Much has been said, talked, read and written about the two coercive modalities of Federalism in Nepal. The discussions, opinions and lectures have helped me personally to learn about these vague looking terms, and I’m in a way enjoying this by-product of political dilemma or a dead lock in the sense that I have become a good learner these days, as whatever is happening around me, be it table talk or the Bandh calamities, I'm ultimately being helped to grasp the practicalities that rarely come associated with theoretical understanding; thanks to the political deadlock.
The first part of this article is purely based on my own thoughts. In the second part, I fast forward the time and space to ten years from the time Nepal would have been demarcated into federal states, to imagine the situation in my country in a light-hearted, yet thoughtful (not quite though :) ) manner.
Part 1
I consider myself as a “no-value” common man who tends to express his ideas and thoughts; 'no-value' only on presumption that my words probably might be negated by the so-called highly-positioned-and-educated intellect community. However, I take this remark (which if remarked) as an opportunity rather than a discouragement while those big-heads get busy to label my thoughts as ‘baseless’ and ‘unpractical’ or ‘a kind of false-idealism’.
I enjoy writing my views. I am quite helpless to restrain this habit of mine, hence apologies if this doesn't turn out to be a piece you were expecting for.
While the issue of modalities of Federalism is being discussed, the first question that pops in my mind: why do we need Federalism? I would like to quote Dr. Bhimarjun Acharya here who rightly says (at least I think he's right), “Political leaders have highly exaggerated and have bluntly treated the ‘Constitution’ as the one and only ‘Magic wand’ to solve all existing problems in Nepal”.
Chemical reaction in my brain comments: 'So could be with the term ‘Federalism. ‘'
Intellects argue - if 'Federalism' be established, development would be better ensured, and with right delivery of services and decentralization of government every member of the society would be able to enjoy the benefits and facilities which they are deemed to by virtue of their citizenship (or ethnicity/caste ?)
I doubt if 'Federalism' alone will bring such positive impact. Why doubt? 'coz I've my own sets of logics and reasons to validate my doubt; and I have already apologized to my readers, this might stand just as an elaboration of my thoughts and ideas and might not turn out to be a brilliant piece.
I ask, what did we lack for all these years that has been hindering development and economic growth in Nepal? Federalism? Was it the absence of government at local level, or was it the absence of systematic governance? Today’s Nepal has already been divided into 5 Development Regions, 14 Zones, 75 districts, blah blah municipalities, blah blah VDCs (please convert blah blah into logical number yourself, 'm quite weak in numbers). All municipalities and VDCs are further divided into astronomical figures of ward samitis and all. And, each of these structures surely has/had a governmental presence, at least in documents. So, in a way, though we hadn’t named the existing system of demarcation as federal, or that might not be considered as an adult form of federalism, but we surely had the structure. We surely had the basic manifestation of Federalism in our country.
No one, these days, seem to analyze whether the Maoist war was necessary in Nepal. I defend, it was absolutely not necessary (again I do it on my own logical terms). This doesn’t mean I support Monarchy, no way. I’m against Monarchy and any statement that supports monarchy. That being said, the Monarchy-related problems (if there were genuinely any) could have been more easily solved without any need of using arms and weapons, without compromising thousands of Nepali lives. And, in the end, how did the monarchy end? The monarchy was not thrown out as a result of Maoist war (though it appears like that), but out of the collective non-violent efforts of civil society and political leaders. Well, for some (including Ex-King), it was instigated by political leaders alone - as a result of their deceptive agitation, without direct participation of 'people', and that alone is a different topic to debate, something which I'm not interested to discuss here.
Maoists created a hubbub around the necessity of Constitution Assembly, and hence justified the need of their war. But, their puffed up logic to support their theory of such necessity is the root reason why our country is trapped into the current political deadlock. I think, people, including the Maoist army, were always misguided. They were persuaded to believe that the Constitution Assembly would take away all their tears and sufferings; compelled to believe that the root cause of their pain lies not in anything except caste-based / ethnic based suppression; and their complicated probems can only be solved through complete isolation from another group, so called 'high caste' groups; completely ignoring the fact that those suppressed, oppressed and mistreated were not only from those lower caste; an act - something I love to compare with Mohammad Ali Jinnah's ideologies during Free India Movement, who favored that 'his' (supposedly only 'his') muslim brothers would be happy only if they were religiously isolated from Hindus.
