Polarized Politics: Jeopardized Democracy

¹Gopal Krishna Siwakoti, PhD

Historical Perspective

During the past six decades of Nepal's tenuous body politics, in which autocratic rule was twice punctuated by constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy, freedom often gave way to political anarchy and public disenchantment rather than contentment. That happened because of a perpetual power tussle among political parties and monarchy and continued neglect of social and economic development. A compromise between the late King Birendra and parties in 1990 helped formalize a British-style constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. Many hoped, including freedom-lovers in the west, that Nepal had finally crossed the democratic threshold. The developments on February 1, 2005 in Nepal, in which brother King Gyanendra re-enacted his father's 1960 coup d’état and in some respects even outdid his late father King Mahendra, shocked any freedom-lover, especially at this time when the western world was pursuing a vigorous policy of spreading freedom abroad. The popular uprising of 2006 that followed the royal takeover ousted the 240 years long monarchic system paving the way for a revised multi-party system that was different from the Westminster model (federal republican system) with the promulgation of a new constitution in 2015 through a Constituent Assembly election. A Comprehensive Peace Agreement was also concluded in the same year to consolidate the peace process in which, most importantly, the transitional justice mechanisms were envisioned to confront the atrocities of the ten year-long internal armed conflict in the country which saw a massive violation of human rights and humanitarian law, including the death of more than 13,000 and enforced disappearance of nearly 1,300 people.

The Scale of Exclusion

The elite dominate even progressive realms like the media and human rights groups. Cultural discrimination plays itself out in discrimination based on language and religion, and more broadly in the limiting of access to resources. Exclusion goes beyond culture, however, and includes discrimination based on ethnic/caste status, language, class, gender, region, and religion. There are also problems rooted in the electoral structure, which does not represent the interests of the marginalized electorate. The major challenges remain with how the state and political parties respond to the demand of Madesh, ethnic groups, women, Dalit, and other marginalized groups. Madhesi, the plain origin communities have been expressing their long-standing grievances of not being including in decision making process of political governance since its establishment. For many, achieving these aims was through federalism, which has been finally embodied in the new constitution. It is believed that such a system could provide the right balance of state action and decentralization, allowing inclusion through cultural autonomy, empowering marginalized groups, and moldings public policy to better reflect the interests of the entire public. There are also opportunities for better management of ethnic conflict, for more efficient and responsive administration, for regionally-balanced economic development, and for more decentralization and local-level experimentation. In this context, the new constitution has removed the clauses of the old constitution that made Nepal a Hindu state by making provisions for the just representation of all communities; the principle of proportional representation as a mechanism for power sharing; a three-tier government and the devolution of power and resources; along with federalism with autonomous units. However, the country still has a serious exclusion problem in all of its institutions, including parliament, bureaucracy, and security organs. Exclusion goes beyond culture; it includes discrimination based on ethnic/caste status, language, class, gender, region, and religion. Now the debate is in the apex to redefine the entire future political structure based on the principle of genuine inclusion. It would help to promote equality and justice, consolidate and deepen democracy, and mitigate violent ethnic conflicts.

State of Electoral Democracy

Despite political tensions and logistical and operational challenges, the voting process in Nepal’s elections have generally been well-conducted and reflected a serious effort to respect international obligations for genuinely democratic elections. Constraints are witnessed in the areas of violations of the code of conduct, including violence and vote-buying, uncontrolled campaign finance regulation, absence of out of country voting, untimely dispute resolution, and weak electoral education. However, there has been a major setback of the democratic consolidation process after Parliament was dissolved in December 2020, raising concerns about the future of the country’s constitutional democracy. An overwhelming majority of legal experts declared it to be unconstitutional. The PM’s decision followed an extended conflict within his ruling Party, formed in 2018 after the merger of the erstwhile Maoist party and United Marxist Leninist Party. Anticipating a vote of no confidence by the majority of his own party’s legislators, the PM moved to scrap the house and call for early elections amidst the COVID19 pandemic. After a decade-long process of contested constitution-writing, many had hoped that the new government elected in 2017 would mark a path to political stability. The latest development has pushed Nepal from a simmering political crisis to a path of constitutional crisis. While the PM’s decision to dissolve the parliament appeared to be an example of parliamentary politicking, it produced deeper implications. Beyond its impact on the future of Nepal’s political stability, it also endangered one of the key gains of post-conflict politics in the country: federalism, one of the main demands of various groups in the years leading up to the new constitution. Nepal’s new federal structure represents the most challenging aspect of the implementation of the 2015 constitution.

