send that message across. Easy to say. Just consider the antecedents of the top three political parties in the interim legislature.
By Maila Baje
http://newsblaze.com/story/20070311095530baje.nb/newsblaze/OPINIONS/Opinions.html
March 11, 2007
Nepal Janatantrik Party (NJP) seems to have it right. Taking responsibility for planting bombs in the residences of human right activists Krishna Pahadi and Dr Devendra Raj Pandey, the party said: "Foreign interference in our internal affairs is increasing. On top of that national puppets of foreigners and several groups are cheating us and are playing the game of dividing the nation in the name of federalism, ethnicity, and right to self-determination."
Describing the duo as among those who are into the game behind the "mask" of human right activists, the NJP certainly went further than Maila Baje's rants. No wonder, the NJP's effect has been stronger. Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula informed the interim legislature last week that Police Headquarters has started investigating the incident by setting up a special team.
The political parties that prevented the Pandey-Pahadi fraternity from claiming that big chunk of seats in the legislature were the first to rise to their defence. Despite all the nastiness for the spoils now, both elites know they would become the first victims should right-wing authoritarianism really raise its head again. Since the implication here would be a military coup, the "historic" House of Representatives Proclamation won't allow them to blame the palace.
And that's what hurts them the most. They just can't understand what really keeps King Gyanendra going. They tried the depression and Internet-gambling story lines in vain. The day after the monarch is denounced as Asia's most humiliated man, he issues a statement enthusiastically welcoming the comprehensive peace accord. Two days after he is pelted with stones at Pashupati, the he comes out with a Democracy Day message defending his takeover. He takes responsibility for the failures as well as the successes of his direct rule.
Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala concedes he's in favor of a ceremonial monarchy, not out of any shared affinity for dynasties, but to ensure stability by providing space to everyone. Maoist supremo Prachanda acknowledges that a mere vote in the interim legislature establishing a republic won't force King Gyanendra out.
The SPA, Maoists and their civil society collaborators just can't acknowledge that their current resurgence is a direct outcome of the royal takeover. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice may have been the first to speak about the crystallization of political events in 2005. It was New Delhi's glassiness that really set things in motion.
Without King Gyanendra's northern alliance - cemented at the Dhaka SAARC summit - the SPA and Maoists could never have come together. On the morning of February 1, 2005, the monarch promised to restore peace and democracy in three years. He took less than half as long. And what do we get? An amendment to the interim constitution in less than 100 days of its promulgation. And who knows how many other ones these clusters of grievances will produce.
Yeah, yeah, the NJP didn't have to use bombs to send that message across. Easy to say. Just consider the antecedents of the top three political parties in the interim legislature.
Ethnic Groups and Race Based Federalism: A Recipe for Disaster for Nepal
By Khagendra Thapa
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0703/S00233.htm
14 March 2007
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." It seems that Nepal has no leader who can speak out the truth and not just repeat like a parrot what the Maoists comrades have been saying ever since the SPA came to power with the blessings from the Comrades as well as our friendly neighbor to the south.
With the untimely death of the 1990 constitution, the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and their comrades the Maoists together code named as SPAM have claimed to represent all the people of Nepal and the interest of the Nepalese people whether the people like it or not. SPAs claim to represent the people because they were elected more than seven years ago. The Maoists comrades claim to represent the people because they have been able to coerce the people to support them by intimidation, extortion, armed kidnapping, and cheap slogans. Together the SPAs and the Maoists, the so called SPAM have become the most powerful political force or so they claim. With the mighty Prime Minister Mr. Girija Koirala in the driving seat and his Comrade Prachanda in the front seat together with all the heroes of Janandolan II and eleven years old insurgency veterans, the bus carrying the Interim Constitution was in motion. Unfortunately, the arrogance of SPAM was challenged by both the Terai residents (Madhesi Group) and the Janajatis. The Interim constitution also made provision to form an interim parliament with the addition of 83 Maoists and 48 other members who are part of SPAM. After all, the scrapping of the old constitution may not have been an excellent idea.
