Rescind the deal

The government’s decision to go ahead with the controversial purchase of a RJ-100 aircraft for the army cannot but be construed as an insult to the entire Nepalese people. For one, the cost of the plane has been overvalued by a whopping 8 million dollars, and secondly, no global tender has been called. These by themselves are enough reasons to suspect foul play in the deal. Next, the four engine jet aircraft is not at all needed by the army and will just be a white elephant, as it is an uneconomical machine quite unsuitable for Nepal’s terrain.

Besides, the army’s plan to lease it out also will not work. For no airlines--least of all the struggling RNAC--will lease such an aircraft unless it is forced to do so. The UN is unlikely to lease the aircraft to carry Nepalese soldiers for peace keeping operations because a larger plane will do the job in one go whereas it takes the RJ-100 at least two hops to do the same job. VVIP and VIP movements are not that extensive in Nepal to warrant the purchase of such an aircraft by the army of one of the poorest countries of the world. Even in official visits the head of state and head of government of poor countries like Nepal should learn to travel by commercial airlines as is done by leaders of countries more prosperous than our own. All this should provide enough grounds for government to cancel the deal. In fact, the previous government led by Prime Minister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai seemed to have been more responsive to public opinion, as it should be in a democracy. Bhattarai, bowing down to public outcry, had at least put the whole matter in cold storage. But now, all of a sudden, the matter has come up again. Why?

The deal was apparently struck during the Nepali Congress-UML coalition regime. Now that Girija Prasad Koirala has come back to power and Nepali Congress is in majority in parliament, the time appears right to strike the deal. There may be nothing to it but it certainly seems more than a little fishy that the RJ-100 should come into news again. The present government that calls itself pro-poor must show that it is more interested in the welfare of the people than in buying unnecessary aircraft and leaving open the door for allegations of corruption. This, neither the prime minister who also happens to be the defence minister nor those close to him can afford to ignore.

It is a matter of satisfaction that commercial banks and financial institutions have not been readily forthcoming with the necessary loans to the army to buy the aircraft. But with pressure, this can easily happen. Under the circumstances, the country’s elected government must, in the interest of the nation, rescind its earlier decision and scrap the RJ-100 aircraft deal. The government must prove that it cares for the people and not for vested interest groups no matter how close they are to the leaders.

Consensualism in Nepali politics

By Sanjaya Serchan

The Westminster or British model of democracy, based on "majority rule, government-versus-opposition parties and unitary government," has often been criticized as being adversarial and not inclusive enough. Considering its drawbacks, some political scientists have put forward alternative model, namely, consociational or consensual one. Arend Lijphart writes about the consensual model: "... the alternative answer to the dilemma (ie the majoritarian model) is as many people as possible. This is the crux of the consensual model. It does not differ from the majoritarian model in accepting that majority rule is better than minority rule, but it accepts majority rule only as a minimum requirement. Instead of being satisfied with narrow decision making majorities, it seeks to maximize the size of these majorities." Lijphart regards certain elements, which he calls majority-restraining elements, as essential for the consensual model. They are executive power sharing or grand coalitions, division of power (eg. federalism and decentralization), balanced bicameralism and minority representation, multiparty (and not two-party) system, proportional representation, and written constitution and minority veto, among others.

The Nepali constitution draws primarily on the British parliamentary model and has incorporated its basic features, such as the single-member district plurality or first-past-the-post system. Still, certain consensual elements can be found in the constitution. One is Article 126, which requires the ratification of, accession to, acceptance of or approval of treaties or agreements on peace and friendship, defence and strategic alliance, boundaries of the country, and natural resources and the distribution of their uses by a two-thirds majority in parliament. This effectively calls for, in order to avoid a minority veto, consensus building. Another consensual element is the Constitutional Council comprising the Prime Minister as its chairman and the Chief Justice, Speaker of the House of Representatives, chairman of the National Assembly and leader of the opposition in the lower house as members. The Council, which can be regarded as a grand coalition committee, makes recommendations for the appointment of various officials to constitutional bodies, such as the Chief Justice, Auditor General and Chairman and members of the Public Service Commission, Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority and Election Commission.

