Democracy in Nepal

Workshop on Democracy in Nepal was collectively organised by South Asia Study Centre, Think India, South Asia Network Plan (CSDS), and Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam on January 5^th 2003 during the Asian Social Form meet in Hyderabad (AP), India. Several organisations and individuals took part in the workshop and aired their views. The workshop was co-chaired by Mr Vijay Pratap of CSDS/Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, Delhi and Shyam Shreshtha of Nepal. Mr Deepak Bhatt of the South Asia Study Centre moderated the meeting.

Participation

1. South Asia Study Centre

2. Nepali Congress

3. Think India

4. WAFED, Nepal

5. South Asia Network Plan (CSDS, Delhi)

6. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, Delhi

7. Prajatantrik Rashtriya Yuva Sangh Nepal

8. Nepali Sherpa Association

9. Vashudhaiva Kutumbakam/CSDS, New Delhi, and

several other organisations and individuals.

Vijay Pratap: Initiating the dialogue, Mr Vijay Pratap of CSDS/Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam said that several activists representing several democratic political streams like CPN (UML), Nepal Green Party, Nepali Congress, and several Leftist intellectuals and social democrats were part of the meeting that was held in New Delhi on January 9-10, 2002 to take a decision on the ASF-2003 meet. In that meeting, he said, a proposal was moved to hold the ASF process 2003 meeting in Kathmandu, the Nepali capital.

The proposal was approved unanimously except a condition that the event would be held there only if democracy survived in that country no matter whomever formed the government. But regrettably, the events in Nepal turned hostile and the Nepali colleagues themselves told later that it would be better not to take risk of holding the ASF-2003 meeting of the WSF process in Kathmandu.

Pratap said they waited for 3-4 months in the changed scenario and then in April 2002 it was decided that the ASF meet should take place in India. Even then we were optimistic about some national political process beginning in Nepal and we got in touch with those Nepali friends who had participated at the Porto Alegre meet of the WSF process. With their help, efforts were made to give shape to a democratic process but that was not to happen due to unfavourable in that country.

Pratap appreciated the friends from Nepal and said their participation in the ASF process at Hyderabad was in itself a proof that the people of Nepal were very much a part of the stream of democracy and equity. He said it was amply clear that the people of Nepal wanted to strengthen the movement for democracy and the workshop has been organised with the same understanding that it would not be inappropriate to hold a meeting on a subject like democracy in Nepal in a neighbouring country. Pratap told the participants that Deepak Bhatt and Arun Joshi had happily took the responsibility to make arrangements for the workshop. He called on the participants to see the proceedings of the workshop in the backdrop of political situation back home, Nepal.

Pradeep Giri: Referring to Vijay Pratap’s statement that in the first place it was decided to hold the ASF-2003 meet in Nepal, Pradeep Giri, a senior leader of Nepali Congress, said he was very happy on the proposal and instantly agreed that the ASF-2003 meet should be organised in Kathmandu despite the fact that dark clouds were already there on the Nepali skies. Today, democracy has been compromised in Nepal and the forces vying for democracy could do nothing. They remained silent spectators. Expressing concern over the situation, he lamented that the political situation in India was also not good as the communal forces were on the rise. He expressly said that people like Narendra Modi were shamelessly working on their communal agenda and feeling as if on victory expeditions. Giri wondered why nobody was doing anything against such tendencies.

“No matter how strong the Indian system looks like from the outside, it has cleavages in it from Kashmir to Assam. India cannot withstand on the crutches of nuke power. The government will get nothing by giving Kashmir looks of a cantonment. The point is that violence generated power has no real strength and least ideas to find solutions,” he observed, adding that most States in South Asia were clinging to power with the help of such tools, for example the military power. He said the system inherited from the British was also responsible for such instability in South Asia. The system could not show results in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh and to some extent in Nepal as its origin was in the colonial mindset.

Giri also came down heavily on those who did not care for the masses and failed in delivering to them. He said the political leaders have mockery of democracy as they needed people’s support only to grab power and once power was in their hands, the leaders would not turn their heads towards the people. Giri also lashed out at the politicians for their dependence on the bureaucrats, mighty military and police. He gave an example in this context that India’s Independence created an opportunity for Jawaharlal Nehru to become Prime Minister of the country but there was no change in bureaucracy. Those bureaucrats became the rulers who were at the helms of affairs before Independence. Thus, in reality there was little change in the system.

Quoting Lenin, Giri said that there was no place for a standing army in an ideal system and in a socialist state a self-controlled system was expected which also allowed everybody to participate directly. He reminded that Gandhiji also spoke about the gram swarajya concept and about the welfare of the last person in the remotest of villages. He said this meant very limited powers for the Centre. “If this happens, people will invigorate their respective countries with the powers of their creativity,” Giri opined, adding that the similar dream of Lenin about the state of society was yet to come true.

He said even Mao was disgusted at the Chinese bureaucracy getting stronger and stronger. He was of the view that the manner in which democracy was killed in Nepal was due to the mistake of considering democracy as a pious pure system of democratic governance. Giri said it was a wrong notion. And, the belief that the British model of parliamentary democracy was the best was also wrong.