Lack of Patriotic and Visionary Leadership
It is indeed very sad for the people of Nepal that there is not a single national level patriotic and visionary leader with clean image. Right now, Mr. Girija Koirala is the leader of SPAM. However, Mr. Koirala is not accepted by all the people. First of all, he is the leader of the half Congress party. The other half of the Congress party is led by Mr. Deuba. Mr. Koirala's behavior during the Tanakpur Treaty with India and his lack of interest to safeguard the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country puts a question mark on his patriotism. In addition, Mr. Koirala as a Head of State and Head of Government failed to express his opposition to the encroachment of Nepalese territory in various border areas by India including in Kalapani, Susta, Illam, Jhapa. Saptari, Banke and Bardia. In fact, even the Ranas who ruled the country for 104 years were more patriotic than any of the SPAM leadership. For example, during the British Rule of India, Nepal maintained all even numbered borders and the Brirish maintained all the odd numbered pillars every year. That kind of border maintenance was abandoned both by multiparty rulers and Panchayati rulers.
Secondly, Mr. Koirala does not have a clean image. His involvement in various scandals during the time he was prime minister for the major part of multiparty government from 1990 to 2001. In fact, Mr. Koirala refused to present himself to the court when he was summoned by the court on corruption charges.
Thirdly, Mr. Koirala does not have any vision or any other plan to develop and help the country and the people. He is a happy camper as long as he is in power.
Fourthly, majority of the leaders of all political parties do not have clean image. Many of them have been involved with corruption, nepotism, favoritism, and influence peddling. Some of them even have criminal records including murder.
How about the Maoists Comrades? What kind of credibility do they have? Well, as we all know 13,000 Nepalese people lost their lives as a direct result of the so called people's war started by the Maoists insurgents. Another 26,000 committed suicide because they could not bear the pain and suffering caused by the war. Over a million people were internally displaced. Many more people left the country in total despair without any hope for themselves and for their children. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of Nepalese people working as laborers (often doing the most dangerous and life threatening jobs which nobody else would do) in many Gulf countries as well as in Malaysia and South Korea.
Several millions if not billions of dollars of worth infrastructure including government offices, schools, transmission towers, bridges, roads, etc have been destroyed. All this happened because of the people's war. The comrades must take the responsibility for the injustices done to the people. So these Maoists leaders whose hands are stained with the blood of the people are also intoxicated with the blood of the 13,000 Nepalese people. Therefore, it would be an exercise in futility to expect any thing good from these self proclaimed leaders who got where they are today with the use of guns and bombs and also with a little bit of help from the extremely friendly neighbor in the south.
According to Sobhakar Parajuli (Kathmandu Post, Feb,. 28, 2007) "The Maoists spread a reign of terrorism in villages and urban areas. They have yet to return the property of innocent people seized during their so-called people's war. They continue to extort money and threaten the villagers. Madi ambush is still fresh among the relatives of those killed. Now Prachanda regrets that it was their mistake when he was aware of the fact that traveling in the bus were innocent passengers. Such regretting words do not convince the people. Rather, Prachanda appears cruel and inhumane in the eyes of the common people."
Well then, are there any other leaders in the SPAM or any other political parties who have long term plan to lift the nation out of poverty, illiteracy, hunger, disease, and outdated caste system? Do any of them have a way to stop the exploitation of the poor and destitute people from the clutches of feudal landlords and crooked business man? Unfortunately, the answer is no.
All these leaders are chanting the same Mantra as the Maoists Comrades. For example, the comrades have been chanting the mantra of Federalism and Constituency Assembly (CA) elections and every one of the leaders both inside and outside SPAM chant the same mantra without even understanding what does constituency assembly or Federalism mean? What are the long term implications of these activities? Does Federalism lead us to a better future? Or it would lead to the fragmentation of the nation thereby multiplying the interethnic conflicts. Would it help us to provide better education to our children? Would it help us to provide better health care to our people? Would it help us to improve the well being of our people? Would it improve the standard of living our people? Would it help us to maintain the peaceful relationship among our multiethnic and multi linguistic people? If so please tell us exactly how it would happen. Is it magical in nature? Does it mean that as soon as the King is exiled or executed and CA elections held and Federalism established, Nepal will turn into another heaven?
People want to know what your plan for economic development is. What are the SPAM plans for education, healthcare, environmental issues, and exploitation of the poor people? Every dissident group is in a destructive mood right now. The infrastructure that was built by donations or borrowed money has been destroyed by our comrades as well as others who think they deserve a bigger piece of existing pie. No one wants to work to increase the size of the pie so that every one will have enough.