The consensual elements provided for in our constitution encourage cooperation, compromise, coalescence and consensus. The implementation of these consensual elements have not, however, been without problems. The atmosphere surrounding Article 126, something amounting to dread among the political parties, could be a case in point. The various recommendations made by the Constitutional Council, including that of the Chief Justice some time ago, have not also been without hitches, and some have questioned as to whom the Council bears responsibility. A more recent related case in this regard concerns the appointment of the chairman and members of the Human Rights Commission (HRC).

The HRC, of course, has been formed by an Act and not directly through the Constitution. The Human Rights Commission Act, 1997 provides for the appointment of the chairman and members of the HRC by a recommendation committee comprising the Prime Minister as chairman and the Chief Justice and Leader of the Opposition as members. For whatever reason, the Act is consensual in approach. But again the implementation aspect, as in the past, has been dogged by controversies.

Going by majoritarian norms, it can be said that a government, once elected, should be allowed to implement its policies, programmes the way it deems fit. Unnecessary curbs on it can be regarded as the stifling of the "voice of the people." A look at the reality, however, shows the picture as more prosaic, and even banal. The present Nepali Congress (NC) government came into power, following the elections of 1999, with 36.1 percent of votes. If the total eligible voters and not only the votes cast (65.7 percent) were counted, this percentage would be even lower. As far as the previous elections are concerned, the NC in 1991 formed the government with 37.7 percent of the votes cast and, following the mid-term elections of 1994, the CPN (UML) formed its minority government with 30.8 percent of the votes cast. In the 1999 elections, the winning margin for forty-two MPs was less than 1000 votes, of which twenty-five were NC MPs, while for another thirty-seven MPs the winning margin was 1001-2000 votes (of them, fifteen belonged to NC). These margins show only a thin line separating the winners from losers in majoritarian democracies.

The consensual model, which attempts to overcome some of the shortcomings of the majoritarian model, is considered especially suitable for "societies sharply divided along religious, ideological, linguistic, cultural, ethnic or racial lines." The model discourages winner-take-all tendencies and avoids becoming a tool for the gratification of a segment, be it the government, a party or whatever. The Human Rights Commission Act, 1997 is an element in our polity conforming to the consensual model. If the Act is a genuine attempt at consensualism, then politicians, especially those in government or the ruling party, should have been cognizant of this fact before reacting to the formation of the HRC. If, however, the Act is an aberration from an accepted majoritarian model, then those in government or the ruling party could have amended it before forming the HRC, something not altogether impossible given the majority they have in parliament. This could have avoided the unnecessary squabbling or controversy.

The consensual model calls for norms and values different from the majoritarian model. It is possible only, to quote Arend Lijphart once again, "if the political leaders engage in coalescent rather than adversarial decision making, motivated by an awareness of the dangers inherent in segmental cleavages and centrifugal tendencies, and with a desire to avert them." The political elites have to, first and foremost, accept the consensual model and the rules of the game associated with it. The elites, of course, may be motivated into acceptance if they realize that the alternative to consensus can be confrontation and conflict, if not chaos.

Do we need foreigners to tell us ?

By Kanchan Joshy

First, it was Eric Valle who showed us Nepalese what Nepal looked like in his magnum opus "Caravan". All of us were so obsessed with "The Land of Everest" cliche that we gasped in awe and raved when Eric’s Oscar nominated work unfolded on screen. And we are doing it again, though not exactly with the same joy, after KPMG / Barents’ report claimed Nepal Bank Limited (NBL) and Rastriya Banijya Bank (RBB) as technically insolvent. It is a surprising fact that we need a foreigner to convince us what this country looks like.

We have to wait and see the returns of the taxpayers’ money spent. With little tangible result from a similar study conducted almost a decade ago, anybody’s assurance of a turnaround of these banks will, at best, be taken with a pinch of salt. We have long been promised things that end up as good quotations for some history student’s reference a few years down the line.

Could a similar report from a Nepali firm create a panic requiring the Governor’s assurance within a couple of days? This however does not mean that given the same amount of money and equal opportunity, a Nepali firm’s work could be at par with what they have done. Those belonging to that particular school of thought could best argue for this. The simple fact is our economy and exposure to problems of such magnitude restricts us from producing results that justify both the cost and time involved.