“But the fact is that this model is surviving only with the help of army, police, intelligence agencies, and the education system inherited from the colonial masters. Is it not strange that we still have the bodies with the same colonial mindset to do planning for us, and the judicial system. The only thing that has changed is hands,” he pointed out.

He stated that freedom of the press, freedom of expression and freedoms to form organisations were very meaningful as such expressions strengthened democracy. He said he was not rejecting everything that happened in Nepal during last 132 years and in fact there has been an explosion of consciousness in that country and this could be seen in the light of Maoist success stories. One would wonder how the Maoists were a success in Nepal. Actually, he said, the people who had bad experiences of working in India as domestic help, serving in foreign armies, and servants or chowkidars abroad were easily persuaded to take guns with the determination to change the system.

Giri said this phenomenon was not to be seen in a poor light or negatively because people always drew inspiration from the revolutions be it the October revolution of 1917, Chinese revolution of 1949, or the September 11 revolution of Bin Laden who attacked US without a gun. However, relevance of violence was limited no matter who held the gun in his or her hand. Whether King Birendra or King Gynanedra or Baburam or Prachand. “You cannot change the system with the support of violence,” he observed, adding that the voice of non-violence was louder. In this context, he gave example of the spontaneous mass movement of 1990 in which more than half a million people had participated.

Giri said that summarily it looked as if people favoured use of violence as a means to achieve the political goals but in actuality people wished democracy to its roots. He said that a recent survey had revealed that despite Maoists’ presence, 73 per cent of the people in Nepal were in favour of multi-party democratic system “If allowed to participate in the election process, the Maoists would not get more than 25 per cent of votes in any case,” he told the participants reminding them how committed people were to the democratic values.

He also described privatisation, liberalisation, and commercialisation as monstrous and anti-people. Giri opined that the disintegration of the USSR had given an impression that socialism was finished and people educated in the US or Britain were enthusiastically made finance ministers in a number of countries, who in turn pushed the whole economy towards liberalisation and privatisation. No efforts were made to assess the negative aspects of privatisation.

Giri said people now have understood that the sectors like health and transport were actually victims of privatisation. For example, privatisation allowed several automobile companies to open their shops in India badly affecting the indigenous sector. In a country like Nepal, the process of privatisation has affected sectors like health, education and transport negatively. He lamented that on the one hand South Asia was struggling to deal with privatisation spree, the political leadership, on the other hand, was equipping itself with colonial mindset. This has made State vulnerable and weak. And, the vulnerability was not limited to Nepal, other countries like India and Sri Lanka were also unstable. In Sri Lanka, LTTE was still there and in India the extremist organisations like PWG and MCC were creating problems for the State.

He said the Indian State was unable to deal with people like Shahbuddin, the main accused of the murder case of a CPI-ML leader Chandra Shekhar and ‘ring leader’ of three districts in the Bihar state. The extremist organisations like PWG and MCC were just elusive for the State.

Such was the situation that the State was being challenged equally by the revolutionaries and the criminals. Giri said Shahbuddin was more dangerous criminal than the sandal brigand Veerappan but unfortunately Shahbuddin continued to enjoy his political clout.

Giri said such strong was the corruption web that nine Bihar MLAs admitted having links with the criminal groups. They said that the criminal groups were so powerful that no one dared form a government there without the support of criminal groups. Giri claimed that leaders like Laloo Yadav and Nitish Kumar were champions of the same forces.

He maintained that if violence was not separated from politics, democracy was not going to survive no matter what efforts the communists, neo-communists, socialists, or Gandhians made. In the context of Nepal, Giri said the success of capitalism, lack of internal democracy in the political parties, besides ambitions of King Gyanendra were the main reasons for marginalisation of democracy there. He asserted that violence of all shades – no matter red or white – was equally responsible for the deplorable situation. “There is no option but to set a target, an agenda for the change. If we really want Nepal’s political situation change, we have little options,” he declared. Also, he said, solution to the problems of caste system and difficulties of the tribal people even as something concrete has to be done for improving quality of education that was being imparted, and the threat of AIDS was also to be tackled. Giri told the participants that time was ripe for embracing a new beginning and by shunning violence people could take a step forward in that direction, he said, adding that he won’t side with anybody who was responsible for it – the State or the Maoists.

Hari Roka: A long time political activist in Nepal and a scholar at JNU, Hari Roka said it was more important to discuss the future agenda rather than dwelling on the past as to what was done by whom and moreover there was unanimity on who was responsible for what. He told the participant to look forward and chalk out a strategy for action.

Referring to the situation back home, Roka said there was an atmosphere of accusations and counter accusations. The leading parties like the Congress and the CPN-UML believed that the Durbar or royalty was responsible for the present situation, whereas the Durbar (the palace) was convinced that the UML was responsible. Similarly, the UML considered the Congress as a weak political party and several others believed that the main responsibility for the mess was that of the Maoists. In light of this, Roka suggested there has to be some thinking beyond accusations and counter accusations.

He said it was important to take action, as the King was being proactive as far as taking the executive powers in his hands was concerned. Like the previous King Gyanendra was reaching out to the people presumably to have interaction with the masses but in reality the effort was for tightening the grip on the administration. He regretted that the hard-earned democratic system was being converted into autocracy.