COVID19 Pandemic and Civic Space

The pandemic situation is increasing inequality and raising many human rights concerns since the very basic needs of the people with disabilities, older persons, people with preexisting health problems, and other vulnerable groups are unfulfilled or compromised (NGO Federation of Nepal-NFN). The pandemic has also resulted in shrinking democracy and civic space. Oftentimes, democratic practices are compromised. Freedom of assembly and association, right to information and participation, freedom of expression, and press freedom have deteriorated. At this challenging time, dissemination of right and authentic information is required but arrests of media persons, forceful removal of online content, shutdown of online media outlets, threats and attacks on media persons, misuse of cyber law have been observed. Civil society voices and public participation are undermined during the pandemic (NFN). Freedom of peaceful assembly and association, rights and freedom of the people to association, speech, movement and migration are severely constrained. It may be necessary to consider the right balance and approach in terms of the pandemic, but even if the people wanted to express their dissatisfaction, make demands and demonstrate, the people were not allowed to do so. There were dozens of cases in which the police used excessive force to disperse the demonstrators, made arrests and fired tear gas. Protests expressing discontent with the pandemic response have been met with excessive force and arrests.

The Federation in its latest research report has outlined that there have been further attempts by the authorities to impose new restrictions on the internet and the media. Civil society has raised concerns at the judicial harassment of a journalist and the death of another senior journalist. There are also concerns about internet restrictions with new bylaws of the Nepal Telecommunications Authority. It further erodes internet freedoms, rule of law, and democracy. As an impact of the pandemic, 3190 journalists out of 8410 were said to have lost their jobs. According to Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists, journalists have been threatened in connection with their reporting on the coronavirus. The source of this news has described of over a dozen cases of the threats and harassment to the journalists who were reporting coronavirus cases.

Safeguarding Democracy

The basic needs and demands of people have remained largely unmet as the system of political governance does not appear to be improving as expected. Feudal, hierarchical, patriarchal and patron client relationship has to be restructured which is the major characteristics of a political, social and economic governing system. The transitional justice mechanisms must start producing results in favor of rendering justice to the victims. The country is at the crossroads of its socio-political transition, as it has plunged into a political crisis and renewed instability after the recent dissolution of the parliament and subsequent restatement followed by a split and massive political rift among political parties. The parties must realize their past mistakes and correct their working styles. Since the court invalidated the PM’s decision to hold elections, chances of a deep crisis ahead are growing and uncertainties are rapidly looming vividly threatening political stability in the country. The tendency of political parties engaging in horse-trading should be closely monitored as a part of social auditing. Wasteful strikes and muscular display of strength needs to be immediately brought to an end since ordinary Nepalis find national politics a strange match in which its ground rules are being continuously perverted and challenged. CSOs now should more proactively engage in ensuring free, fair, peaceful and credible elections. Political parties must comply with fundamentals of good governance and the rule of law. Organizing training courses on law, human rights, and democracy as part of civic education package, with the participation of citizens and local authorities is an important effort along with civic surveillance of the governance system. Making Nepal's democracy more inclusive has become essential to the success of the peace process. This means increasing the participation of many groups who have been underrepresented in parties, government and national institutions-women, ethnic communities, caste groups, regionally underrepresented groups, and others. Despite this, with the presence of a strong and proactive civil society, there are still some rays of hopes that Nepal will be transformed to a true democratic and equitable state that respects the democratic freedom, human rights, and human dignity.