Source:
http://www.ekantipur.com/ Ensuring Victory Was of the People By Anil J. Shahi
The most recent proclamation by the King to restore the dissolved House of Parliament, and the subsequent welcome of the decision as the “people’s victory†by the Seven-Party Alliance comes as a bitter disappointment to those who believed the movement could have – or should have -- achieved much more: A Republican Democracy. What Nepal needs, we believe, is a total structural transformation, not just a power shift from feudalistic guardians to political elites. The total annihilation of the feudal structure, which protected the monarchy, and which, as in the post-1990 revolution, will probably continue to protect the political elites, should have been the ultimate goal of the recent movement. Given that the movement had gained tremendous momentum towards achieving that goal, sudden “agreement†to end it is seen by many as a great opportunity sorely missed.
Well, we have been hit by a heavy dose of realpolitik. The masses on the streets were probably beginning to feel battle-fatigue; common Kathmanduites beginning to feel the pinch caused by soaring prices of food, or the lack thereof. Many were likely getting tired of almost three weeks of curfews and unrests. The international community, particularly the Indians, still held firm to their long-standing policy of “twin pillars†in Nepal. And, most importantly, our so-called leaders never had the courage, or the vision, to believe in Nepal without the monarchy. Their demand of the revival of the dissolved House of Parliament was fundamentally flawed right from the beginning -- I am still wondering how the House that is to be governed by the Constitution of 1990, which does not allow amendments on the issue of a constitutional monarch, will be able to announce a Constituent Assembly that would ensure that the fate of the monarchy will be decided by the people.
Given that the outcome of the movement, however bitter, is probably sealed for now, I, for one, am willing to accept defeat and look forward, and try to make the most out of it. If the political leadership is to prove to the Nepalis that the movement was genuinely targeted at restoring sovereignty on the people, and not merely another grab at power, they must then act swiftly and decisively on several issues that are of utmost urgency at this transitional period.
First and foremost, they must consider replacing the Constitution of 1990 with an interim constitution. The new constitution must severely curtail the authority of the king. This should include, but not be limited to, his command of the army. Given the king’s notorious past records, there is a distinct possibility of him ordering the troops back into the barracks once again, making it extremely difficult for the new government to rule. In order to ensure firm loyalty of the army to the civilian government in the new structure, it might even be advisable that the new interim government replace senior army officials who might still hold utmost loyalty to the king with those who would be likely to submit to the collective will of the people of Nepal. The declaration of a new interim constitution would also pave the way for an unconditional Constituent Assembly election, ensuring that the fate of the monarchy would be in the hands of the people of Nepal. [The Constitution of 1990 sets forth the consolidation of “Constitutional Monarchy†in the preamble, making it not subject to any amendments.] This insistence on an unconditional Constituent Assembly does not presuppose a republican government as the ultimate goal; rather, the matter should be left for the Nepali people to decide through a Constituent Assembly. The wounded tiger is likely to strike back with greater vengeance, thus the new government must take into consideration any measure that would prepare them for any such surprises.
As stated in the agenda of the Seven Party Alliance, the issue of bringing the Maoists into peaceful mainstream politics should be of utmost priority as well. They should not only work to enhance their 12-point Memorandum of Understanding with the Maoists, but should make serious and honest efforts to reach a permanent peace accord with them. The peace agreement must be comprehensive and far-sighted – every aspect of conflict transformation must be addressed. Some that come to my mind at the moment are: Issues of gender, caste, and ethnicity; displacement; rehabilitation; disarmament; transitional justice; post conflict development; integration of the Maoist soldiers into the national army, etc. It would be prudent to seek international help in this regard. Maoists must also learn two important lessons from the recent Jana Andolan: a) Peaceful protests proved far more effective than armed revolution; and b) If the Nepali people were capable of making the monarch with a solid backing of the army capitulate, they can surely handle the Maoists too if it came to that. The Maoists must give up violence and their extreme communism.
It is also imperative that the interim government at least establish a framework for prosecuting any serious cases of corruption in the past, and of gross human rights violations during the conflict. The latter should not only include violators from both the security forces and the Maoists during the years of Maoist rebellion, but also those who committed such grave crimes during the 18-day nationwide uprising. From army generals to high-ranking officials of the king’s government, to the corrupt officials from the parties themselves, these criminals and rights violators must not be spared.
Many Nepalis have also been disappointed by the old leadership’s (leadership in this sense is already plural) refusal to recognize their past mistakes, step aside, and pave the way for new faces. That is to say, democratization of the leaders’ respective parties should also be in the agenda. After all, one cannot fathom a truly democratic country until the elements ruling it are democratic themselves. A good start would be for the members of the interim government to commit themselves to resign permanently from politics after the results of the Constituent Assembly are in and the new constitution formulated. I am sure people have appreciated all of their contributions to the country, and to the cause of its democracy, and would respect them even more if they submitted to new leadership, for the betterment of our country, in the nearest possible future. It would be a farce in the name of democracy if the people were to see the same Prime Minister who has failed the country in the past be allowed to assume the responsibility again.
Finally, the Nepali civil society that played a highly praiseworthy role in the fight for democracy must also not rest so fast. They must remain vigilant and alert of not only the king’s surprise actions, but also of the future democratic governments. It would be their duty to continue to ensure that people’s voices are being heard, and that the victory will not go futile, for the war is still going on.
While it may not have met the expectations of many, the end of Jana Andolan 2006, has ushered in a new era in Nepal, and has opened a window of opportunity for a better future. It surely is up to the leaders of Jana Andolan 2006 to prove to the disenchanted that it is not going to be an utterly disappointing déjà vu all over again. It is incumbent upon the leaders to prove that the Andolan was truly about the people and not just the political leaders. Nepalis have had to fight for democracy five times in nearly six decades -- almost once every ten years – in 1952, 1962, 1979, 1989, and 2006 – and one would hope that this time, it’s for good.
Posted on: 2006-04-29 08:50:55 (Server Time)
