Nepal

The frills of democracy

Bullied by the Maoists, the Koirala government has repeatedly subverted the constitutional process, comments Prakash Nanda

  The end of the year 2007 coincided with the end of a historic institution of South Asia and of the world. The so-called seven-power alliance and the Maoists (who killed nearly 15,000 of their fellow citizens between 1996 and 2006) ruling Nepal have decided to terminate the 240-year-old monarchy. Nepal will now be known as a Federal Democratic Republic. The world has lost its ‘only Hindu State (or Kingdom)’ because the King in Nepal has been considered to be an incarnation of the God Vishnu.
   It was on 26 September 1768 that King Prithvi Narayan Shah arrived in Kathmandu and was welcomed by Kumari, the Living Goddess (a tradition unique to Nepal). That day marked the high point of the unification of Nepal. Prithvi Narayan Shah had succeeded to the throne of Gorkha in 1743.
   At the centre of much of Nepal’s present turmoil has been King Gyanendra, the 12th Shah-dynasty monarch. His tumultuous reign began in 2001 after a palace massacre in which the crown prince was accused of gunning down nine members of the royal family, including Gyanendra’s older brother Birendra, and then killing himself.
   Four years later, Gyanendra dismissed parliament and seized total power, saying he would bring order to a chaotic political scene and quell the Maoist insurgency. But the insurgency worsened, and the economy faltered. To silence the opposition Gyanendra jailed critics and banned criticism of himself, his government and the army. As a result, the Maoists joined forces with Nepal’s main parties to orchestrate weeks of unrest in April 2006 that ended with Gyanendra’s restoring parliament and thus surrendering to the present ruling alliance in 2006. This alliance had been systematically degrading his authority and position since then.

However, the death knell of the monarchy has been rung under dubious circumstances. When the ruling alliance assumed power one and a half years ago under an arrangement that had the blessings of India, the United States and Great Britain, it was envisaged that an elected Constituent Assembly would decide whether Nepal would remain a constitutional monarchy or become a republic. Elections were supposed to be held for constituting that Assembly in June 2007. The election date was later postponed to November 2007 and then again to April 2008.
   Earlier, it was envisaged that there would be 497 members of the Constituent Assembly, with proportional representation for 50% of the seats and the rest to be directly elected. The election procedure as envisaged currently is for a 601-member Constituent Assembly, of which 335 seats will be filled through proportional representation, 240 seats by direct election, and 26 seats by nominated members. Through political blackmail and by holding out the threat of returning to his murderous campaign, Prachanda, the leader of the Maoists, has forced the interim government of Prime Minister G.P. Koirala to abandon the constitutional path. Instead of limiting its task to holding a free and fair poll to elect a Constituent Assembly that would draft a Constitution, the government has allowed itself to be bullied into taking decisions that lack legitimacy and by no means reflect the popular will.
   Many senior leaders of the Nepali Congress, arguably the country’s most popular party, have already revolted against Koirala’s abject surrender on symbolic monarchy. Some of the world’s finest democracies — Great Britain and Japan — venerate their monarchs as symbols of national unity and integrity, they point out.
   The Maoists have virtually won the election without a single vote being cast. Prachanda has also said that he wants to be the president of the Nepalese Republic for the first two years. Now he stands a good chance of fulfilling his ambition. Former minister and peace negotiator Pradeep Gyawali has said, ‘We have suspicions about the integrity of the Maoists, about their fully entering in the democratic system and total abandonment of violence.’
   Joining the political mainstream is a tactical move by the Maoists designed to subvert the state from within and seize power. The interim objectives are to locate Maoists in trade unions, bureaucracy and other state institutions to shape the environment. Prime Minister Koirala has also been successfully pressurised to accept Prachanda’s demand that his PLA (People’s Liberation Army) has equal status with the Nepal Army (which means treating the formal armed forces of the country on par with the rebel forces) and will be integrated into the army on his terms. He has also ensured that his Young Communist League (YCL) will be absorbed as a paramilitary force. Though the PLA and the Army are inactive these days and under the direct scrutiny of the United Nations, the YCL cadres are creating havoc in Nepal’s countryside.
   Even though the Maoists have declared peace, the spate of killings, abduction and extortion continue. Nepalese journalist and civil rights activist Kamla Sarup writes: ‘Nepalese today live in very uncertain times. After a decade of fighting, the war — with its violence and killings — has become institutionalised. The Maoists’ victims and ordinary people are suffering on a daily basis. The hills are burning, the killing fields are spread all over Nepal, and now the Terai region is burning. On one side, the United Nations is collecting arms — on the other side the Maoists are fully armed and ready to do battle.… Police conducted raids on the offices of the Young Communist League to search for weapons, but gave them a clean bill. Who are we trying to fool? What worries me is that Nepal will become like some African countries, with no law and order, and marauding gangs roaming the countryside and even in the capital after some time.’
   The Maoists have not kept their promise to dismantle their parallel administration in the countryside. Though the PLA is confined to camps, armed cadres of the YCL are at large. The peace and political processes have no mechanism to enforce agreements. Thus, while the Maoists are changing the goalposts, other political forces have shown little capacity to deal with unrest.
   Maoists are not popular in the plains of Nepal bordering India, known as the Terai belt. Nepal’s strategic underbelly, Terai is the country’s granary and industrial and communications hub. Terai contains 47% of Nepal’s 26 mn population, one-third land area and 21 of the 75 districts. The people are Tharus, Pahadis and Madhesis. Historically, Madhes has been a victim of discrimination and deprivation. Madhesis are now demanding their rights. Many of their leaders have resorted to arms. Political violence in this belt in 2007 alone has taken more than a hundred lives. Some radical leaders of the region are even demanding formal independence. Nepal is Terai-locked and gets paralysed in the event of unrest in Madhes.
   Mahantha Thakur, formerly a senior cabinet minister, who recently severed his ties with the Nepali Congress to launch the Tarai-Madhes Democratic Party (TMDP) insists that the ‘identity, rights and dignity’ of the Madhesi people must be safeguarded. The Maoists, who otherwise champion the cause of oppressed nationalities and real democracy, are not prepared for it. Their cadres are waging gunbattles against the Madhesi dissidents.
In sum, the abolition of monarchy will not necessarily usher genuine democracy in Nepal. That goalpost is miles away.