What kind of Leader Do Nepalese People Want?
Unfortunately, Nepal never had a visionary leader who puts personal interests above political party interests and national interests above political party interests. None have shown any vision for the future of the nation. No leader has been acceptable to all ethnic groups and people of different political affiliations. If we are to build our nation strong and prosperous we need to have political leader who has the following characteristics:
1. Since Nepal is a multi-ethnic nation where no group is in majority, we need a leader who is completely unbiased and can get along with people of all regions and ethnic backgrounds irrespective of their culture, language, political affiliations and caste. In other words, the leader must be able to live and work with Kamis, or Sarkis, or Sherpas, or Tharus, or Danuwar, or Satars, or Limbus, etc. This can only happen if the leader has the interests of the people and the nation above his/her personal interests.
2. People need a leader who has high moral and ethical standards and as such s/he has the ability to tell others to follow high ethical and moral values.
3. The leader must also be motivating and charismatic so that s/he can influence the people and motivate them to work hard to improve their own livelihood and neighborhood.
4. The leader must also possess a clear sense of purpose (or mission) - clear goals - focus – commitment.
5. The leader must also be able to work with others and be highly optimistic and results oriented
6. Ability to encourage and nurture others so that s/he can make a difference in the lives of the people.
7. Ability to understand what others say, rather than listening to how they say things. One could partly sum this quality up as "ability to walk in someone else's shoes" Or know where the shoe pinches.
8. The leader must be able to display a passion for, and have a strong conviction of, what they regard as the moral correctness of their vision. They engage in outstanding or extraordinary behavior and make extraordinary self-sacrifices in the interest of their vision and mission.
9. The leader must be inspirational and communicate with people in an understandable way and live by example. S/he must have high self confidence, determination and persistence.
10. The leader must have ability to delegate authority to reliable and competent people.
The question is do we have any leaders who display even five of the above qualities? You be the judge.
Culture of Death, Destruction, and Violence
It is no secret that Maoists got where they are today using ruthless violence, destruction, murder, looting, kidnapping, intimidation, and extortion. They also used cheap and unrealistic slogans to attract people to their line of thinking. For example, Comrade Prachanda when he first showed up in public promised to turn Nepal into another Switzerland. It seems he was repeating the rhetoric of another great leader Mr. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai who proclaimed that he was going to make Nepal as developed as Singapore within five years when he was the prime minister.
Comrade Prachanda even went to the extent of claiming that he can make greater Nepal by declaring the Sugauli Treaty signed with the British in 1816 null and void. This comes from the same leader who wants to give the right to self determination to all those ethnic groups who are demanding for it. Comrade Prachanda! Tell us the truth do you want to break the country into smaller countries or build a greater Nepal? Your statements are conflicting and confusing.
Now the Maoists comrades are in power with the successful use of force, destruction of public and private property, extortion, and intimidation. The success of Maoists is now being copied by other groups. They have learned that it pays to be violent and act of violent crimes can get results. With the lessons learned from the Comrades, other groups whether they are Terai residents, Khambuwans, Tamurats, Magarats and many others are using the time tested Maoists tactics to get what they want. There is a culture of violence, death and destruction in Nepal now. Every one wants to stop the movement of vehicles and burn tires causing great amount of financial loss to the working class.
One of the dangerous promises that the comrades used was to turn Nepal into a Federal Republic where each indigenous group of people will have an autonomous republic. For example, they promised different autonomous regions for such ethnic groups as Gurungs, Magars, Newars, Tamangs, Tharus, and many others.
How Can an Autonomous Regions be Achieved?
