Home >> South Asia >> Nepal & Bhutan

     Email   Print 

Nepal: Political Impasse, PM & Resolution

Prakash Bom - 11/30/2007

Political leaderships who often fail to learn from their mistakes that they had repeatedly committed in their struggle for democracy have terribly fell short in creating political culture in their party that can embrace radical change for the nation. This is disgracefully true with 'Nepali Congress Party' leaderships. Consequently, other political party whether leftist or rightist followed less or more the same role model until this current political gridlock.

The political psyche of NC leaderships is to take safe ride on the horse of status quo which is old and mal-fed. NC has tried to take such a ride over fifty years but shockingly fell on the ground with greater wound that made many of its cadre crippled. Yet its leaderships brag themselves of their sacrifice in claiming hierarchical ladder of the party establishment. Such a culture of a political party that has led the political movements for democracy in practice it is semi-democratic. It has included all even corrupt political leaders and cadres (Mandales) in the name of democracy. In return they are the ones who decline radical change against people's aspiration.

The April Uprising was accelerated by the repeated speech of NC president GP Koirala for the 'Inclusive Democracy'. Was it a political jargon or a commitment that motivated people who sacrificed their own lives and their beloved ones? People wonder how the inclusive democracy could include them in the process; what political culture can possibly materialize in real time that gives them opportunity to participate in nation building process. That's why people have come along with the demand for proportional representation electoral system to begin with.

How arbitrarily NC leaderships from the top ladder have spoken against PR electoral system (unless media have misinterpreted) is awful. Their argument for individual voter's freedom that does not exist in PR electoral system is baseless. If that is true then how come PR electoral system is so widely used through out the world, particularly in the western European nations and EU elections! The United Kingdom that invented FPTP (First Past the Post) electoral system has implemented PR electoral system in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (except for England). Check on the history of individual voter's freedom in the state of California of the United States, which has recently passed the legislation to implement PR electoral system.

It is obvious that such a baseless argument can hardly now mislead fifty percent of unlettered innocent Nepali people. However, it cannot perhaps misinform people of lettered Nepali who are open to know about the fact of PR electoral system. PR electoral system cannot be pin downed to the matter of individual voter's freedom because the 'Open Party List' ballot model, for example, under the full PR electoral system has individual voter's freedom of choice to vote his or her candidate. Open Party List PR approach allows voters to express a preference for particular candidates, not just parties. This is the model on which all democratic western European nations' elections are implemented.

Moreover, PR has other options such as 'Mixed Member Proportional Representation' (MMPR) electoral system in which voters cast votes on double ballot – one to the party and other to the individual candidates of their choice. NC should form an intra-party committee of capable and arduous leaderships and cadres who can study PR electoral system of the world and come up with the authentic recommendation in stead of making arbitrary stereotype conclusion on PR.

The basic principles underlying proportional representation electoral systems are that all voters deserve representation and that all political parties in a nation deserve to be represented in the legislatures in proportion to their strength in the electorate. If NC does not agree with PR electoral system fully then NC does not want everyone should have the right to fair representation in a society like ours – multi-ethnic, multi-culture, yet feudal and male-chauvinistic.

In addition, if the prominent politicians speak their mind with their vested political interest it stinks terribly. For example, with UML legislators' vote the proposal by Maoists for declaring republic and implementing full PR electoral system was passed with simple majority votes in the Parliament. However, if UML leader KP. Oli is attempting to force UML withdraw its legislators' votes (as published in Himal Media) by delivering a new party decision can be horrendous to democratic process. UML does not have such an authority over the Parliamentary decision that has passed a bill with the majority. If it does then it will lose its democratic credentials.

The current political gridlock exists between people's mandate and SPA members' commitment to implement. NC was the last SPA member which has committed to republic setups. Maoists are the ones who have flickered with their decisions – accepting fifty/fifty mixed electoral system first then changing their mind for full PR. However, CA elections must occur as per the mandate of people not just for sake of the elections but to resolve the overall political crises to create new democratic Nepal.

If SPA leadership is incapable of making their minds clear over the party line politics then consider former US president Jimmy Carter for his reasoning (as reported by AFP) as recommendations for resolving the current political gridlock. Carter has suggested that Parliament should vote for a republic immediately and the outcome could be ratified by a new government following CA elections. Carter has clearly implied that the Interim Parliament can with an overwhelming majority of votes declare Nepal Republic which ought to be confirmed by a simple majority of the newly elected members of the constituent assembly.

Regarding electoral system for CA elections Carter has honestly evaluated the situations that have been postponed twice. He suggested that the present political stalemate could be resolved by allotting seventy percent of the constituent assembly seats by proportional representation and thirty percent by FPTP (first-past-the-post) electoral systems. This ought to be the middle ground for both NC and Maoists to implement the mandate of people for CA elections.

The nation must move forward with CA elections as mandated. However, it largely depends on Prime Minister GP Koirala's discernment as the interim head of the state. Moreover, GP Koirala as a Prime Minster of Nepal is responsible for the nation as a whole and people. This is a historical moment for him, nation and people of Nepal. The interim Parliament has passed the mandate to declare nation republic prior to CA elections with the simple majority votes. But it needs two third majority of the House for the implementation. None the less resolution of the current political gridlock lies fundamentally in the leadership of GP Koirala as a Prime Minister and the president of NC. All other NC leadership will follow his final discernment.