Nepal's first step towards "limited" or semi-democracy?

Even "nascent" democratic regimes like ours could be made most undemocratic at the inkling of an eye could best be seen, felt and experienced right here in Nepal. The rights and the privileges that were so agreeably accorded to the lay men of this country by the 1990 Constitution appear either on its way to be greatly "limited" or at best be scrapped ultimately time permitting. A day will soon come when the outside world would talk about Nepal having "limited democracy" or at the most be called "semi-democracy" if the manner in which the government under Koirala intends to curtail the very basic rights of the people that are common in a democratic system the world over. In sum and substance it is the guarantee of these basic rights of the citizens and thereafter the concurrent honoring of those rights enshrined in the constitution by the government in a particular country at a particular time gives the regime a democratic face. Failing to do so or providing those basic tenets of the constitution to its citizens makes the regime highly undemocratic one. It is this aspect in effect that distinguishes a democratic regime with that of a despotic one. The Girija Prasad Koirala regime by bringing into effect the June 4 Public Security acts in force has amply hinted that his establishment would henceforth rule the country in a manner he wishes. His administration also has made it pretty clear to all and sundry that any one differing with his "hard line posture" would be seen by the State as a rebel and that any one individual or even a group belonging to the party itself or from outside, would be dealt with accordingly. To put it carefully, Koirala regime will henceforth go most undemocratic way till some one, from the party or his detractors in the opposition, manage his ouster. Thanks the Almighty that Prime Minister Koirala has finally unmasked his political culture of being a hard liner and undemocratic one from the very beginning.

Home Minister Ram Chandra Poudel albeit tried to defend the new enactment of the draconian measures in his own "calculated and structured" fashion, however, the fact is that the nation has already been told to tighten their belts and remain prepared to face any uninvited "wrath" from the government quarters should the population commit any minor mistake in the process of living their modest and miserable lives. Now that the government is equipped with such measures considered to be repulsive in nature and content in a democratic system, we hope that it would be used soon to tame all those who differ with the government's arrogant and undemocratic practices. Days ahead in Nepal appear to be more chaotic that one might have in their imaginations. Encouragingly enough, some political parties have come up with their strong reservations regarding the enactment of the laws which curtail citizen's rights. The government remains firm in its determination.

It is in this context we wish to draw the attention of the diplomatic missions of the Western democracies based in Kathmandu to air their views that impresses upon the present regime and forces the government to scrap the newly enacted laws that heavily restricts the democratic privileges of the Nepali population as stipulated in the 1990 constitution. We have the knowledge that it is this set of democratic nations which hinted the UML opposition to adopt "constitutional processes" for the "resignation" of the nation's Prime Minister. To recall that was the time when during the 19 th session of the Nepalese parliament the entire opposition sought the resignation of Prime Minister Koirala for his alleged involvement in the procurement of the Lauda air deal and paralyzed the whole business of the parliament from day one till it came to an end.

We wish that the democratic nations here too understand the gravity and the would be negative impacts of the new stringent laws on the existing democratic system and help save the charm of the system itself. And what those charms and the attractions are perhaps we need not remind them. Failing to speak in favor of the preservation of people's basic rights and privileges as granted by the constitution would mean that they too supported the prevalence of a sort of "limited or semi-democracy" in Nepal and nothing else.

Be that as it may, it would also be in the wisdom of the national population and the political parties to adhere to the basic norms and the values of the democratic system. Every system demands in effect "duties" from the various segments in the name of the nation. Rights must follow duties as well. Demanding only rights from the State would be unfair. It must be coupled with duties as well. Tightening of security system and relieving the people from threats to their personal lives is welcome. However, care should be taken that in securing law and order, the general lay men are not harassed and become the victim of the new acts. Care should also be taken that the laws are not used for personal political vendetta.

Without passing on more comments on the new draconian laws enacted by the government, we wish to copy a paragraph from the classic text of P.J.Proudhon's book on "The General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century". The scholar of international standing mentions: (sic) "To be governed is to be kept in sight, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right , nor the wisdom, nor the virtue to do so.… to be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction, noted, registered, enrolled, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, forbidden, corrected, punished…..That is government."

Is it that we represent the "governed ones" and Koirala regime is the "Government" as hinted by scholar Proudhon? Keep on analyzing!

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