According the 2001 Census of Nepal, the population of Nepal consists of the following categories in terms of percentage:
Population of Nepal in Percentage (Source: Central Bureau of
Statistics, Nepal Government)
1 CHHETRI 15.80
2 BRAHMAN - HILL 12.74
3 MAGAR 7.14
4 THARU 6.75
5 TAMANG 5.64
6 NEWAR 5.48
7 MUSLIM 4.27
8 KAMI 3.94
9 YADAV 3.94
10 RAI 2.79
11 GURUNG 2.39
12 DAMAI/DHOLI 1.72
13 LIMBU 1.58
14 THAKURI 1.47
15 SARKI 1.40
16 TELI 1.34
17 CHAMAR, HARIJAN, RAM 1.19
18 KOIRI 1.11
19 KURMI 0.94
20 SANYASI 0.88
21 DHANUK 0.83
22 MUSAHAR 0.76
23 DUSADH/PASWAN/PASI 0.70
24 SHERPA 0.68
25 SONAR 0.64
26 KEWAT 0.60
27 BRAHMAN - TARAI 0.59
28 BANIYA 0.56
29 GHARTI/BHUJEL 0.52
30 MALLAH 0.51
31 KALWAR 0.51
There are 72 other categories of people in Nepal which are not listed in the above table. The criteria used to cut off was any groups which are less than 0.5% of the total population are not quoted as these would not be needed to make the point clear.
Let us say, for example, as promised by Maoists Comrades that we all agree that Limbuwan and Khambuwan are given an autonomous region in the eastern Nepal. From the above table one can see that they constitute a population of 4.37% when both groups are combined. Now, the problem is the region where they want their autonomous region also have many other ethnic groups including Magars, Gurungs, Bahuns, Chhetries, Kamis, Damais, Sarkis, Newars, Tamangs, and the list goes on and on. If they are given autonomy in the area then what are the other people who have been living there for hundreds of years going to do? Do they have to move to somewhere else? If so where would they go? Let us forget about the Bahuns and Chettris who are supposedly the exploiters and let them go to hell. However, what is a poor Kami or a poor Damai is going to do. Where would they go? Kamis and Damais like Newars, Bahuns, Sarkis, and Chettris are spread all over Nepal.
Representation of Ethnic Groups
The recent revolts by the Terai residents and the various ethnic groups from the mountains have been claiming the fair representation in administration, army, police, etc. There is no question that their demands are appropriate and justified. However, these demands cannot be addressed by CA election or the introduction of Federalism.
Empowerment of Local Governments and not Federalism is the Answer
According to the 2001 census of Nepal, there are 103 different ethnic groups in Nepal. They speak at least 90 different languages. Some of the ethnic groups are as small as 164 people. For example, according to the 2001 census of Nepal there are only 164 Kusundas in Nepal and these people are no where else in the world. Different groups of people especially the ones demanding the autonomy are spread out through out the nation. Therefore, introduction of Federalism or declaration of self governing regions based on ethnic groups will spell disaster for the whole country. It would not even benefit the group that is claiming autonomy. The ethnic groups such as Magars, Tharus, Tamangs, Newars, only constitute 7.14%, 6.75%, 5.64%, and 5.48% respectively. Moreover, these groups are not living in a particular locality. They are pretty much spread out through out the country except the Tharus who mainly reside in the Terai belt.
Therefore, the best way to kill the snake without breaking the stick would be to empower the local governments. It will be a true democratic way of resolving the demands of terai residents as well as the various ethnic groups of the hill areas.
What Kind of Power would the Local Government Have?
The ultimate objective should be to give the power to raise tax, be responsible for taking care of school education, primary health care, local self governance including public safety (hiring local police), passing the rules and regulations on the local governance, and judiciary. Well, that gives the local elected bodies complete authority. It will all be democratic because the people will elect not only the local government officials but also the judges and the chief of the police. People must be alert and ask for transparency, accountability, and rule of law. This will be the ultimate democracy which will satisfy the demands of all ethnic groups no matter how small or how large they are.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0703/S00233.htm
14 March 2007
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." It seems that Nepal has no leader who can speak out the truth and not just repeat like a parrot what the Maoists comrades have been saying ever since the SPA came to power with the blessings from the Comrades as well as our friendly neighbor to the south.