Nepali people had helped the leaders to constitute the much hyped Constitution Assembly sacrificing every deal of their happiness in the form of tears and blood, and just when they were expecting to see themselves being freed away from their sufferings by the advertised boon of “Constitution”, the fairy tale magic wand ‘Constitution Assembly’ received the most insulting death ever recorded in the history of Nepal.
I put forward, it’s not necessarily the absence of government at local levels, but the absence of effective system- the deficiency of right conduct, presence of care-free attitude in government staffers and leaders and the deficiency of right governance that have been obstructing the developmental process in Nepal; something that has never been discussed/reviewed among Nepali political arena. So, even when Nepal would be divided into Federal states, the structure might change, but the cause – the root factor would remain intact. Once who used to be the District Head would be placed as a State Head, but that wouldn’t make any overnight changes in the head of the Head. The staffers would not turn dedicated by a stroke of a pen; the root cause behind the calamity would always remain intact unless rightly addressed.
Hence, rather than wasting our efforts and time to fight for the naming and demarcation of number and boundaries of states, we should have worked on to improve the system itself. We should have ensured as to how we could promote youths, their visions and power for the development, and help them lead the country. It’s not the face that needs the polishing; but the brain, not the hardware but the software that needs the repair.
Part 2
Now few words about the other hot-agenda, the alleged ultimate cause that killed CA, glowing issue about the modalities of Federalism; Single-Ethnic-Identity based Federalism or Multi-ethnic based Federalism.
With great respect and regards to the intellect community who might strongly argue for the necessity of Single-Ethnic-Identity based Federalism, I would like to present my own arguments in the following paragraphs.
Why do we need Single-Ethnic-Identity based Federalism? One of the answers to this question, “….’coz with single-ethnic-identity based structure the undermined, suppressed, oppressed and marginalized groups’ representation in every system can be better guaranteed.”
I fully agree. But, my agreement is not for the structure but the value it carries and the objectives it tries to contain. Yes, representation must be ensured for every undermined, suppressed, oppressed and marginalized group.
‘Nepal’- at present time. Supposedly, Brahmins and Chettris have maltreated the communities belonging to lower caste. Their rights have been hindered; their children have no better future and they hardly can reach higher arena of politics. (This is what 'they' state right? 'They' - those who believe that the above statement is a universal truth) So, let's suppose that the above lines are true.
Scenario One
For now, let’s support the idea behind single-ethnic-based federalism and let’s move ahead to structure our nation into single-ethnic-based states so that all those maltreated communities could be helped. So, we have decided to constitute a-one-state Madhesh state in Terai, a-one-state Newa state in Kathmandu, etc. etc.
Ten years from now,
Let’s zoom into Madhesh State. Walk with me in this journey, with an expectation that now Madhesh State must be enjoying the best political and social environment, with every member of the society enjoying equal rights, no maltreatment whatsoever; no any fighting and no complains. Ready? Let’s dig in.
“Who is the Head of the state? "He is a Madhesi." Great! The system has worked. Now, he can make decisions for his community.”
Are all members of his community happy? “No", a faint answer echoes from behind. "We are still not been provided with rights" shouts a Chamar family.
Why? “Coz, Madhesi people are maltreating us. We are still considered untouchables. Our children are not allowed in the schools where their children study. They have lands, buildings but we have nothing.”
And you, we point out to a Brahmin youth out there, “I have just completed my Higher Secondary with great marks in Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Maths. I want to be a doctor but my poor family can’t afford for my higher education. I didn’t get a scholarship. They said they give scholarships to Madhesi – coz they are more marginalized and I belong to upper-caste. And, I don’t have my own state, says my madhesi neighbors here. I’m treated like a refugee here.”
These might be a few exceptions, we try to defend this system. This system can’t fail. Let’s walk further.
While we are having some rest under this tree, we are astonished to see palace-sized buildings. They were not here before. We wonder who those belong to. Let’s ask a pedestrian. A madhesi pedestrain replies “That white one belongs to Upendra Yadav”, “and that one belongs to Bijay Gachhadar”. And which one is yours? “I never had one”, he replies.
We are more surprised to know that the percentage of people living below the poverty line has not been any less even after a decade of Federalism.