Roka said it was vital to put in some intellectual labour to reverse the situation but sadly the political parties like CPN-UML, and Pradeep Giri’s Nepali Congress were divided over several issues and such a division was actually functioning as a lever for the King’s interests. The more divided the political parties were, the more benefit the King was likely to get out of that, he asserted.

Roka also regretted that there was no unity among the political parties at the national level and due to this weakness the burning issues related to the Dalits, women, and tribal were not drawing attention. Also, the issues of languages, regional considerations and imbalances, etc., were also kept perennially on the backburner. It was strange that unity was not being evolved on such grim issues and the old systems, which have proved useless for the people, still continue to dominate the social scene. He warned that these issues have to be sorted out before the political parties think about anything else.

Those social streams, which have long been deprived, have to be taken into the mainstream and socio-economic parity ensured to them. He said it was interesting that the Maoists were saying the same thing and in view of this there was something positive about them. They were known as social guards of the Dalits and the marginalised. In a history of several hundred years, they were considered as ‘touchables’ for the first time. Nobody has done it earlier. The Maoists have done this and that was something positive about them. But, larger society was still divided on the question and that was helping the Maoists.

Roka said he did not approve of the Maoists’ politics riddled with violence but this did not mean that he believed in the policies of the Nepali Congress. He blamed the party for turning Nepal into the colony of the US and Britain. Roka said he was also in disagreement with the CPN-UML, which though talked about the nation-state but also tilted towards the Nepali Congress and the Durbar.

Referring to his three-decade long experience as an activist of the UML in different capacities including as a district secretary of the UML, Roka said much was committed wrong in the past and whatever was provided by the US or the British was imbibed diligently and adopted religiously. Their sermons were taken as model policies. They showed us the way to privatisation and corporatisation and we adopted them as policies. According to him, the Nepali Congress did the same thing and there was nothing but to repent.

“The only thing is unity against these tactics. We must get united against them. All parties must realise that nothing was done to accommodate all citizens in the socio-political and economic spheres. This was a big mistake. Now, we must take everybody with us and then move forward,” he advised.

He reminded that everybody was responsible towards society and called upon the participants to take home the lessons and experiences of the ASF meeting and tell people how privatisation, globalisation, neo-liberalism, and neo-imperialism were affecting their lives.

Talking about international trade and the issue of importing technology, Roka suggested a cautious approach while importing technology, as those technologies were not required that ensured retrenchment or ouster of the workers. One should not forget how the ADB, IMF, and World Bank policies were damaging the economy. Similarly, the foreign policy has to be framed.

He said it was to be understood what Maoism or Durbarism was. All national parties must have a clear-cut perception about these concepts and the Maoists have to be brought into the mainstream. A common national coalition government should e formed. All neglected sections should be brought in. the mainstream. This way, the polity could go further this and county might find a new direction. Self-assessment and self-criticism was the hallmark for that.

But the million-dollar question was: who would lead the nation? Naturally, the political parties should take that responsibility and the process has to be very inclusive. Roka said the need of the hour was to establish a society based on democratic values and equity in all spheres.

Bimalendra Nidhi: A senior Nepali politician, Bimalendra Nidhi, said that after fall of the Rana dynasty in 1950s, democracy did see the bright sun but could not survive beyond a decade. For next three decades, people continued to fight for their democratic rights and in1990 their popular movement succeeded in bringing in the multi-party democratic system in the country. But now the King’s Decree of October 4, 2002 has again threatened both democracy and country’s constitution.

He said both of them who took part in the movement for democracy and those who did not take part were seen as committed to the multi-party system. Nidhi observed that the process was essentially seen as a democratic act but larger issues of poverty, regional imbalance, languages were not addressed in a subtle way though the movement in itself was a glorious chapter in the history of people’s movement, the movement for democracy. Now, the King’s Decree has changed everything.

He wondered how people could be convinced if the democratic forces were able to bring about a change and ensure participation of the downtrodden. He said the Maoists have been leading a violent movement for last seven years, still people were in agreement that there was no place for violence. In light of this, he added, question could be asked what kind of a political system the Maoists wanted? And, was there any place for violence? Nidhi urged the participants and the democratic forces to look into this question.

According to him, the Nepali people, prior to the October 4 Decree, people were trying to tread the path of democracy based on the constitution they gave to themselves. In that constitution the King was not an Executive Head but a Constitutional Head as a symbol of national unity. This was the multi-party system with the election and parliamentary system in place. These were the salient features of the constitution but the Maoists did not accept this brand of democracy. They neither wanted the parliamentary system. No, the parliamentary system was not there so this discussion continued to go on. The British model of the parliamentary democracy has failed in this case. This has failed in understanding and redressing the real problems of society. In view of this, thinking has to be there about an appropriate and new democratic model. Nidhi hoped that the philosophers and thinkers were doing something about it. “There are several model of parliamentary democracy, hence there may be a prolonged discussion on the subject,” he emphasised.

He also talked about different models being practised in the countries like India, Britain, and those countries that accepted the British Queen as their constitutional head or monarch but have parliamentary democracy. “However, the multi-party democratic system is not able to address all types of peoples’ problems. This system has no relevance in creating a new society. The multi-party and parliamentary systems, therefore, are no more useful. We must conclude that, I believe,” he stressed.