With the untimely death of the 1990 constitution, the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and their comrades the Maoists together code named as SPAM have claimed to represent all the people of Nepal and the interest of the Nepalese people whether the people like it or not. SPAs claim to represent the people because they were elected more than seven years ago. The Maoists comrades claim to represent the people because they have been able to coerce the people to support them by intimidation, extortion, armed kidnapping, and cheap slogans. Together the SPAs and the Maoists, the so called SPAM have become the most powerful political force or so they claim. With the mighty Prime Minister Mr. Girija Koirala in the driving seat and his Comrade Prachanda in the front seat together with all the heroes of Janandolan II and eleven years old insurgency veterans, the bus carrying the Interim Constitution was in motion. Unfortunately, the arrogance of SPAM was challenged by both the Terai residents (Madhesi Group) and the Janajatis. The Interim constitution also made provision to form an interim parliament with the addition of 83 Maoists and 48 other members who are part of SPAM. After all, the scrapping of the old constitution may not have been an excellent idea.
Lack of Patriotic and Visionary Leadership
It is indeed very sad for the people of Nepal that there is not a single national level patriotic and visionary leader with clean image. Right now, Mr. Girija Koirala is the leader of SPAM. However, Mr. Koirala is not accepted by all the people. First of all, he is the leader of the half Congress party. The other half of the Congress party is led by Mr. Deuba. Mr. Koirala's behavior during the Tanakpur Treaty with India and his lack of interest to safeguard the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country puts a question mark on his patriotism. In addition, Mr. Koirala as a Head of State and Head of Government failed to express his opposition to the encroachment of Nepalese territory in various border areas by India including in Kalapani, Susta, Illam, Jhapa. Saptari, Banke and Bardia. In fact, even the Ranas who ruled the country for 104 years were more patriotic than any of the SPAM leadership. For example, during the British Rule of India, Nepal maintained all even numbered borders and the Brirish maintained all the odd numbered pillars every year. That kind of border maintenance was abandoned both by multiparty rulers and Panchayati rulers.
Secondly, Mr. Koirala does not have a clean image. His involvement in various scandals during the time he was prime minister for the major part of multiparty government from 1990 to 2001. In fact, Mr. Koirala refused to present himself to the court when he was summoned by the court on corruption charges.
Thirdly, Mr. Koirala does not have any vision or any other plan to develop and help the country and the people. He is a happy camper as long as he is in power.
Fourthly, majority of the leaders of all political parties do not have clean image. Many of them have been involved with corruption, nepotism, favoritism, and influence peddling. Some of them even have criminal records including murder.
How about the Maoists Comrades? What kind of credibility do they have? Well, as we all know 13,000 Nepalese people lost their lives as a direct result of the so called people's war started by the Maoists insurgents. Another 26,000 committed suicide because they could not bear the pain and suffering caused by the war. Over a million people were internally displaced. Many more people left the country in total despair without any hope for themselves and for their children. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of Nepalese people working as laborers (often doing the most dangerous and life threatening jobs which nobody else would do) in many Gulf countries as well as in Malaysia and South Korea.
Several millions if not billions of dollars of worth infrastructure including government offices, schools, transmission towers, bridges, roads, etc have been destroyed. All this happened because of the people's war. The comrades must take the responsibility for the injustices done to the people. So these Maoists leaders whose hands are stained with the blood of the people are also intoxicated with the blood of the 13,000 Nepalese people. Therefore, it would be an exercise in futility to expect any thing good from these self proclaimed leaders who got where they are today with the use of guns and bombs and also with a little bit of help from the extremely friendly neighbor in the south.
According to Sobhakar Parajuli (Kathmandu Post, Feb,. 28, 2007) "The Maoists spread a reign of terrorism in villages and urban areas. They have yet to return the property of innocent people seized during their so-called people's war. They continue to extort money and threaten the villagers. Madi ambush is still fresh among the relatives of those killed. Now Prachanda regrets that it was their mistake when he was aware of the fact that traveling in the bus were innocent passengers. Such regretting words do not convince the people. Rather, Prachanda appears cruel and inhumane in the eyes of the common people."
Well then, are there any other leaders in the SPAM or any other political parties who have long term plan to lift the nation out of poverty, illiteracy, hunger, disease, and outdated caste system? Do any of them have a way to stop the exploitation of the poor and destitute people from the clutches of feudal landlords and crooked business man? Unfortunately, the answer is no.
