Democracy For Nepal

Monday, October 06, 2014

Super Don वामदेव

एमालेको राजनीतिक बैठकहरु बल्खुबाट Five Star होटलहरुमा सार्ने वामदेव एउटा प्रवृति हो। वामदेवको "राष्ट्रियता" माफियातंत्र हो। उसले जुन पार्टी चलाएको छ त्यसको नाम नेकपा (माफियावादी) हो। नेपालको राजनीतिमा नेकपा (माफियावादी) बाट जत्रो ठुलो खतरा अरु कतैबाट छैन। यो देशलाई सर्वनाशतिर लाने प्रबृति हो। वामदेवको विरोध बाहुनवादको विरोध होइन, त्यो त आफ्नो ठाउँमा छँदैछ। वामदेवको विरोध माफियावादको विरोध हो। सबैलाई चेतना भया। वामदेवलाई पुर्ण रुपले पराजित नगरेसम्म देशको कल्याण छैन। वामदेवलाई कमल थापाको साइजमा पुर्याउनु नेपालको राजनीतिको प्रथम जिम्मेवारी हो। किनभने नेपालको नया कमल थापा भनेको वामदेव नै हो। देशको गृह मंत्रालय वामदेवलाई सुम्पनु भनेको वामदेवलाई पशुपतिको पुजारी बनाउनु जत्तिकै घिनलाग्दो कुरा हो। "राष्ट्रियता" भनेको वामदेवकोलागि आफ्नो कुकर्म लुकाउने धुँवा बाहेक केही पनि होइन। सबैलाई चेतना भया।

वामदेव बाँदर हो

वामदेव बाँदर हो, त्यो मान्छे त हुँदै होइन।

Saturday, October 04, 2014

The Right To Self Determination, The Right To Divorce

Nepal topography. The green/yellow zones hold the Inner Terai valleys. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The right to self determination in a federal setup is the right of a state to break away from the country to form an independent country should the people say so in a referendum on the topic.

That right to self determination is like the right to divorce in a marriage. You can't argue that every country, every society that has laws allowing divorce (I don't know any where that is not the case, enlighten me please) has lead to massive family breakdowns.

That right to divorce is essential. It is a right. You can't force someone to stay in a marriage they don't want to stay in.

In the case of Nepal, my reading of the situation is the people of Madhesh are nowhere close to wanting a separate country. No party in parliament is for it. That should tell you as to where public opinion stands. I don't think that means it is a happy marriage. But it is a marriage that can be worked out. But that does not mean the right to self determination should not be there.

Federalism without the right to self determination is like partyless democracy. It is an oxymoron.

CK Raut has articulated racism against Madhesis in Nepal better than any Madhesi leader in history. And his stand - which I agree with - is should that discrimination persist, Madhesh should break away from Nepal. So far it has been an abusive marriage. That abuse has to stop.

The roadmap for CK as I see it is, first ensure a constitution for Nepal where there is the right to self determination, and where all of Terai is maybe two states. Form a political party in the process. Attempt to get that party to be the majority party in those two Terai states. Once you get there, organize a referendum on the topic. Try to win it. And there you go. That is the roadmap. It is nonviolent. It is democratic. It is at least a decade long process. But that decade should be enough to create a Nepal where the Madhesis have proportional representation in the entire state apparatus. That would make divorce unnecessary.

No party in Nepal's parliament wants to break up Nepal. But that does not mean they have the option to not put the right to self determination in the constitution. But they do have the option to not let CK Raut win majorities in the Terai states, and you do that by serving the people better, more honestly. And should there ever be a referendum, they will have the option to campaign against the breakup. That will be a further exercise in democracy. Because Nepal is a democracy where the sovereignty rests with the people. If the people are sovereign, as they are, they only stay part of Nepal because they choose to do so.

India Skipped Landlines

English: Mobile phone evolution Русский: Эволюция мобильных телефонов (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Not long back, your average Indian did not have a phone number. Today most Indians have mobile phones. They did not go from no phone, to a landline to a mobile phone. They seem to have skipped the landline.

Nepal is writing a new constitution. And because it is writing a constitution in 2014, and not 1950 or 1777, this constitution should be cutting edge. It should be an attempt to build a better democracy than anywhere else. We might fail in that attempt. We might end up not creating something better than anywhere else. But we should try. One easy way is by not making obvious mistakes.

I talk of partyless democracy as a concept, because politicians in Nepal understand the concept. The current political class in Nepal fought against that concept for decades. They know in their bones what that is.

This new constitution should be designed in a way that the Nepali diaspora is not a loss to the country, because right now it is. Messing up the concept of dual citizenship is a very bad sign. And it is not too late to rectify.

The idea should be to rope in the entire Nepali diaspora. Most Nepalis in the diaspora are still Nepali citizens. There should be a provision to help them vote online in Nepal's national elections. Some Nepalis have become citizens of other countries. This is a tiny minority. Make it possible for them to have dual citizenship. Their Nepali citizenship should be a full citizenship. Why not? That is a brain gain idea. Nepal could use more brains, especially Nepali brains who might know a thing or two about Nepal, who might be emotionally attached to the country.

The right to self determination is a similar thing. That has to be an integral part of Nepal's federalism. That is not a tool for breaking up the country. I don't think so. That would strengthen the country. That would lead to power devolution to the state and local levels and make for a much more efficient government. That would be a good thing.

The entire debate on federalism has been about the map and the names of states. The real debate should be about power devolution. In the new Nepal how much power will the states have? How much power will the local governments have?

A good formula would be that one third of the central government budget should be handed directly to the state governments in proportion to their populations. And one third of a state's budget should be handed directly to the districts in a similar formula. And one third of the district budget should be handed over to towns and villages and cities in direct proportion to a village/town/city's population.

This formula would be simple, fair, and right. It would lead to meaningful power devolution.

Is CK Raut Still In Custody?

Why is CK still in custody? I thought he was told he will be released. A minister can not say he will be release if he still will be taken to court. So a minister saying he will be released was a minister saying he will be released. So why is he still in custody?

I Thought CK Raut Was Released

Minendra Rijal, Ram Chandra Poudel and another minister gave word in writing. Why is CK still in custody?

Friday, October 03, 2014

75 Districts Key To Power Devolution

Nepal is not home to five or 10 ethnic groups but over 100. That is why the key to power devolution in the country has to be about giving a lot of power to the 75 districts. Creating five or 15 states might not be enough power devolution. The solution might lie in creating really strong district governments with large budgets of their own.

5 States, 75 Districts, 75 Parliamentary Constituencies

5 States, their names to be decided through majority vote by their respective parliaments.
The 75 districts remain intact.
There are only two direct elections in the country, one for the national parliament, another at the local level for wada chiefs and mayors and deputy mayors.
The MPs elect the Prime Minister.
The wada chiefs, mayors, deputy mayors elect the district government.
Every elected leader in the country at all levels elect the country's president who is the constitutional head, and the Commander In Chief of the Nepal Army.
The two direct elections are held during alternate two years, the dates decided autonomously by the Election Commission.
The MPs are elected in each district at the district level. Districts that qualify for more than one MP are made multi member constituencies. Details on how multi member constituencies operate are in these blog posts from 2007.