Till date, the forces of the movement for democracy of the 1990 still have faith in the multi-party and parliamentary system as well as in the democratic movement. These parties remained committed to these principles. They believed that this system allowed abolishing country’s disparities. But the Maoists neither accepted the constitution nor the parliamentary system. They also didn’t believe in the election process or the party system. They actually wanted a sort of autocracy in the name of single-party system. Their documents spoke for themselves. The articles of Prachand, Baburam, Bhattarai or in the documents of their central committee everything was clear. They just did not want the monarchy in the country. “It would be all right if their demand is restricted to replacing the King with President but do they want democracy to survive in the country? Do they want the parliamentary system to survive? Do they want the election system to survive? And what about the fundamental rights and the human rights? They want a new system in place of all this. Their belief is that this is possible in their system,” he observed.

Nidhi said what the Maoists believed in was actually minus democracy and there would be no place for election system and the human rights. ‘This means the system will be totally different,” he pointed out.

He said that the democracy in Nepal was threatened even before October 4, 2002 because the constitutional monarchy, multi-part democracy, the election system, and the parliamentary system all were threatened constantly. Everybody including the King, the people, advocates of the multi-party system as well as parliamentary system’s supporters were all in favour of a solution. But the solution was not to be there. ‘Still there is no solution,” he added.

Now, he pointed out, the October 4 Decree has changed everything. The King has become proactive. He has come forward with his ‘signboards’. “Another force is Maoists. They want to finish the King as well. They also want to finish the multi-party parliamentary system in the country. But there is the largest third force, with 73 per cent mandate, that believes in multi-party democratic and parliamentary system. So, the tussle is among these three centres of power. We really do not know whether solution to this will be in possible even if in a phased manner. We have to take a serious note of it, though quite difficult to find a solution once for all,” he articulated.

In view of this, he said, the energies have to be concentrated and galvanised to oppose the move of the King. The king has threatened the multi-party parliamentary system and the election system. “This should be in our priority. In the second phase, the Maoist problem has to be solved. This is the only way to take the country to the path of democracy”.

According to Nidhi, the King wanted to say that he was the sovereign but constitution was silent about that. The democratic framework also did not accept this.

“According to the constitution, sovereignty is in the people and our political philosophy approves of that. The King also wants to grab the executive and administrative powers, which in a democracy are the prerogatives of the elected government led by a cabinet. Why the King wants to enquire into the functioning of Prime Minister? Why does not he think it is a job that belongs to the people. Also, he has empowered himself with the power to remove the Prime Minister at any time, on any plea and appoint anybody in his or her place. You can see how he had dismissed Sher Bahadur Deuba from the prime ministership and brought Lokendra Bahadur Chand in his place. This was sheer violation of the people’s rights. The King also claims that he will not cause or allow any danger to the multi-party democracy in the country but he is lying. On the contrary, he has directed the bureaucracy to take directions from him only and not take notice of anybody else. In nutshell, the king has empowered him with all sorts of executive powers – control over administration, the royal army, and the cabinet et al. Nidhi said this was why the Nepali Congress (Prajatantrik) termed the move of the King as unconstitutional and undemocratic.

“Can we compromise with the rights we acquired through people’s movement of 1990 and struggles? If we want democracy to survive in the country, we must work for a common cause, a common agenda. An action plan against the royal decree of October four last year. Only after it is revoked we will think what steps to take next”.

He said it was also to be found whether or not a dialogue was possible with the Maoists, whether a solution could be found through the process of dialogue. This has also to be seen whether talks were necessary to have long lasting solution to the problem. “Can we leave the shattered democracy as it is today? I am of the opinion that if we want to bring the country out of this situation we have to prioritise our problems. First and foremost is the threat after the King revoked the decree. “All communities, the political parties of all hue and cry, intellectuals, believers in the democracy and members of the global community must unite in an effort to re-establish democracy in Nepal. Only then it will spearhead towards creation of a New World,” he declared.

Chitralekha Yadav: Chitralekha Yadav expressed concern that the country was passing through a political crisis. She added that the royal decree of October spoke much about it. In view of this, she suggested that the topic of the workshop should have been “Nepal in Democracy” instead of “Democracy in Nepal”. She described the Maoists as another crisis as they were raising catchy slogans. “The youth are naturally attraction towards the catchy slogans,” she expressed her concern.

Chitralekha pointed out that it was important to talk boldly about the multi-lingual problems and the problems of multi-caste system. “We must talk about these issues. Difference should be on the basis of merit only. People belonging to all communities should get opportunities according to their capabilities and merits. When a person does not get on the basis of her or his capabilities, she or he is bound to feel frustration due to discrimination. Martin Luther King talked about racial discrimination in the US. Here in the context of Nepal, we should talk about caste discrimination so that discrimination does not lead to disappointment,” she stated, adding that democracy could flourish only there where there was no discrimination. “It is true that overcoming poverty, hunger, and illiteracy is a gigantic task, still there is hope and we can do it by fighting unitedly. There is no way out.”