Let alone the Millennium Development Goal, even the basic human rights has not been taken cared for. Brahmins and Chettris here, who are in fewer numbers than Madhesis, in records, are being mistreated; they are either not hired by Organizations or given a lower salary.
Even after all these, we are still optimistic. There must be representations for all the groups in the State House, right?? We ask. Statistics speaks, “Yes, we do have, but 2/3 of the voting rights is reserved by upper caste Madhesi people, so the voice of the remaining 1/3 is never taken cared for. “
We dwell back into the memories of time when we were building a single-ethinic-identity-based federal Nepal and then we had promised, “Member of every community would be treated equally irrespective of race, caste or sex, or religion, or the state he/she belongs to”
End of Scenario One
Let’s get back to the present. So, now, we must have realized why the theory of single-ethnic-identity based federalism would not work in future.
What would have happened if it was a multi-ethnic-based-Birat State instead of single-ethinc-identity based Madhes state, let’s dig in?
Scenario Two
Head of State: Higher-caste Madhesi, but hasn’t been able to address the issues of lower-caste Madheshis.
Rights of Chamar addressed?: "Still not cared for, do they exist?"
That Brahmin Youth, did he get the chance to study: "No. Coz, he might be poor but belongs to high-caste group, and that can't justify he is from a marginalized group."
Palace-sized buildings still exist? : Y"es. One belongs to Upendra Yadav. The other one belongs to Sujata Koirala."
Millenimum Development Goal reached? : "Forgotton."
Human rights? : "What is that?"
Representation in State House: "Yes. But no one has a majority, so enough of reason to get busy in political fighting, give and take."
How is the state? "Politically – Great. In official records: Excellent. In reality: Deteriorating"
End of Scenario Two
Oh, even the multi-ethnic-based federalism failed.
Let’s get back to the experts now. Let’s create a Federal (?, new?) Nepal based on scientific reasons, through the analysis of economic laws and after a careful study of developmental issues; not on the basis of ethnicity. Coz, it’s not about ethnicity, but about deficiency of rights, bad governance, poor system, bad attitude of leaders, bad behavior of government staffers, misleading policies and the worst game of politics - the game that has been designed not by the people, but by those leaders belonging to 'i-don't-want-to-change' breed favoring traditional and conservative approach.
Apologies, I couldn’t find a meaningful conclusion to this article. Hope you can.
11 June / Gopal Trital
http://gopaltrital.blogspot.com/
The first part of this article is purely based on my own thoughts. In the second part, I fast forward the time and space to ten years from the time Nepal would have been demarcated into federal states, to imagine the situation in my country in a light-hearted, yet thoughtful (not quite though :) ) manner.
Part 1
I consider myself as a “no-value” common man who tends to express his ideas and thoughts; 'no-value' only on presumption that my words probably might be negated by the so-called highly-positioned-and-educated intellect community. However, I take this remark (which if remarked) as an opportunity rather than a discouragement while those big-heads get busy to label my thoughts as ‘baseless’ and ‘unpractical’ or ‘a kind of false-idealism’.
I enjoy writing my views. I am quite helpless to restrain this habit of mine, hence apologies if this doesn't turn out to be a piece you were expecting for.
While the issue of modalities of Federalism is being discussed, the first question that pops in my mind: why do we need Federalism? I would like to quote Dr. Bhimarjun Acharya here who rightly says (at least I think he's right), “Political leaders have highly exaggerated and have bluntly treated the ‘Constitution’ as the one and only ‘Magic wand’ to solve all existing problems in Nepal”.
Chemical reaction in my brain comments: 'So could be with the term ‘Federalism. ‘'
Intellects argue - if 'Federalism' be established, development would be better ensured, and with right delivery of services and decentralization of government every member of the society would be able to enjoy the benefits and facilities which they are deemed to by virtue of their citizenship (or ethnicity/caste ?)
I doubt if 'Federalism' alone will bring such positive impact. Why doubt? 'coz I've my own sets of logics and reasons to validate my doubt; and I have already apologized to my readers, this might stand just as an elaboration of my thoughts and ideas and might not turn out to be a brilliant piece.