All these leaders are chanting the same Mantra as the Maoists Comrades. For example, the comrades have been chanting the mantra of Federalism and Constituency Assembly (CA) elections and every one of the leaders both inside and outside SPAM chant the same mantra without even understanding what does constituency assembly or Federalism mean? What are the long term implications of these activities? Does Federalism lead us to a better future? Or it would lead to the fragmentation of the nation thereby multiplying the interethnic conflicts. Would it help us to provide better education to our children? Would it help us to provide better health care to our people? Would it help us to improve the well being of our people? Would it improve the standard of living our people? Would it help us to maintain the peaceful relationship among our multiethnic and multi linguistic people? If so please tell us exactly how it would happen. Is it magical in nature? Does it mean that as soon as the King is exiled or executed and CA elections held and Federalism established, Nepal will turn into another heaven?
People want to know what your plan for economic development is. What are the SPAM plans for education, healthcare, environmental issues, and exploitation of the poor people? Every dissident group is in a destructive mood right now. The infrastructure that was built by donations or borrowed money has been destroyed by our comrades as well as others who think they deserve a bigger piece of existing pie. No one wants to work to increase the size of the pie so that every one will have enough.
What kind of Leader Do Nepalese People Want?
Unfortunately, Nepal never had a visionary leader who puts personal interests above political party interests and national interests above political party interests. None have shown any vision for the future of the nation. No leader has been acceptable to all ethnic groups and people of different political affiliations. If we are to build our nation strong and prosperous we need to have political leader who has the following characteristics:
1. Since Nepal is a multi-ethnic nation where no group is in majority, we need a leader who is completely unbiased and can get along with people of all regions and ethnic backgrounds irrespective of their culture, language, political affiliations and caste. In other words, the leader must be able to live and work with Kamis, or Sarkis, or Sherpas, or Tharus, or Danuwar, or Satars, or Limbus, etc. This can only happen if the leader has the interests of the people and the nation above his/her personal interests.
2. People need a leader who has high moral and ethical standards and as such s/he has the ability to tell others to follow high ethical and moral values.
3. The leader must also be motivating and charismatic so that s/he can influence the people and motivate them to work hard to improve their own livelihood and neighborhood.
4. The leader must also possess a clear sense of purpose (or mission) - clear goals - focus – commitment.
5. The leader must also be able to work with others and be highly optimistic and results oriented
6. Ability to encourage and nurture others so that s/he can make a difference in the lives of the people.
7. Ability to understand what others say, rather than listening to how they say things. One could partly sum this quality up as "ability to walk in someone else's shoes" Or know where the shoe pinches.
8. The leader must be able to display a passion for, and have a strong conviction of, what they regard as the moral correctness of their vision. They engage in outstanding or extraordinary behavior and make extraordinary self-sacrifices in the interest of their vision and mission.
9. The leader must be inspirational and communicate with people in an understandable way and live by example. S/he must have high self confidence, determination and persistence.
10. The leader must have ability to delegate authority to reliable and competent people.
The question is do we have any leaders who display even five of the above qualities? You be the judge.
Culture of Death, Destruction, and Violence
It is no secret that Maoists got where they are today using ruthless violence, destruction, murder, looting, kidnapping, intimidation, and extortion. They also used cheap and unrealistic slogans to attract people to their line of thinking. For example, Comrade Prachanda when he first showed up in public promised to turn Nepal into another Switzerland. It seems he was repeating the rhetoric of another great leader Mr. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai who proclaimed that he was going to make Nepal as developed as Singapore within five years when he was the prime minister.
Comrade Prachanda even went to the extent of claiming that he can make greater Nepal by declaring the Sugauli Treaty signed with the British in 1816 null and void. This comes from the same leader who wants to give the right to self determination to all those ethnic groups who are demanding for it. Comrade Prachanda! Tell us the truth do you want to break the country into smaller countries or build a greater Nepal? Your statements are conflicting and confusing.
Now the Maoists comrades are in power with the successful use of force, destruction of public and private property, extortion, and intimidation. The success of Maoists is now being copied by other groups. They have learned that it pays to be violent and act of violent crimes can get results. With the lessons learned from the Comrades, other groups whether they are Terai residents, Khambuwans, Tamurats, Magarats and many others are using the time tested Maoists tactics to get what they want. There is a culture of violence, death and destruction in Nepal now. Every one wants to stop the movement of vehicles and burn tires causing great amount of financial loss to the working class.
