National 1 (Spotlight Weekly)

Question of Interpretation

Unless major political players agree on the universal definition of democracy, instability is bound to reign supreme

By KESHAB POUDEL

King Gyanendra reiterated his commitment to multiparty democracy and stressed the need for democratic rule, during his recent felicitation at Dhangadi in far-western Nepal. Despite his reiteration, the King did not explain what his modality would be.

Political leaders, too, do not tire of expressing their commitment to multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy. But the question remains: what are the mechanisms to reinstate accountable elected representatives to govern the country?

It seems that everyone has their own interpretations in the political game. Despite coherent and universally accepted rules and practices of democracy, different political forces have their own methods and interpretation of representative government. If every individual continues to take his or her own stand in interpreting the democratic process, a deepening crisis would be inevitable. Until the political forces adhere to the universal definition of democracy, one cannot find a meeting point.

When immediate elections for the House of Representatives are impossible, how will legislative power be exercised to pass money and other bills? How long will the country be ruled by ordinances, which cannot have legitimacy for more than six months?

As the country does not have elected representatives to choose the head of government and perform the legislative role, how long can the prime minister nominated by King Gyanendra under Article 127 of the constitution rule the country? To whom are today's ministers accountable? All these constitutional questions are there. Since Prime Minister Lokendra Bahadur Chand is in no position to announce new elections any time soon, how will the government prove its legitimacy?

Like the Maoists and monarchists, the leaders of mainstream parties have their own agenda. Nepali Congress president Girija Prasad Koirala, who has always been taking an inconsistent stand, is now firmly advocating the one-point agenda of reviving the House of Representatives. Koirala's arguments have some strong points but he does not have supporters.

CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal wants an all-party government under Article 128 of the constitution. Since Chand is leading a palace-appointed government, there is no sense in demanding another similar government under someone else's leadership. The Maoist leaders have proposed a three-point agenda: the convening of a roundtable conference, the appointment of an interim government and elections to a constituent assembly that would write the new constitution.

Although the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 adheres to all democratic ideals, nobody seems to be committed to following it. "I don't think the country will ever get such a democratic constitution like the present one," said senior advocate Mukunda Regmi, who was a member of the commission that drafted the document.

"The existing problem has nothing to do with fault in the constitution. It is our habits, practice and culture. I don't understand how a constituent assembly can make a more democratic constitution," he said. (See interview)

According to the universal definition of democracy, it is a system where the people choose their representatives to rule themselves. The basic character of representative government is that it will be elected through the popular will in periodic elections and the people representatives will choose the leaders. But the interpretation in Nepal seems to vary with each leader.

"The confusion in the interpretation is understandable, as Nepalese society is yet to develop the taste and habit of democracy. The process of making democratic habits and taste is tedious and long. The formation of habits requires at least a system through which people can exercise their rights," said a political analyst.

Representative government may be inefficient but it is accountable to the people, while non-representative government may be efficient but is not accountable to the people. In absence of a body of elected representatives, there is always the possibility of the country being ruled through decree.

By giving up individualistic interpretations of democracy and accepting universal democratic norms, political leaders would help sort out the current crisis. If the King and political parties continue to articulate their own agenda, the transition will be longer and painful. Once the country sticks to the political system, it will start correcting mistakes and move ahead.