Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Dr. Prem Sharma, T.U

The people’s movement of 1990 and its consequences are the synergy of internal discontents and international inducement, an impact of South Asian regional changes and the global move towards multiparty wave i.e. the perestroika and glassknot policy of erstwhile Soviet Russia and victory of the West against Stalinist style of hard line communism. At the time, many dictators were flushed away across the globe such as in the Philippines, South Korea, Chile, Haiti, Nicaragua and Argentina in favor of democratic order.

The government at 90's was under a great pressure due to non-renewal of trade and transit treaty with India. Internally, the power centralism was growing. Goods and service delivery at the local level was being poor and the people’s representatives were undermined. Imposition on lower government units, excessive power abuse at the central levels either by royal courtiers, so called Bhumigat Giroha** (see in the references) or by Panchayat Niti tatha Janchbhuj Samiti (a political bureau at the apex) were pervasive. The role and activities of zonal commissioners and chief district officers (CDOs) were against the verdict of popular mandate of the referendum (1980) which had favored the timely reformed Panchayat system to make it more liberal. The internal discontents created chaos and factionalism within Panchas.

Even on the eve of the movement, the deprived upper level Panchas flocked together, as a dissident group against the Marichman Government and showed tacit support to the funeral procession of the effigy of the Panchayat System at the fall of 1989. Accompanying the upper level Panchas, the lower level district, urban, rural and quasi-Panchas one after another, encouraged the anti-Panchayat movement. The 24 members of the district assembly of Chitwan District had tabled a resolution demanding the abolition of Panchayat System and restoration of MPS (Hindu Weekly, Jan1,1990) Issuing a press statement, Ashok Baniya, Chairman of Hetauda Town Panchayat expressed his support to the ongoing democratic movement, and called on all to actively work for making the March 2 general strike successful (Samalochana, March 1, 1990) Numerous Panchas followed suit this process throughout the Kingdom.

A Large number of National Panchayat Members had presented a no confidence motion against the PM by exercising the right conferred by the Constitution. It is not true that the no demand can be made even for changing the verdict of referendum. A demand can be made even for changing the constitution. But the people and the state must respect and comply with the existing constitution until it is changed…. There exists a situation conducive to reform and development of democracy within the Panchayat System itself by launching a struggle against distortion arising in it. Panchas believing in dynamism must continue on their path with the confidence that expected reforms can be made from within.

R.P. Member, Rajeshwor Devkota in a statement said "…. After the referendum, HM had said that the minority opinion would be respected. I therefore, urge that the existence of non-Panchayat side must be accepted" (Naya Nepal, Jan 22, 1990, quoted in Sharma 2002: 21).

During the 'United People's Movement' of 1990, NC and United Left Front (ULF) after a long hibernation bounced back to a decisive role in the people's movement. On Jan 18, 1990, NC on its national convention vowed strong determination to launch anti-Panchayat movement for the restoration of Multi Party System (MPS). Then some of the communist factions supported NC's proposal and formed a 'United Left Front' and some other got united under a separate coalition- United National People's Movement' (UNPM) (see in detail Sharma 2002: 43). The movement overcame within 49 days. It ultimately restored multiparty democracy. Late King Birendra declared new Constitution-1990 along with constitutional monarchy:

We are convinced that the source of sovereign authority of the independent and sovereign Nepal is inherent in the people, and, therefore, we have, from time to time, made known our desire to conduct the government of the country in consonance with the popular will; and whereas, in keeping with the desire of the Nepalese people expressed through the recent people’s movement inspired by the objective of securing to the Nepalese people social, political and economic justice long into the future; and whereas, it is expedient to promulgate and enforce this Constitution, made with the widest possible participation of the Nepalese people, to guarantee basic human rights to every citizen of Nepal; and also to consolidate the Adult Franchise, the Parliamentary System of Government, Constitutional Monarchy and the System of Multi Party Democracy by promoting amongst the people of Nepal the spirit of fraternity and the bond of unity on the basis of liberty and equality; and also to establish an independent and competent system of justice with a view to transforming the concept of the Rule of Law into a living reality.

A study conducted immediately in 1991 based on media perspective and empirical knowledge had revealed that the factors bringing the change in Nepalese governance or system were many more. Among them, the anti-panchayat elements i.e. multiparty voters (46.3%) of 1980s referendum were waiting for a right time to strike strongly. The failure of Panchayat system was inevitable because of dissidence and factionalism within themselves.

The table no.1 (see in the endnote) presents a series of reasons which weakened the legitimacy of Panchayat regime. There might be many causes for the collapse of Panchayat system. Among them the major reasons are outlined on the table. Among the highest recorded ranks, lack of political freedom was the first and the foremost reason, followed by the unaccountability of the Panchayat government to the people. In the third rank, the system was known as functioning devoid of the Panchayat system's aims and objectives. Besides, unnecessary interference of the palace, and economic imperformance and negligence on developmental activities were equally rampant (Sharma 2003: 71).