(Courtesy: Roop Joshi)
In the current almost inscrutable maze of Nepali politics it seems opportune to ask “what is to be done?” to ensure democracy in Nepal. (Apologies to Nikolai Chernyshevski who wrote a novel with this title circa 1887 and also to Vladimir Lenin who borrowed this title, circa 1915, for his own treatise on the Bolshevik cause.) This is a question that plays, or should play, in the minds of every Nepali who is bemused, appalled and downright frightened by where the country is currently headed.
There is no “New Nepal” yet. April 2006 was not a “political watershed” as termed by many. It was merely a consequence of the unholy alliance between the seven political parties and the Maoists, endorsed by a gullible international community and forced by the high-handed approach of the Government then. There still exist triangular, though uneven, centers of political leverage in Nepali politics: the Seven Party Alliance (SPA), the Maoists and the currently side-lined king. The SPA is bungling along with no leadership or direction. The Maoists are playing a waiting game to seize the first opportunity to come to power (not necessarily by democratic means). The king, stripped of his powers, remains still a distant focal point for a substantial number of those who still believe that the monarchy is useful for the New Nepal. Given recent developments, the Madhesis (MJF, JTMM, etc.) may be considered a fourth player in this macabre political dance.
The timeline has been set: elections for the Constituent Assembly on 22 November 2007, just over three months away. The Chief Elections Commissioner has yet to confirm that the law and order situation is expected to be conducive to elections by the planned date. Eastern Terai is afire with the marauding Madhesi extremists. Breakaway Maoist factions are attacking security forces. The YCL behaves like a security force in itself. The verification process in the Maoist cantonments has been stalled without rhyme or reason. Kidnappings and extortions occur daily and silently, since the victims are cowered into silence. Is it realistic to expect politicians to campaign and voters to vote in this scenario? Needless to mention, the indefinite postponement of the elections only prolongs the tenure of this un-elected Government.
Hence, first and foremost, Law and Order must be established across the country, not only in Kathmandu valley. The Home Ministry must deal with this paramount issue realistically, instead of, for example, setting naïve deadlines when political dialogue is needed. The Defense Ministry must implement an urgent plan to utilize all its resources (i.e. including the Nepal Army) in the cause of law and order. So Minister Sitaula and the Prime Minister really do need to burn the midnight oil.
Once law and order has been established and the security situation allows candidates to campaign without fear and, subsequently, allows every voter to vote in a completely secure environment, the CA elections can be held. Further, if election campaigns and awareness creation is left exclusively up to the much talked about “eight-party mechanism”, it would be folly. The SPA and Maoists do not have exclusive rights on Nepali democracy. After all, 62 parties have registered for the elections. Every party must be included in the “mechanism” leading up to the elections.
It is advisable to hold the elections under the auspices of the United Nations, which has a far better record in conducting elections than in peace-keeping, for example the post-Khmer Rouge elections in Cambodia conducted by the UN. In addition, every polling booth needs an independent international monitor, for example Mr. Jimmy Carter’s organization and others. Mr. Carter would be of far greater use in this exercise than the performance he put on during his last visit to Nepal.
Once fair and transparent CA elections are held, the CA sets out to prepare the new Constitution. Concurrently, a national referendum needs to be held on the question of monarchy versus republic. This issue is far too important to leave to the CA alone. The recent “constitutional amendment” allowing the current Interim Government to abolish the monarchy with a two-thirds majority in parliament is a politically naïve gesture, even presuming that an un-elected Interim Government has this authority which it does not. If political parties of every hue and colour - even those who have reached the national stage merely by the power of their guns - can have a say in this vital issue concerning national sovereignty and unity, certainly every Nepali must have the opportunity to speak up too. Let the cards fall where they may, but there must be a national referendum on this issue. The infrastructure already established for the CA elections can also be used for the referendum. The referendum is on the institution of monarchy. Issues such as possible abdication to younger generations can be dealt with post-referendum.
So the above, in almost an outline format, is what is to be done in the short-run. The complacency that we Nepalis are so famous for must give way to activism. We must be more demanding of our political leaders. If democracy is to be the birth right of every Nepali, it is the duty of every political leader or would-be-leader to make it clear to us what his or her political agenda is. We must stop voting for individuals, but rather for policies and programmes. Delays, hesitation and politics as usual will only shatter the dream of a “New Nepal”.
Related Posts:
Peace or Appease Process?
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/07/peace-or-appease-process.html
April's Sizzle and February's Chill in Kathmandu
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/06/aprils-sizzle-and-februarys-chill-in.html
Second Amendment to Nepal's Interim Constitution - No Cause for Maoist Joy
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/06/second-amendment-to-nepals-interim.html
Reality Check for Nepal - Part-II
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/05/reality-check-for-nepal-part-ii.html
Reality Check for Nepal - Part-I
http://nepaliperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/05/reality-check-for-nepal-part-i.html
4 comments:
Roop,
In an otherwise mediocre piece, you appear to have faltered spectacularly on the point about the monarchy. Should Nepal's very own Macbeth and that monster of his son continue for any longer on the scene, it's a fait accompli for the "institution" - never mind the referendum. Your suggestion that "abdication to younger generations can be dealt with post-referendum" is utter nonsense. If you really mean it then you should have the guts to disclose what Faustian bargain you have entered into with that scum-bahun, Dahal.
peter has a point.. if this boils down to keep gyanendra and paras around, the "institution" has no chance.
But a question for peter - do you believe in the idea of universal suffrage, in the right to vote?
If so, Roop's suggestion, as "mediocre" as it may be is the way forward.
Dani,
I certainly don't disagree with you.
Whether the CA or an especial referendum is used to settle the future of the monarchy, the point is that, as long as the despicable duo are around, they will be at once prized as assets by the republicans as they are walking disasters for the monarchists. For example, if a referendum were to be held in the foreseeable future, it will inevitably be turned into a referendum on Gyane and Paras - in that case the monarchy has had it. No wonder that the republicans are just relishing such a prospect.
There are alternatives that would produce far better outcomes for the monarchy even if some form of an electoral test was made a precondition. The monarchy will be opting for suicide by persiting with these two loosers. The sooner that they are gone - anywhere, the better.
Peter, we are on the same wavelenght here. It's best for everyone if the decision of succession is decided BEFORE CA elections so the monarchists don't have to whine and complain about it later.
Post a Comment