She said that the people’s perception was that the leaders were like gods with magic wand in their hands to get everything done and ready solutions to all problems, but that was not to be. Actually, she asserted, the focus has to be on higher goals with a sense of judgement about the reality of social justice. “When we talk about social transformation, we must deliver social justice and equal opportunities otherwise social transformation is not going to be possible and thus meaningless. It is sad that in Nepal it is a Mahabharata like situation where Bhishma knows who is wrong and who is right but by the virtue of his duty he is with the wrong doers. Our leaders should not repeat this as people’s aspirations are the foremost priorities”.

She asked the participants to tell her whether the democracy existed in Nepal. “A section of people believe that the King is committed to democracy and he has himself said that also but the ground reality was different. Chitralekha maintained that it was wrong to always blame the leaders for anthing wrong. “We always term the political leaders as the wrong doers but are not we also responsible?”

She added that the situation in Nepal was volatile and the time was ripe to sit together, think seriously, and come out with some solution. “There is talk of economic crisis and of a failed state. What is our responsibility today? Women participation is another issue. They should be equal partners in the development process. If a single person is deprived of his or her rights then the whole purpose of democracy is defeated. In fact, democracy means role for everybody and participation by everybody. It is sad that the present ruling dispensation has given ministerial berth to a single woman.”

“In view of this, if we keep on blaming each other, the future is going to be bleak for sure. We badly need a point of minimum understanding. To overcome the present crisis, we should utilise this ASF forum intelligently. We should move ahead with an initiative from this very place. If multi-party system has to be revived in Nepal, we must begin from this Methodist College (in Hyderabad) itself. Nepal needs everybody’s support and help in this hour of crisis,” Chitralekha urged.

Renu Rajbhandari: Talking about community health sector and the status of women’s empowerment in her country, Renu Rajbhandari, a social activist, said that activists engaged in women’s empowerment back home were sceptical about the future of democracy and like others she had the feeling way back in 1991 that democracy would not last long as women were not adequately represented in the democratic bodies. She said the interim government also did not take care of women and the parliamentary committees formed thereafter also did not see participation of women in them.

“Are not women human beings? How can one rule without giving opportunity to all sections of society and to the marginalised segments in particular? How can the rulers imagine that there will be no opposition to their actions not aimed at all sections,” questioned the activist.

Renu said the fall of democracy in her country was painful but it was because all sections of society were not engaged in the democratic process after 1990 and the policies were not framed keeping in mind the people’s aspirations. “Politician-centric politics was order of the day. Nobody seemed worried about protecting rights of the common people. The politicians were more concerned about protecting their own privileges. This situation also created problems for us engaged in the social sector. Even government employees were harassed and branded as supporters or activists of the adversary political parties,” she observed.

Renu said if people were really serious about solving these problems, they must look into last 12 years’ functioning and critically analyse everything. “We could have done so much during that period but nothing was done. Women could get only oppression, rapes, etc in reward and even today they do not get justice in courts of law because political parties are protecting those responsible for oppression and rapes. I know about so many such cases. When a rape takes place the vested interests give it a political colour. The people get divided according to their political affiliations. And most importantly, no political party has uttered a single word against the plight of those several thousand women who are pushed into prostitution,” she maintained.

She said the political parties were also silent about the women working in the unorganised sector in Nepal or other countries like India and Hong Kong. Some parties did raise issues of women in their election manifestos but then conveniently forgot everything and did not feel doing something about it. The real problems of women were just forgotten and things like AIDS are talked about because AIDS brought in big money.

“They never talk about malaria eradication because rich people do not die of this disease. Meningitis is claiming several hundred people every year in Nepal but nobody is concerned. The woes of women were not redressed even during the democratic rules in the country during last 12 years, of course prior to the recent fall of democracy. How can they ignore 51 percent of humanity?”

She argued that in such a situation people were naturally bound to tilt towards those who talked about them and their woes and difficulties. People also saw in them the real sympathisers who would get them social justice. “The Maoist movement gets foothold on the basis of this. I am not a Maoist but would like to give an example of Salyan and Udaipur regions where the Maoists talk and care about women. They have created a room for themselves in their hearts. But, the government machinery is after everybody. In suspicion of having affiliation with the Maoists four women were brutally killed by the royal army and a 52-year old woman was stripped by two army men and tortured for seven hours suspecting that she was hiding some explosive device inside her private parts. They stripped the woman before her 16-year old young daughter. Now, that woman has a strong sense of retaliation. She wants to kill those army men. The point is that the Maoist movement is an outcome of social disparity but again men lead the movement. Men are supreme in their organisational hierarchy,” she stated.

Renu made it clear that the people participating in the workshop were pro-women but the political leadership back home was not. The leadership believed in patriarchal society. In fact, the men dominated the system. Maoists at least have some women in their central leadership and the militia constituted mostly of women because women would easily be used as shields.

“I believe that a male dominated system is bound to blast in violence. I am not going into the details that who is responsible for the ongoing violence in Nepal but the fact remains that women are the main victim. If their husbands get killed in violence they become widows and burden of the whole family comes on their shoulders. It is not important whether their husbands are soldiers or Maoists. This, I believe, is feminisation of poverty, which is leading to greater migration of all sorts. And, there is no policy regarding migration.”

She gave a glaring account of violence. According to her, a man from Salyan area, who was supposedly close to the Jan Morcha Party, was going to Nepalganj for some work. On his way to that place, he was detained by the army and put in jail for seven months. When he returned home after detention the Maoists wanted him to join their cadres. He refused and the women of his household also resisted. This resulted in his killing by the Maoists a few days back. This was done before the eyes of his family members.

