Wednesday, February 15, 2006

While we can't dismiss out rightly the genuine apprehensions expressed by a few democratic countries that possess the distinction of being all time good friends of Nepal and hope they will continue to exhibit their friendship in the future as well, on the municipal elections just held in the country, however, what is also for sure is that despite their longing for mass input at the polls things could not move as the way they wished. That was unfortunate indeed. It would be a matter of heated discussion to ascertain after all whose error primarily blocked the way for a massive participation at the polls? Let the academicians and the interested quarters mull over.

The ground certainty is that the elections as per the schedules have already been conducted. The solid fact is also that the elections could not see the participation of the major political actors whose inclusion or for that matter the involvement would have made the election results more impressive and an inclusive one than what it is today being claimed still the other way round by a certain section of Kathmandu elite. The cruel fact is also that the major parties despite various calls from the establishment side and the election commission did not demonstrate their inclination in participating in a practice that is by no means a regressive act or for that matter an undemocratic exercise. Elections can't be regressive as some would like to interpret. Lesser engagement of the political players is an altogether a different and serious matter. The more is the engagement, better is the result and is all embracing democracy indeed. Unfortunately that was not.

It would have been better had the major political actors who yet count in Nepali politics joined the election fray. However, they did not do that for their own exclusive reasons. Perhaps it is this non-participation of the key players of the country in the elections that prompted some countries near and far to criticize the elections and hopefully they will do the same with the election results.

But then we come to the same point again. The elections have been already conducted. Thanks the major seven and the rebels that no earthshaking events or for that matter incidents took place on that day. Had they wished to disrupt the polls, they could have done so but they did not do so. Perhaps it is this discipline seen in the opposing camp that have got to be respected and admired. This also speaks of their regard for the elections immaterial who conducted it and who participated in.

It was an election that was far better than what has been a regular phenomenon in neighboring Indian held Kashmir where the national press describes elections to the local levels as "the turn out was less than the dead bodies". At least this was not the case in Nepal .

Now we have only two options left with us: to chose in between greater evil and lesser evil. Certainly the lesser evil is that now the municipality will have their representatives to govern which had remained vacant for several years and the fallout of which was solely on the laymen. Let us admit this fact. Their presence certainly would make easier the tasks confronting the municipalities in the days ahead. At least there is no vacuum now though what is also for sure is that had the major parties participated in, so many dynamic and vibrant new leaders would also have stepped in supporting and helping their own voters' interests. However, this did not materialize, regrettably.

Now yet another question arises: who have won the elections? In our opinion, though comparatively less matured ones now in the scene but then yet whosoever has own the game is a Nepali citizen. Those who have come out with flying colors are all genuine Nepalese who as per the provisions of the constitution possess the right to offer their candidacy and seek votes and by the same token to run the offices if elected.

The Election Commission says the turn out was twenty two plus in percentage. While we don't understand the nitty-gritty of the percentage factor, nevertheless, what we know is that if the statistics provided by the EC is a correct one then we believe that all those who have contributed to that percentage were Nepalese nationals who voted in favor or disfavor of their preferred or rejected candidates.

Finally, we appeal the establishment to go in for a rapprochement with the agitating seven and convince them all to take part in the rest of the places where elections are due. If done so would mean broader participation and what broader participation means in a democratic system every body know. This would perhaps satisfy the countries that have just expressed their concerns regarding the conduct of the municipal elections.

Reconciliation and compromise are the two major components of a democracy. If the two are made to proceed together, democratic system automatically becomes dynamic and thriving and an inclusive one.

Let's learn from our past mistakes. This applies to both.