Nepal´s New Political Leaderships must Pilot Pundits but not Vice-versa
Prakash Bom
November 27, 2008
Despite the media reporting on minister of culture and state restructuring Gopal Kirati´s gold-rush for innovation, once before criticized by the constitutional pundits and CA secretariats for his attempt to rule-out CA jurisdiction, minister Kirati´s recent draft for federal government system resembles pragmatic federalist approach to state restructuring pertaining to nation´s geographical and cultural diversity.
The draft is, therefore, clearly based on one of the models of the federalism that endorses self-sustainable units of government based on the argument that the greater the number of self-governable people´s elected local governments – municipalities, boroughs, townships and school districts the most successful ought to be the federal government system for overall socio-political and economic developments of the nation at the grass-root level.
But there is a doubt whether these constitutional experts and CA secretariats are honestly committed to the state restructuring that can enforce national consensus to address nation´s geographical and cultural diversity based on the federal government system restructuring. Therefore, if the political leaderships found dumb on this issue but dependant on the constitutional pundits for state restructuring then that will not bring about any fundamental change but can still get dragged with the status quo of current (feudal) administrative establishments.
Every political leadership from every political party of the nation must demonstrate their leadership over the expertise of so call constitutional pundits of Nepal by solely not depending upon them. Rather political leaders´ ideas should lead the experts for them to follow the guideline as per their discipline but not otherwise. If not political leaderships will be the puppet of experts. As a result, the constitutional pundits will restructure the state for their own self-interest as witnessed in two-hundred fifty years of history of nation that was how pundit-ownership had protected privileged class at the suffering of the majority of marginalized class to this time – as true to all south Asian nations.
The political leaderships have to watch closely over the strikes of constitutional experts during a new constitution drafting. For example, if political leaderships fail to conceive an authentic and clear pragmatic model for state restructuring based on the national consensus for the federal government system, which can suit with the geographical and cultural structures of nation, the nation´s political parties will lose the governance authority in overall government system. Once again the pundits of Nepal as political appointees and government employees will dominate the ruling.
The unity of Maoist party that has been established with the endorsement of the party politics for the "People´s Federal Democratic National Republic" by the recent national convention of Maoist cadres has as a matter of fact reinforced the national consensus for people´s aspiration for democracy despite the domination of the hardliner ideologues and core interest of the Maoist party.
Hopefully, national Maoist cadres have realized that the hardliner interest for the centrally controlled government system or one party-system of totalitarian communist that governs hierarchically based on the party-leader seniority and reference to the former leaders is nothing different from the system of autocratic feudal monarchical system that people of Nepal had to wait for 21st century to come for its abolishment.
Similarly, the other main political parties have to sacrifice their party interest that is sheer ideology and dominated by the party leadership seniority along the tradition of feudal-socialist tree of party-hierarchy. For example, Nepali Congress party´s national awareness movement for opposing Nepal Army integration with the Maoist militias by senior leaders stands against aspiration of people for peace and democracy. Likewise, the tradition of Nepali Congress party that lets senior leaders to remain in power under the party-hierarchy-tree is repressive to new ideas of new-generation party leaders for the nation and the democracy.
There should be no question about integrating qualified Maoist militias into NA based on the professionalism and national standard for military discipline. Of course, to integrate Maoist militia commandos who have been active in politics in Maoist party such as PLA commander Nanda Kishor Pun, deputy commander Chandra Khanal, Barshaman Pun and so on into NA is unethical because these commandos are politically motivated to Maoist party.
Therefore, main opposition political party NC should not object the integration, but rather support the process as per the peace agreement based on scientific and rational evaluation for the professional integration in compliance with the military discipline of NA. Basically, the status quo of NC leaderships from the old tree of party-hierarchy are about to obstruct the peace process and democracy unless the young generation leaderships of NC see the danger of it and step up their effort to prevent course for rational and scientific army integration process.
The federal government model that can be most pragmatic and sustainable to address the geographical and cultural diversity of the nation is the federal government system that is structured with the units of local governments in far greater number than regional or state governments.
The discrepancy or error that minister Kirati´s draft has is the redundancies of the units of the governments. For example, it is unnecessary to structure four development councils above the 14 state councils or governments. Because the big size of regional or state government with the fewer number will be ineffective and will breed the unnecessary burden of bureaucracy.
However, the greater number (14 states) of state governments with the greater number of self-governable local governments - municipalities, boroughs, townships and school districts – (though what minister Kirati meant for 800 district local and 4000 municipalities - if it is demographically viable is unclear) can yield people liberty from the rule of the expertise and corruption of the government employees through the competitive electoral democratic process for government responsibility.