I ask, what did we lack for all these years that has been hindering development and economic growth in Nepal? Federalism? Was it the absence of government at local level, or was it the absence of systematic governance? Today’s Nepal has already been divided into 5 Development Regions, 14 Zones, 75 districts, blah blah municipalities, blah blah VDCs (please convert blah blah into logical number yourself, 'm quite weak in numbers). All municipalities and VDCs are further divided into astronomical figures of ward samitis and all. And, each of these structures surely has/had a governmental presence, at least in documents. So, in a way, though we hadn’t named the existing system of demarcation as federal, or that might not be considered as an adult form of federalism, but we surely had the structure. We surely had the basic manifestation of Federalism in our country.
No one, these days, seem to analyze whether the Maoist war was necessary in Nepal. I defend, it was absolutely not necessary (again I do it on my own logical terms). This doesn’t mean I support Monarchy, no way. I’m against Monarchy and any statement that supports monarchy. That being said, the Monarchy-related problems (if there were genuinely any) could have been more easily solved without any need of using arms and weapons, without compromising thousands of Nepali lives. And, in the end, how did the monarchy end? The monarchy was not thrown out as a result of Maoist war (though it appears like that), but out of the collective non-violent efforts of civil society and political leaders. Well, for some (including Ex-King), it was instigated by political leaders alone - as a result of their deceptive agitation, without direct participation of 'people', and that alone is a different topic to debate, something which I'm not interested to discuss here.
Maoists created a hubbub around the necessity of Constitution Assembly, and hence justified the need of their war. But, their puffed up logic to support their theory of such necessity is the root reason why our country is trapped into the current political deadlock. I think, people, including the Maoist army, were always misguided. They were persuaded to believe that the Constitution Assembly would take away all their tears and sufferings; compelled to believe that the root cause of their pain lies not in anything except caste-based / ethnic based suppression; and their complicated probems can only be solved through complete isolation from another group, so called 'high caste' groups; completely ignoring the fact that those suppressed, oppressed and mistreated were not only from those lower caste; an act - something I love to compare with Mohammad Ali Jinnah's ideologies during Free India Movement, who favored that 'his' (supposedly only 'his') muslim brothers would be happy only if they were religiously isolated from Hindus.
Nepali people had helped the leaders to constitute the much hyped Constitution Assembly sacrificing every deal of their happiness in the form of tears and blood, and just when they were expecting to see themselves being freed away from their sufferings by the advertised boon of “Constitution”, the fairy tale magic wand ‘Constitution Assembly’ received the most insulting death ever recorded in the history of Nepal.
I put forward, it’s not necessarily the absence of government at local levels, but the absence of effective system- the deficiency of right conduct, presence of care-free attitude in government staffers and leaders and the deficiency of right governance that have been obstructing the developmental process in Nepal; something that has never been discussed/reviewed among Nepali political arena. So, even when Nepal would be divided into Federal states, the structure might change, but the cause – the root factor would remain intact. Once who used to be the District Head would be placed as a State Head, but that wouldn’t make any overnight changes in the head of the Head. The staffers would not turn dedicated by a stroke of a pen; the root cause behind the calamity would always remain intact unless rightly addressed.
Hence, rather than wasting our efforts and time to fight for the naming and demarcation of number and boundaries of states, we should have worked on to improve the system itself. We should have ensured as to how we could promote youths, their visions and power for the development, and help them lead the country. It’s not the face that needs the polishing; but the brain, not the hardware but the software that needs the repair.
Part 2
Now few words about the other hot-agenda, the alleged ultimate cause that killed CA, glowing issue about the modalities of Federalism; Single-Ethnic-Identity based Federalism or Multi-ethnic based Federalism.
With great respect and regards to the intellect community who might strongly argue for the necessity of Single-Ethnic-Identity based Federalism, I would like to present my own arguments in the following paragraphs.
Why do we need Single-Ethnic-Identity based Federalism? One of the answers to this question, “….’coz with single-ethnic-identity based structure the undermined, suppressed, oppressed and marginalized groups’ representation in every system can be better guaranteed.”
I fully agree. But, my agreement is not for the structure but the value it carries and the objectives it tries to contain. Yes, representation must be ensured for every undermined, suppressed, oppressed and marginalized group.
‘Nepal’- at present time. Supposedly, Brahmins and Chettris have maltreated the communities belonging to lower caste. Their rights have been hindered; their children have no better future and they hardly can reach higher arena of politics. (This is what 'they' state right? 'They' - those who believe that the above statement is a universal truth) So, let's suppose that the above lines are true.
