Immodest proposal

A neutral government could be considered to help the CA concentrate on writing the constitution

NOTE OF DISSENT

NOV 29 -

The results for almost all the ballots cast in the 2013 Constituent Assembly (CA) elections are out. As most of us had expected, the results came as no surprise, maybe except for UCPN(Maoist) supporters and sympathisers who must have been disheartened by the people’s verdict. 

This was only to be expected as the latest CA election was by far, more free, fair and impartial than the one held in 2008. That, of course, is the reading of impartial and apolitical poll observers; though Maoist-inclined observers might hold different views. The crest-fallen faces of the UCPN (Maoist) leaders as they announced their so-called boycott of the polls, immediately after they became aware of the direction the people’s verdict was taking, were really worth watching. The downfall, no doubt had something to do with the split in the party. But the Maoists, both factions, must use this opportunity to do some soul-searching. The UCPN (Maoist) must attempt to find out why it failed in the polls. The breakaway faction, the CPN-Maoist, should also ascertain reasons for its failure to persuade voters from staying away from polling stations. The very fact that  voters defied the CPN-Maoist’s call for a poll boycott and voted against the UCPN (Maoist)’s arrogance is a clear sign that the people were not satisfied with the way the Maoists handled power.

The Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led Maoists, however, smelled more than just conspiracy and rigging in their loss. They were joined the next day by a dozen or so smaller parties that also did not fare well in the elections. The parties seem to feel that a conspiracy was hatched to deprive them of victory. (What kind of victory? They would almost certainly have been more than happy if they had won all the  seats in the direct and proportional election. In their parlance, such an election would have been fair, free and impartial.) The losers’ consortium called on the Election Commission to voice their grievances and their leader, who also happens to lead the UCPN (Maoist), told the press that the people were “appalled” by the poll results. He really seemed to know the people, having led a 10-year Maoist insurgency that cost over 15,000 Nepali lives (over 8,000 of them were declared martyrs by the Dahal-led government) and in which over 150,000 people were displaced. The Maoists, both factions, seem to have forgotten that they had to give up their armed struggle to seize power and had to join other forces seeking to re-establish democracy. And democracy means respect for the verdict of the people, which undemocratic forces do not seem to realise. 

Wins and losses 

It might do well to recall that the Nepali Congress (NC)-led by KP Bhattarai had won the 1991 general elections, securing 110 seats. But the same party, led by GP Koirala had to face defeat in the 1994 polls. The 1999 general elections again brought the NC back to power with over 54 percent of the seats in the parliament. The Surya Bahadur Thapa-led Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) had won just one seat in 1991 but went on to win 20 seats in 1994. In the 1999 elections, it had to be satisfied with just 11 seats. So voters kick out those with who fail to live up to their promises. This is the beauty of democracy. One has to accept this process with sportsmanship. The UCPN (Maoist) and the fringe parties that followed the Maoist example, would do well to heed the people’s verdict and try to remedy their mistakes, which just might help these disgruntled parties return to power in the next election.

The voters’ understanding

Many  voters in my area in the Capital told me that Nepali people have been living in peace and harmony among themselves. So they would not allow political parties to create enmity among different communities. This writer would not know what people elsewhere in the country feel, but in the Capital, this feeling was almost universal. It  explains why only the NC and UML won in the direct elections and why RPP-Nepal secured more votes under proportional representation. 

The other factor was the understanding that political leaders are more interested in occupying powerful positions and catering to the needs of their cadres and workers than in writing a constitution or helping the common man. A pamphlet circulated just before the election read: leaders wasted four years and the expenses of the CA exceeded Rs 91.26 billion with the people getting nothing in return. The pamphlet asked the people to “wake up” and opt for new faces. Many saw political leaders amassing fortunes and going on unnecessary foreign junkets without concentrating on the task at hand which then, as now, is the writing of a constitution. 

A neutral government 

Huge amounts of money from the public treasury will go for the upkeep of the CA and its members. The money will be well spent if the parties are able to write a constitution in the shortest time possible. But the focus has already shifted towards government formation. Hence, my own outlandish proposal is that the country should be run by a neutral government as was done for the elections—though I still think it is unfortunate that the present government head continues as Chief Justice. Most will laugh at the proposal—as it deserves to be under normal conditions. But the fact remains, the parties that form the government will be more interested in helping their supporters—even those accused of horrific crimes like murder—than writing a constitution that will be a potent means for progress. 

So the proposal for a neutral government in a country which has duly elected a CA cannot but be mocked by most people, especially those versed in western democratic systems. Hence, the government that takes power should at least put a moratorium on foreign junkets—including free trips offered by foreign governments and institutions—as such trips become a burden on tax payers. If need be, such trips can be undertaken by government officials who receive much less travel and daily allowances than ministers. 

Can the present elected leaders and their followers at least ease the worries and anxieties of the people by concentrating on the task at hand and not diverting their attention to extra-curricular activities? The leaders need to win back the confidence of the people and they can start by being less self-centred and more people-oriented. People constantly evaluate the actions of the leaders, not only during elections.