“The point is that violence let loose by any party is affecting the people in general and women in particular. Politics of violence cannot reach anywhere and it should not be allowed to reach anywhere. It won’t be incorrect to blame politicians for such happenings. They are responsible towards people as they represent them. The political parties should act responsibly. They must accept their duty or leave the people alone. I would say that if the political parties don’t try to find solution they must quit the scene. I have faith that the bodies like the ASF or the WSF are with us and we must ask them for help. Also, we have friends in India who can help us out. Cannot we start peace dialogue right here by forming a forum for peace? How long can we rely on the helpless political parties,” she questioned.

Towards the end of the workshop, she made it clear that she was not a believer in the royalty and instead considered King Gyandendra as a ‘killer’. Therefore, she added, she was with the people in their struggle for democracy. She also made it clear that she was a part of the workshop not as a representative of any NGO but as an advocate of women and their issues. “I have come here to present women’s perspective,” she pointed out. About the political parties, she clarified that she was not against all parties as some of them were okay but everything was not to be left to them alone.

Garima Shah: Garima Shah of the Prajatantrik Rashtriya Yuva Sangh Nepal, talked how the youth were thinking about the current political situation in the country. She added that peace was the precondition for restoration of democracy in the country. “Democracy will remain under threat till there is no peace. We are loosing the aura and achievements of the mass movement of 1990. The State must look into the needs and aspirations of the youth force. If nothing is done, such problems are bound to multiply and crop up time and again.”

She lamented that the decade of 1990 actually groomed nepotism, opportunism, corruption, and male-centric politics, etc. “All politicians are worried about increasing their political weight, are busy in acquiring more and more assets for their families and encouraging their family members in different sphere of life. People are not in their scheme of things. They never think whether common Nepalis were getting food to run his or her kitchen. Children getting nutritious food is never their concern. Nobody thinks about their education, livelihood. Today, unemployment is touching the skies. In such a situation, the radical Leftist people are attracting the youth especially as the Leftist radicals are selling dreams to them. This is one reason why the youth between 16-25 consist the most part of the Maoists. The youth have, in fact, invigorated the Maoists’ movement,” she observed.

Garima said the inequality transcended women and existed at several levels. “It exists between rich and poor, between farmers and capitalists, between the so-called upper castes and the so-called lower castes, between the hardcore politicians in white and the grassroots social activists. So where is equity and equality? Everybody will have to participate if we really want to establish equality at all levels. Charity must begin at home,” she made her point.

She said there was ‘one group’ that claimed that democracy could not survive in Nepal because the politicians have failed. “If talk like this, will we be able to save our country? The very sovereignty is being threatened. Those parties, which ruled for longer periods have greater responsibility and they must accept that. There is no divided opinion as regards the achievements of the 1990 movement. We must build further on that and move ahead. We must not accept the royal decree of October 4. The King is longing to become a despot, an autocrat. We must stop that. I hope that the people will resist the king’s move and create a mass movement against his action,” she concluded.

Yogendra Shahi: Yogendra Shahi said that before talking about democracy, it was important to look into the past history, which was replete with conspiracies, murders, and even the lately Durbar assassinations. “We have actually failed in developing a model of democracy at the grassroots level. The landlocked character of the country has blocked so many good things from entering into Nepal but has regrettably allowed the outside forces to dictate our politics. We have also not learnt from the models of smaller countries like Japan, Switzerland, and Korea. It is strange that Nepal and Uganda saw democracy at the same time but that country is far ahead,” he maintained.

He expressed concern over all indicators of development going against Nepal as trade was in deficit, and education sector was in a mess. “The only thing growth oriented is Maoists, the phenomenal growth of their movement. We have to dig the answers to the phenomenal growth of Maoists’ movement. Whatever the Maoists are doing is not good. Violence cannot end in peace. Therefore, people must come forward unitedly, take the lead and transform. This is the only option.”

Shahi ridiculed the King for his claims about commitment to democracy. “But, does he know there are some norms of democracy. I suggest, he must talk to the political parties if he wants a long lasting solution to the problems. But regrettably he is creating confusion. A section of the Indian rulers as well as global interest groups are promoting and encouraging him. This has also happened in past. In the name of Maoists, the western forces are taking deep interest in Nepal. They want to make our country their playground. These powers want to create clout in South Asia, from South Asia to Tibet. We have to take this into account while talking about democracy in Nepal,” he warned, adding that the western influence on Nepal has to be assessed in totality, as there were no comparisons with the western societies.

“The Nepali society is diverse whereas the western societies are more homogenous. Therefore, it is important to borrow only those things from them which are really relevant for diverse society,” he recommended.

Gopal Shiwakoti ‘Chintan’: A human rights and ecological activist, Gopal Shiwakoti ‘Chintan’ of WAFED, Nepal, regretted that those who made their points were guided by their respective political agenda. He said that considering the political situation back home it would be appropriate to discuss the issues much more broadly while not allowing them to be limited to some viewpoints.