One of the dangerous promises that the comrades used was to turn Nepal into a Federal Republic where each indigenous group of people will have an autonomous republic. For example, they promised different autonomous regions for such ethnic groups as Gurungs, Magars, Newars, Tamangs, Tharus, and many others.
How Can an Autonomous Regions be Achieved?
According the 2001 Census of Nepal, the population of Nepal consists of the following categories in terms of percentage:
Population of Nepal in Percentage (Source: Central Bureau of
Statistics, Nepal Government)
1 CHHETRI 15.80
2 BRAHMAN - HILL 12.74
3 MAGAR 7.14
4 THARU 6.75
5 TAMANG 5.64
6 NEWAR 5.48
7 MUSLIM 4.27
8 KAMI 3.94
9 YADAV 3.94
10 RAI 2.79
11 GURUNG 2.39
12 DAMAI/DHOLI 1.72
13 LIMBU 1.58
14 THAKURI 1.47
15 SARKI 1.40
16 TELI 1.34
17 CHAMAR, HARIJAN, RAM 1.19
18 KOIRI 1.11
19 KURMI 0.94
20 SANYASI 0.88
21 DHANUK 0.83
22 MUSAHAR 0.76
23 DUSADH/PASWAN/PASI 0.70
24 SHERPA 0.68
25 SONAR 0.64
26 KEWAT 0.60
27 BRAHMAN - TARAI 0.59
28 BANIYA 0.56
29 GHARTI/BHUJEL 0.52
30 MALLAH 0.51
31 KALWAR 0.51
There are 72 other categories of people in Nepal which are not listed in the above table. The criteria used to cut off was any groups which are less than 0.5% of the total population are not quoted as these would not be needed to make the point clear.
Let us say, for example, as promised by Maoists Comrades that we all agree that Limbuwan and Khambuwan are given an autonomous region in the eastern Nepal. From the above table one can see that they constitute a population of 4.37% when both groups are combined. Now, the problem is the region where they want their autonomous region also have many other ethnic groups including Magars, Gurungs, Bahuns, Chhetries, Kamis, Damais, Sarkis, Newars, Tamangs, and the list goes on and on. If they are given autonomy in the area then what are the other people who have been living there for hundreds of years going to do? Do they have to move to somewhere else? If so where would they go? Let us forget about the Bahuns and Chettris who are supposedly the exploiters and let them go to hell. However, what is a poor Kami or a poor Damai is going to do. Where would they go? Kamis and Damais like Newars, Bahuns, Sarkis, and Chettris are spread all over Nepal.
Representation of Ethnic Groups
The recent revolts by the Terai residents and the various ethnic groups from the mountains have been claiming the fair representation in administration, army, police, etc. There is no question that their demands are appropriate and justified. However, these demands cannot be addressed by CA election or the introduction of Federalism.
Empowerment of Local Governments and not Federalism is the Answer
According to the 2001 census of Nepal, there are 103 different ethnic groups in Nepal. They speak at least 90 different languages. Some of the ethnic groups are as small as 164 people. For example, according to the 2001 census of Nepal there are only 164 Kusundas in Nepal and these people are no where else in the world. Different groups of people especially the ones demanding the autonomy are spread out through out the nation. Therefore, introduction of Federalism or declaration of self governing regions based on ethnic groups will spell disaster for the whole country. It would not even benefit the group that is claiming autonomy. The ethnic groups such as Magars, Tharus, Tamangs, Newars, only constitute 7.14%, 6.75%, 5.64%, and 5.48% respectively. Moreover, these groups are not living in a particular locality. They are pretty much spread out through out the country except the Tharus who mainly reside in the Terai belt.
Therefore, the best way to kill the snake without breaking the stick would be to empower the local governments. It will be a true democratic way of resolving the demands of terai residents as well as the various ethnic groups of the hill areas.
What Kind of Power would the Local Government Have?
The ultimate objective should be to give the power to raise tax, be responsible for taking care of school education, primary health care, local self governance including public safety (hiring local police), passing the rules and regulations on the local governance, and judiciary. Well, that gives the local elected bodies complete authority. It will all be democratic because the people will elect not only the local government officials but also the judges and the chief of the police. People must be alert and ask for transparency, accountability, and rule of law. This will be the ultimate democracy which will satisfy the demands of all ethnic groups no matter how small or how large they are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)