Unfortunately, we are so fascinated by foreigners’ dollar-generated work that we fail to utilise them to their full potential.

Many people would agree that we did not need anyone flying across continents to tell us the financial health of these banks. It just required someone with vision and power to convince those who hold the reins of our economy. Walk down the aisles of RBB’s branch in Bishal Bazaar and observe piles of records and employees turning big fat books looking for data. You will find it difficult to believe that this branch is the bank’s loan database. In an age when technology is the key to success, this bank thought it wise to spend its money to build a grand building near Singha Durbar, but it makes computers accessible to only a few in the upper rung of the hierarchy.

In a layman’s language, a bank’s success story is as great as its capacity to maximise its income from risk assets, primarily loan. Loan application received is scrutinized and its risk assessed no matter who the applicant is, what his social status is or how much political clout he wields. Monitoring starts the day a loan application is processed right up to the time it is repaid. There would have been no need to pay per-diems in dollars had there been someone with strong vision and back up to put this into practice.

Any professional firm in Nepal could easily study the systems in these two banks and advise how to conduct its affairs according to the minimum best practice. We then need someone bold enough to enforce discipline so that these banks are run like banks and not as pawn shops. Had a study been conducted
after this stage, it could point out where we are wrong. We could then start from there and receive the best value for all the time, money and effort spent.

In search of their rights

By Prabodh Devkota

Kailali’s Kamaiya movement is indeed a historic movement in Nepal. This movement is important because the Kamaiyas themselves have come out with their own voice. It is difficult to imagine how uneducated Kamaiyas who have been working as bonded labourers for more than three generations can handle such a powerful movement? Kamaiyas have proved that the human voice can’t be suppressed even in the worst conditions. If a historically muted group is in search of its right it should be seen as a positive exercise in a democratic country. The movement should be a political movement, but not led by party politics otherwise it will lose the norms of political rights values.

In BS 1981, Rana Prime Minister Chandra Shamsher had formally announced the end of the Das System in Nepal. Nearly 59, 873 das and dasis had become free. But about 175 years later, the bonded Kamaiya system remains unchanged. Bonded Kamaiya system still exists in different western districts like Dang, Banke, Bardia, Kailali and Kanchanpur.

Saguni Chaudhari, one of the members of the 19 bonded Kamaiya families does not know her age. She is the mother of three daughters and three sons. She had came to Kathmandu wishing to gather moral support. It does not matter she is formally uneducated, what matters is her vision and attempt to change history

She is an uneducated rustic mother of a village. Probably she does not know about citizens’ rights, human rights or so many other acts ensuring equal rights. But she knows that in spite of her extreme poverty, she along with her family want to live freely. Last week, I took her live interview on the radio, she told me that throughout her life a question had remained unsolved: why her family is different from others. There are other poor people too but why is her poverty different? She told me, I never dream of being rich but always dream of becoming free... free as others.

I told her that each mother has thousands of dreams regarding her children and asked her about her dream. She slowly went on. "My Basimlal who is only 11 years old and my Bandhu who is just 9 years old, go to the fields to plough instead of going to school. Bandhu falls down while ploughing because he is too small and can’t hold the plough. I want to send Bandhu, Basimlal and my daughter to the school, but it is only my dream. Fortune has betrayed us and now we are fighting against fortune." When we are free from Bonds, my family will work for its own sake and we will be happy even in poverty.

Her husband Rajdev Chaudhari also doesn’t know from when he started working in Siba Raj Panta’s house. He might have been small when he joined work there. He said that since the last three generations, his family had been working in that house. Raj Dev doesn’t know how much debt this grandfather had taken from the landlord; but the burden of the unknown debt weighs his and the 19 families which have come to kathmandu to protest.

Now they are fighting for their liberty. The issue is not restricted to Siba Raj Panta and his 19 bonded Kamaiya families. The issue has shifted towards the liberty of all. This kamaiya group wants the issue to be discussed in the parliament so as to produce some effective steps that will end the Bonded Kamaiya System for ever in history. The government now has an historic opportunity to act.