“My point is that our discussion must focus on certain things that are relevant to the Nepali politics. Like the Maoists have established a broad base among the masses and the King has empowered himself with all sorts of executive power. We cannot blame the Maoists for taking guns in their hands. Congress did the same thing, even resorted to the armed struggle. Recently, Vamdeoji has declared that if the King wanted to tread his own way, his organisation would also arm itself go into hiding with the aim to mobilise people for struggle,” Chintan referred.

He said the most important thing was the need for a change in the country. “We should not concentrate on what the Maoists has been doing, no matter good or bad. But the dream they are selling is for real, the aspirations of the people. Nobody knows whether they are able to materialise the dreams in future or not but the people are with them. Some of the speakers talked democracy in the country. I ask them when did democracy come in the country at all? We did not see democracy in 1990. Also our constitution was not democratic. Do you think democracy means the parliamentary system of Tony Blair? Does not democracy mean something else?”

Referring to Bimalendra’s statement about the threat to democracy, Chintan questioned why his (Bimalendra’s) party was not doing anything about it. “On this question, there is also no unanimity in the constitutional assembly or in the interim government.”

He remarked that the question that was hovering over the political parties was that what would happen if the Maoists became powerful and the parties like the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML were wiped out from the political scene.

“The CPN-UML is fearing its ouster in the event of revolution by the Maoists. My humble submission is that all parties, the royalty, and the Maoists all of them together must form an all-party national government and create an independent and free election system. If the talks with the Maoists result in forming of the constitutional assembly, please do that. The people attending this meet can move in that direction,” Chintan pleaded.

Rajendra Rawal: Rajendra Rawal said the speakers have pointed out towards the mistakes and weaknesses committed in Nepal and drew attention towards the inadequacies in social life and in the system as a whole but why the discussions were at all taking place in the ASF or in India.

“Let us find it out why it has not been possible for us to initiate this dialogue in Nepal. Why we have grabbed the ASF opportunity? Secondly, the participants here constitute most of the Nepali people living in India. Only a small number has come from Nepal actually. Also, we must explore why these people were compelled to migrate? Why people are not staying back in Nepal? This we must ask ourselves. The question does not relate to livelihood only. Moreover, this has been going on for a long time. But now the situation has changed. Why anybody above 14 years of does not want to stay back? Why this situation? This is one grey area we must contemplate about,” Rawal pointed out.

He said another important thing was to examine the inadequacies of the system and formulate plans for redress. He also advocated an amendment to the constitution adding that even for referendum, constitutional amendment was a must but presently there was no such provision in the constitution.

He said the people were compelled to live in penury. In an area like Karnali they have nothing to eat. The ‘liberated’ bonded labourers have no home, they were spending their nights under trees. Dalits were not being allowed to get water from the village water sources.

Thakur Gaire: Thakur Gaire said it was really good that the issues related to corruption, unemployment, social disparities and students etc., were being discussed in the workshop and but the discussions were being selective. “These problems have become grave and we all agree to that but the appraisal is selective and to the individual’s convenience. For example, Pradip Giri continues to be an important part of a political party that during its rule bought expensive vehicles, Pajeros, for the MPs and the MPs were ‘bought’ to replace the Prime Minister and even sent on foreign tours. It is easy to teach others rather. Following the same path is difficult,” he quipped. Referring to the remark of Renu that the people themselves should come forward to form the government because parties were helpless, Thakur ridiculed that President of Maiti Nepal, an organisation considered clean, was also part of the present government in Nepal.

“Where this country is heading for. The corrupt NGOs cannot be the representatives of the people. I do not know what Renu Rajbhandari’s organisation is doing but most of them are corrupt. A vigil has to be maintained on the political parties and told that coming up to people’s aspirations was their primarily job. How wonderful it is that one who was a trader yesterday is our king today. Everybody knows how he has acquired that seat. More than 2.5 crore people in their heart of hearts do not accept him as their king. His steps are against the people of Nepal. We must agree to it. We also agree that the Maoist problem needs to be settled through negotiations. We are unable to bring the Maoists to the negotiation table and identify the areas where common point can be agreed upon, but this is not happening,” he lamented.

Gopalmani Sigdel: Gopalmani Sigdel concentrated on two points, one about democracy in the King’s pocket and another about democracy in the hands of people. “When democracy is in the hands of people, the job of strengthening lies in the hands of people as well as the leaders. People’s honest participation strengthens democracy. But we are so sick politically that we even do not attend the funeral of other party leaders. Fight with each other. There is no co-operation, no sense of brotherhood. We lost 12 precious years of democracy just pulling each other’s legs, doing nothing. We in fact belittled democracy. The leaders used their cadres for their vested interests. Now, the situation is worse. They will have to mend their ways or else …”

He blamed that the idioms of the political parties were self promoting. “If Pradip Giri said that his party was ready for mending its way, this gives a feeling that they will be happy if Deuba is elected the Prime Minister once again. Similarly, Girijababu says one who spoke in Biratnagar is not incarnation of Vishnu but people themselves. Likewise, demanding restoration of parliament gives an impression that Girijababu wants to be the Prime Minister for the fifth time. Madhav Nepal says nobody can stop the people now, by saying this he wants to actually convey that he may be the most right choice for the prime ministership. And ultimately, the Maoists speak the same language. Baburam Bhattarai will be appointed the Prime Minister and Prachanda will also agree to it. So this is the plight. Therefore, I suggest that the political parties evolve a consensus to decide whether or not royalty is necessary in Nepal for strengthening democracy in the country,” Sigdel concluded.

