 |
Kathmandu Thursday March 07, 2002 Falgun 23, 2058.
|
State
responsibility and crisis of conscience
By DR SHREEDHAR GAUTAM
The Maoist attack on the
police and military barracks in Achham and Salyan districts recently
and the endorsement of the state of emergency for three more months by
the House of Representatives on February 21 have once again impelled
us to take an in-depth look at the concept of democracy and the form
of the present crisis. Since 1990, we in Nepal have been familiar with
the term democracy as a do it yourself doctrine. The implicit meaning
of democracy is choosing for yourself. Liberty and equality are its
distinctive objectives. Fraternity is another concept that goes along
with democracy, with an indication that a democratic system promotes a
sense of responsibility. But if we make an objective analysis of the
last 12 years of our democratic experiment, we will find only a small
group of power-seekers playing the chess-like game of politics for
their own benefit. The game of power politics has been so naked that
in this respect Nepal has surpassed the military dictatorship in many
Third World countries. There has been little effect on the lives of
the majority whose sufferings have not been lessened by the frequent
change of power in Singh Durbar over the last 12 years.
The current national
scenario suggests the state and society moving dangerously towards
head on conflict. Over the years we have not seen any sign of state -
society rapport. And no country can hope for good governance in the
absence of healthy balance between civil society and political state.
The lack of a progressive polity all these years is to be traced to
the existing nature of our state, which has functioned in an
authoritarian way dressed in democratic garb. The way the state of
emergency has been ratified vividly shows how Parliament has been made
a rubber stamp citing the will of the people. While endorsing the
state of emergency, the state i.e. the concerned political parties
through whom the political state functions, should have made a sincere
introspection over their own past record and over the causes of
the state’s failure in maintaining a healthy balance in society. But
nothing of this sort happened. Already the alienated segments of
society are severely hurt by neglect from the political state and
terrorist manifestation in the form of ultra-leftist violence. There
is likelihood of mass discontent erupting if the state aggravates the
situation further.
The crux of the problem
since the restoration of the multiparty democracy is the political
leaders who have misused the state’s political authority. They have
undermined the power of the people who are greater than them and are
also the creator of the state. The country is facing anarchy, because
the executive has been operating with the help of the parliamentary
branch without seeking the backing of civil society. It is an
essential nature of a democratic country to acknowledge that the state
has no higher power than the people or civil society. Our political
leaders have completely forgotten that political structure is a mere
creation of the people. We, in Nepal, as a people, made a tryst with
destiny to restore a multiparty democracy with utmost concern for the
welfare of every member of society. So it is paramount that leaders
are sensitive to the values of harmony and the stability of the nation
as a collective social entity. But to our great dismay these leaders
have glossed over the need of balance in society. The ruling elite
seems oblivious to the fact that if society is self-divided or if
there is clash between different sections of society, the state
suffers in its representative might and thereby democracy perishes.
It is in this background
that there is an urgent need to preserve the homogeneity of our
society. The state of emergency shows there is a clash of interest
between two groups and this development could destroy the fabric of
democratic norms. The present disruption of social coherence is bound
to lead to political disunity of various natures. The situation should
not be allowed to exceed the limits through our reckless action. We
are now facing a society - versus - state crisis. Moreover, we have to
be extra vigilant in the context of global capitalism. Global
corporations in Nepal are also active and they are notorious for
selling the soul of society to exploitative forces. This is the period
for all responsible social organizations and political parties to come
into constructive play. The growing interference of multinational
companies on the one hand, and the frustration of a majority of the
people with government are the direct result of the failure of the
state. State authority has become purchasable with the rapid increase
of corruption. There are groups within the state using money power.
The Maoist uprising is linked to the surrender syndrome of state
organs and the rulers before the political Mafia who are responsible
for undermining our society and our national pride.
If the government still
continues to withdraw from the public welfare process, different forms
of terror groups can emerge. Gradually but systematically government
schools, colleges, hospitals and means of transportation are being
either closed down or privatised. This is a very disturbing sign. The
well off can go to costly hospitals and so-called glorious private
educational institutions; but the suffering majority will feel further
left out. Such developments can force the disgruntled to seek justice
in the streets, instead of the courts.
If our democracy is to
redeem its tryst with destiny, a code of ethics must become the vogue
in public life. The government should opt for consensus and the
contentment of the lowliest. Government should realize that arbitrary
acts are not compatible with democratic norms. It should seek dialogue
with all disgruntled groups in society, including the Maoists. The
executive, with the help of parliament, has taken a decision to ratify
the state of emergency. But in the absence of togetherness between
society and the state or without evolving a viable harmony
functionally involving all affected parties, rule of law cannot be
established in society even under emergency powers. In our case
corruption has hijacked democracy and it survives only in name or in
mere ritualistic celebration as on Falgun 7 every year. The majority
of people feel that the terrorism of bribery and corruption has
touched unprecedented levels and it is no less harmful than the
terrorism unleashed by ultra leftists. Fearful of the government in
the absence of transparency and accountability, people like to be left
alone rather than look to the state for any help. As long as the
present scenario remains unchanged, few will believe in the
possibility of a rational social order with maximum security to the
most vulnerable segments of society.
The present sorry state of
governance reminds us of Plato, who wished a country to be governed by
an elite of philosophers with sound and healthy reason. He was
slightly sceptical of democracy as it required cent percent literacy
and awareness among the people. Likewise, Rousseau must have given the
slogan of ‘Back to Nature’ after losing faith in man’s capacity
to lead an organized or well-ordered life. The idea of natural man
against the established socio political order appealed to the
culturally sick and bored of France in the 18th century. Marx, on the
other hand, applied his theory in terms of economic force. He thought
revolution necessary for the ethical health of the people. But the
agenda of politics typical of our country is largely self-serving.
Political leaders never care to learn from people of vision who set an
example in the past by sacrificing personnel comforts to serve
humanity. They are busy with the dirty tricks of power play. What we
are facing is a crisis of conscience. So, it is not corruption alone,
it is conscience also . Will the politicians listen to the cry of this
hour?
Other Stories
|