Scenario One
For now, let’s support the idea behind single-ethnic-based federalism and let’s move ahead to structure our nation into single-ethnic-based states so that all those maltreated communities could be helped. So, we have decided to constitute a-one-state Madhesh state in Terai, a-one-state Newa state in Kathmandu, etc. etc.
Ten years from now,
Let’s zoom into Madhesh State. Walk with me in this journey, with an expectation that now Madhesh State must be enjoying the best political and social environment, with every member of the society enjoying equal rights, no maltreatment whatsoever; no any fighting and no complains. Ready? Let’s dig in.
“Who is the Head of the state? "He is a Madhesi." Great! The system has worked. Now, he can make decisions for his community.”
Are all members of his community happy? “No", a faint answer echoes from behind. "We are still not been provided with rights" shouts a Chamar family.
Why? “Coz, Madhesi people are maltreating us. We are still considered untouchables. Our children are not allowed in the schools where their children study. They have lands, buildings but we have nothing.”
And you, we point out to a Brahmin youth out there, “I have just completed my Higher Secondary with great marks in Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Maths. I want to be a doctor but my poor family can’t afford for my higher education. I didn’t get a scholarship. They said they give scholarships to Madhesi – coz they are more marginalized and I belong to upper-caste. And, I don’t have my own state, says my madhesi neighbors here. I’m treated like a refugee here.”
These might be a few exceptions, we try to defend this system. This system can’t fail. Let’s walk further.
While we are having some rest under this tree, we are astonished to see palace-sized buildings. They were not here before. We wonder who those belong to. Let’s ask a pedestrian. A madhesi pedestrain replies “That white one belongs to Upendra Yadav”, “and that one belongs to Bijay Gachhadar”. And which one is yours? “I never had one”, he replies.
We are more surprised to know that the percentage of people living below the poverty line has not been any less even after a decade of Federalism.
Let alone the Millennium Development Goal, even the basic human rights has not been taken cared for. Brahmins and Chettris here, who are in fewer numbers than Madhesis, in records, are being mistreated; they are either not hired by Organizations or given a lower salary.
Even after all these, we are still optimistic. There must be representations for all the groups in the State House, right?? We ask. Statistics speaks, “Yes, we do have, but 2/3 of the voting rights is reserved by upper caste Madhesi people, so the voice of the remaining 1/3 is never taken cared for. “
We dwell back into the memories of time when we were building a single-ethinic-identity-based federal Nepal and then we had promised, “Member of every community would be treated equally irrespective of race, caste or sex, or religion, or the state he/she belongs to”
End of Scenario One
Let’s get back to the present. So, now, we must have realized why the theory of single-ethnic-identity based federalism would not work in future.
What would have happened if it was a multi-ethnic-based-Birat State instead of single-ethinc-identity based Madhes state, let’s dig in?
Scenario Two
Head of State: Higher-caste Madhesi, but hasn’t been able to address the issues of lower-caste Madheshis.
Rights of Chamar addressed?: "Still not cared for, do they exist?"
That Brahmin Youth, did he get the chance to study: "No. Coz, he might be poor but belongs to high-caste group, and that can't justify he is from a marginalized group."
Palace-sized buildings still exist? : Y"es. One belongs to Upendra Yadav. The other one belongs to Sujata Koirala."
Millenimum Development Goal reached? : "Forgotton."
Human rights? : "What is that?"
Representation in State House: "Yes. But no one has a majority, so enough of reason to get busy in political fighting, give and take."
How is the state? "Politically – Great. In official records: Excellent. In reality: Deteriorating"
End of Scenario Two
Oh, even the multi-ethnic-based federalism failed.
Let’s get back to the experts now. Let’s create a Federal (?, new?) Nepal based on scientific reasons, through the analysis of economic laws and after a careful study of developmental issues; not on the basis of ethnicity. Coz, it’s not about ethnicity, but about deficiency of rights, bad governance, poor system, bad attitude of leaders, bad behavior of government staffers, misleading policies and the worst game of politics - the game that has been designed not by the people, but by those leaders belonging to 'i-don't-want-to-change' breed favoring traditional and conservative approach.
Apologies, I couldn’t find a meaningful conclusion to this article. Hope you can.
11 June / Gopal Trital
http://gopaltrital.blogspot.com/
