Pre- and post-CA challenges

FROM: nepalelectionportal.or and ekantipur.com

BY: DIPENDRA JHA

As the CA polls come closer, some contentious issues have come to the
fore that need serious consideration and wider discussion. However, a
wider discourse on the pre- and post-CA scenarios has yet to take
place. There is not much time till election day, and these challenges
need to be tackled by the political parties and others in a mature
fashion.
Pre-CA scenario

Electoral violence is very possible in many parts of the tarai and some
other parts of the country. In the tarai, the violence seems to be the
work of various armed groups. Elsewhere in the country, the activities
of the Maoist YCL have clearly shown that the road to the polls is
going to be a bumpy one.

The incidents in Ramechhap, Darchula, Kaski, Sindhupalchok, Dhankuta
and some other districts are a few of the examples of pre-CA violence
instigated by the YCL. The seven political parties and the government
are yet to respond in a formal and systematic manner. Their inaction
has increased the chances of the situation becoming worse.

The eight-point agreement between the United Democratic Madhesi Front
(UDMF) and the government was supposed to create a conducive
environment for the election in the tarai. There were high expectations
that the agreement would exert moral pressure on the armed groups to at
least not disrupt the CA polls. The violence is unlikely to end, and
people do not feel any kind of change in terms of their safety and
security when we look at the individual threats. The armed bands have
raised questions over the recent agreement and the CA process. Some of
the groups have formally announced bandas and strikes during the
election. They have also published a hit list.

The agreement could have made not only the gun-toting bands but also
the people feel that their issues had been widely recognized. Only one
new point was added to the eight-point demand of the UDMF following the
previous 22-point agreement signed between the government and the
MJF—mass enlistment of Madhesis in the Nepal Army—which, however, was
immediately rejected by the Nepal Army itself.

Recent calls to sign up for the NA do not seem to have attracted the
interest of Madhesi youths. Similarly, the young people of Morang,
Siraha, Dhanusha and other districts in the tarai have not shown any
enthusiasm to work as temporary policemen for the CA polls. The cool
response is only natural as the demand put forward by the UDMF was
itself criticized by the people for being impractical and against
principles. Unless we deal with the existing racial perception
regarding the NA, APF and Nepal Police, it will be very difficult to
include the Madhesis.

The NA has been working as a repressive tool of the ruling elite to
repress the democratic movements of different ethnic groups and
political forces. The immediate objection of the NA regarding
participation of Madhesi youths in the army contributed to boosting the
argument of ultras campaigning for a boycott of the NA’s call for
applications.

To address these challenges, we need wider “inclusion” of Madhesis and
other marginalized people in every state organ, including the security
agencies, along with their democratization. That needs a clear vision
and plan for restructuring the state, including the security sector
reform.

On the other hand, the role of the human rights community and the UN
and other international agencies working in Nepal is also vital in
addressing the pre-CA challenges. It would be relevant to cite one
example here. The OHCHR-Nepal has not published the reports of its
fact-finding missions, including reports of the incidents in
Kapilvastu, Nepalgunj and Gaur and the overall situation in the tarai.
It is believed that the OHCHR-Nepal has sufficient information obtained
from its field visits regarding the root causes of the human rights
violations and excessive use of force in the country including the
tarai. But why it is not making them accessible to the general people
is a matter of concern.

In times of violence and conflict, the role of such agencies in making
the people and concerned stakeholders aware of factual information is
vital. There has to be transparency in the work of the UN agencies in
Nepal, the NHRC and the human rights community because that’s the only
way of dealing with the issue of impunity. There is a need for more
confident diplomacy, straightforward dealing and professional
engagement of these actors to end impunity and promote human rights.

Another pre-CA challenge is the unhealthy competition among the
political parties. They have been campaigning so vehemently one would
think the election was being held to form a majority government. The
main objective of the CA is obviously to draft a new constitution. But
the political parties seem to have forgotten this, and their misplaced
zeal has contributed to the electoral violence.

Post-CA scenario

The post-CA scenario can be more challenging. The reason behind this is
clear as the politics, economy, social relations and overall attitudes
of the key stakeholders are controlled by a small elite. There are many
traditional, religious and cultural practices, which promote
discrimination and inequality against those who are poor and
“voiceless” besides strengthening the position of the elite.

The feudal mindset and practices rooted in the political parties and
state agencies—including the bureaucracy and security agencies—are the
major obstacles. They have to be transformed and democratized,
otherwise it will be almost impossible to address the longstanding
issues of discrimination based on caste, ethnicity, gender, class and
religion besides resolving the crisis of deprivation and exploitation
that the landless, poor and marginalized people have been suffering.

How to bring equality, justice and self-determination to the people is,
of course, a difficult question to answer; but that difficulty will
also test the competency of the political parties.

The issue of land and agriculture is central to the prevalent
discrimination and marginalization, which need to be dealt with fairly.
Land deprivation is not only related to entitlement to a certain
portion of land. It is strongly related to the caste system, social and
cultural practices and the political power-sharing which determines the
state’s policies and programs. For example, if we want to ensure the
rights of Dalits, we must work for land reform. If we want to address
the violence against women and protect their rights, the core of the
agenda should be to promote land ownership by women. Education,
empowerment and employment are central to all the agendas regardless of
whether they have to do with state restructuring, providing justice to
victims or national progress. The CA should adopt a pro-poor
development strategy, which may again be disrupted by the elite.

Including marginalized and disadvantaged people in the state apparatus
and socio-economic relationship is another major concern. Inclusiveness
is not just related to representation; but also to active
participation, ownership and orientation to change. The CA should
ensure this in the constitution and provide the people a clear roadmap
to be implemented immediately by the state and other stakeholders.

Only if we are committed to these basic principles can we act on
them. State restructuring, inclusiveness, democratization of the
security agencies, bureaucracy and other productive sectors, justice to
all (particularly to those victimized), an end to violence and
assurance of peace and security are a few of the areas that need such a
commitment. A rights-based approach to development and democratization
and human rights-governed thinking can only successfully deal with
these challenges.

Only a political culture which allows subaltern voices to be heard and
deals with the issues of the poorest of the poor can accommodate the
post-CA challenges.