Nepal needs to Redefine its Democracy

By Rajeeb L.Satyal, Baluwatar, Kathmandu

In Nepal, democracy is being interpreted and used by most political parties from narrow perspective and for their short-term party benefits. The only one person that really honored the constitution and the spirit of democracy was King Birendra. So this is the only paradigm which has unquestioned national consensus. Even the CPN (Maoist) have endorsed this through various statements published in various Newspapers.

But the more critical question at this point is this: Was what people of Nepal achieved in 2046 (1990), a real democracy for the people or just a shift of power from King to some political leaders who had no political vision for their country. Now after little more than 10 years, it was suddenly proved that it was simply a power shift and gullible voters were simply used as tools and means to access to power and their own individual prosperity.

What did political leaders, and their followers benefit from this democracy? It was like a lottery that changed their life overnight from nothing to prosperity (with some exceptions).

On the other hand, what did the common people really get from democracy? : We can not say nothing because there were many things such as: increased poverty, risks of human lives on the street, Nepal bandh, deteriorated quality of education and morality, ever widening gap between poor and rich, increased violence, demonstrations, protest and almost everything that was against the spirit of true democracy. Ordinary people do not have any pleasant memories of the last decade. It was nightmarish. There are memories of only unfulfilled hopes and aspirations, tortures and frustrations and feeling of helplessness. People even lost their fundamental right to live peacefully, to work and to earn and to educate their children. The clamor for improving education was as superficial as their promise to lead the country to prosperity. Yes, they become rich in the process. If democracy means all those things that actually make people feel like leaving their country, then it is only natural people loose faith in democracy.

To the commoners, democracy has been nothing more than- empowerment of political parties or their political workers to do what they want, to gain power on public cost: to declare Nepal bandh whenever they want by terrorizing people in the name of democracy, closing down schools (surprisingly even by elected opposition parties), organizing fruitless demonstrations, liquidation of several public corporations/other institutions due to political appointments and interferences, and unlimited misuse of fund. However qualified a guy may be, s/he could hardly get any chance to occupy any good positions, without any political connections.

If the politicians and their parties were supposed to be symbol of democracy, they did very poor job of it. Even the names of some political parties do not adequately reflect Nepal or her people's sentiment. How can political parties of Nepal claim to represent national interest when even their names and the political philosophies of their parties are burrowed from other countries? How these political parties claim to be more nationalistic than previous political system before 2046 BS, which reflected at least some originality and dignity of Nepalese culture (though there were some correctable flaws.

The present leaders and political parties were so ego eccentric that they even fail to see the genuine initiatives of the previous political system. They abandoned some of the most wonderful ideas just because it originated during pachayati time, such as: "Go back to the village national campaign, "Nepal being declared as Zone of Peace" "Meeting Basic Necessity by 2000", "NDC", "Non-Aligned Foreign Policy" to name a few that reflected more mature and pragmatic than the present political stunts used by political parties. Did political parties and leaders loose so much confidence in themselves that that they had to resort to terrorism to convince the public? If the political leaders thought there were better ideas than those ideas of Panchayati times, Why could not they come up with some new national development vision or philosophy that they could directly share with public through media. Unlike before, electronic media including Internet has given direct access to public as well as leaders to reach each other directly. Never was there so much opportunity available in the past for such direct communication.

So, if there are any dynamic, sensible or sincere patriotic leaders left in this country, who are genuinely concerned with Nepal's development, they should first review and understand the fundamental need, unshakable faith and aspiration of the people. Then they should define democracy in more positive terms with stronger commitment towards protecting people's fundamental right to live, safety and peace, bringing all the divergent ideas, religions, culture and beliefs together. They should understand that strikes and Nepal Bandh are not symbols of democracy. People want food, house and a life to live, if it is not too much ask for.

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past