Nina Sherpa: Nina Sherpa of the Nepali Sherpa Association appreciated that the pparticipants drew attention towards the past mistakes. She added that in a world where there was much talk about alternatives, it was necessary to think about a turn around. “What will be the shape of that model, we must concentrate on that right now,” she recommended.

Navaraj Paudel: Navaraj Paudel suggested that the popular government that came to power with majority after restoration of democracy in 1990 actually became a victim of ambition. As a result, it announced mid-term polls hoping to return to power with a clear two-thirds majority, but something else was in store, everything changed and the CPN-UML came out to be the largest single party. Majority was in no party’s favour. At that time the Maoists, who believed in the same constitution though with reservations, were also part of the process. “The point is that the political parties could not look beyond the hung verdict, hence problems were bound to multiply,” he concluded.

Til Bahadur Vishwakarma: Til Bahadur Vishwakarma threw light on the plight of the Nepali migrants in different parts of the world and especially in India. He wondered why the participants did not talk about the Nepali migrants. He regretted that the Nepali constitution also did not speak for the migrants even as there were more than four million Nepali migrants in India and several thousand in other parts of the world. Vishwakarma said that there was no data information about the Nepali migrants with the Nepali or the Indian government, not to talk about a policy for them.

“In what conditions the Nepali migrants have been living in India and under what circumstances they have been migrating to India needs serious discussion. The Nepali migrants have no rights, in fact. It is strange that the Nepali constitution speaks for the animals and the birds but not for the migrants. The political parties also do not speak for them. Are not the migrants part of the Nepali society? Is it not the duty of the political parties to think about them,” he questioned passionately.”

Tika Bhattarai: Tika Bhattarai said that the values of democracy were destroyed in Nepal the day the local bodies were dissolved. He said it has to be examined whether people accepted this or not. Also, he said the need was to contemplate why the democracy was weakened.

Shyam Shrestha: Shyam Shrestha said that after listening to the speakers he has come to the conclusion that the 4^th October decree of the King was anti-people. “Therefore, such actions have to be opposed tooth and nail but those who enjoyed power for 12 years are mainly responsible for the present situation. They should be introspective about this. They should also review their actions. The point is that we after all need the political parties. We all should evolve a common programme and fight against oppression. Parties should evolve unanimity on certain issues. However, I see unanimity on all these issues here. We must talk about comprehensive change in our country in the areas – economic, social and political. The agenda for a change has to be discussed. There may be unanimity on that and there may a solution to the problem. But one thing we must understand that in future we have to address both the Maoists as well as the reactionary forces. Without addressing these problems, there won’t be much success,” he maintained.

He said that for strengthening democracy it was necessary to get support from various quarters. Friends in other South Asian countries could be contacted in this regard. He also pointed out that a collective struggle was not possible with each party drawing its own programme or agenda separately for the sake of vested interests. “ However, in some shapes and shades, the struggle is already on. The CPN-UML demonstration was part of it. Similarly, Basantpur programme was part of it. All are doing this according to their strength but this cannot be decisive. Lukewarm water cannot cook rice. You can understand what I mean. All parties and organisations must come together and draw a common programme for restoration of democracy. If all of us are united in struggle, the royalty will have to revert. We do not need separate slogans for this.

“We must work hard for revocation of the royal decree and launch a united struggle for the attainment of fully empowered all-party government. Rest will spring later, even solution to the Maoist problem. No single party is capable enough to take the nation forward. Therefore, there is need for an all-party convention for exploring such possibilities by the parties themselves, not by the king. The all-party convention may be responsible for holding elections in the country eventually leading the country to normalcy,” he suggested.

He concluded that there was a great need for a common agenda. The discussion has to be on this issue. Also, it has to be taken into account why the political parties have not gone to the villages for last 12 years, why they have shown no sympathy towards the dalits, the marginalised. “They only concentrated their energies on amassing wealth and encouraging corruption,” he complained, adding that forums like the ASF should be used for strengthening democracy in Nepal and in building solidarity among different democratic forces in the country.

Conclusion: Most of the speakers expressed their concern over the prevailing socio-political and economic situation in Nepal in view of the King Gyanendra taking hold of main institutions of governance and executive powers in his hands. The speakers expressed their concern over the little space for free activities of the political parties and civil society groups in the country. They also suggested ways and means to tackle Maoist violence in the country and suggested that peace was the only answer to the strengthening of the political forces and democracy as a whole. The participants resolved to launch a united and unified movement in Nepal for the restoration and strengthening of democracy there. They said the ASF opportunity would play a catalyst’s role.

Report complied by Suresh Nautiyal, Coordinator of the South Asian Dialogues on Ecological Democracy with assistance of Chris Mary Kurian. Transcription support by Deepak Bhatt.

For Hindi click here

Copyleft. Any part of the content on this site can be used, reproduced, or distributed freely by anyone, anywhere and by any means. Acknowledgement is appreciated.

Designed and maintained by CAPITAL Creations, New Delhi. Phone 91-11-26194291