The worry of the constitutional experts about how ordinary people of the village could govern their local bodies of the government is what should be obsolete from the scene of the contemporary socio-political and economic revolution of Nepal. Those political experts and party leaders who think in this line of "people-distrust" for not letting people to have chance to govern their communities through the process of competitive electoral democracy should be subject to nationwide criticism for public awareness.
The question is whether the people should know first to claim their stake on their community or the constitutional experts and government authority should yield to people. Basically, local people should knock down the government employees´ authority over their community by inaugurating their own government that is formed through the competitive electoral democratic process. That is why federalism has evolved out of democracy for people to have system of government in which they can play competitive democratic electoral role for the responsible governance of their local units of government in the grass-root level.
The draft is, therefore, clearly based on one of the models of the federalism that endorses self-sustainable units of government based on the argument that the greater the number of self-governable people´s elected local governments – municipalities, boroughs, townships and school districts the most successful ought to be the federal government system for overall socio-political and economic developments of the nation at the grass-root level.
But there is a doubt whether these constitutional experts and CA secretariats are honestly committed to the state restructuring that can enforce national consensus to address nation´s geographical and cultural diversity based on the federal government system restructuring. Therefore, if the political leaderships found dumb on this issue but dependant on the constitutional pundits for state restructuring then that will not bring about any fundamental change but can still get dragged with the status quo of current (feudal) administrative establishments.
Every political leadership from every political party of the nation must demonstrate their leadership over the expertise of so call constitutional pundits of Nepal by solely not depending upon them. Rather political leaders´ ideas should lead the experts for them to follow the guideline as per their discipline but not otherwise. If not political leaderships will be the puppet of experts. As a result, the constitutional pundits will restructure the state for their own self-interest as witnessed in two-hundred fifty years of history of nation that was how pundit-ownership had protected privileged class at the suffering of the majority of marginalized class to this time – as true to all south Asian nations.
The political leaderships have to watch closely over the strikes of constitutional experts during a new constitution drafting. For example, if political leaderships fail to conceive an authentic and clear pragmatic model for state restructuring based on the national consensus for the federal government system, which can suit with the geographical and cultural structures of nation, the nation´s political parties will lose the governance authority in overall government system. Once again the pundits of Nepal as political appointees and government employees will dominate the ruling.
The unity of Maoist party that has been established with the endorsement of the party politics for the "People´s Federal Democratic National Republic" by the recent national convention of Maoist cadres has as a matter of fact reinforced the national consensus for people´s aspiration for democracy despite the domination of the hardliner ideologues and core interest of the Maoist party.
Hopefully, national Maoist cadres have realized that the hardliner interest for the centrally controlled government system or one party-system of totalitarian communist that governs hierarchically based on the party-leader seniority and reference to the former leaders is nothing different from the system of autocratic feudal monarchical system that people of Nepal had to wait for 21st century to come for its abolishment.
Similarly, the other main political parties have to sacrifice their party interest that is sheer ideology and dominated by the party leadership seniority along the tradition of feudal-socialist tree of party-hierarchy. For example, Nepali Congress party´s national awareness movement for opposing Nepal Army integration with the Maoist militias by senior leaders stands against aspiration of people for peace and democracy. Likewise, the tradition of Nepali Congress party that lets senior leaders to remain in power under the party-hierarchy-tree is repressive to new ideas of new-generation party leaders for the nation and the democracy.
There should be no question about integrating qualified Maoist militias into NA based on the professionalism and national standard for military discipline. Of course, to integrate Maoist militia commandos who have been active in politics in Maoist party such as PLA commander Nanda Kishor Pun, deputy commander Chandra Khanal, Barshaman Pun and so on into NA is unethical because these commandos are politically motivated to Maoist party.
Therefore, main opposition political party NC should not object the integration, but rather support the process as per the peace agreement based on scientific and rational evaluation for the professional integration in compliance with the military discipline of NA. Basically, the status quo of NC leaderships from the old tree of party-hierarchy are about to obstruct the peace process and democracy unless the young generation leaderships of NC see the danger of it and step up their effort to prevent course for rational and scientific army integration process.
The federal government model that can be most pragmatic and sustainable to address the geographical and cultural diversity of the nation is the federal government system that is structured with the units of local governments in far greater number than regional or state governments.
The discrepancy or error that minister Kirati´s draft has is the redundancies of the units of the governments. For example, it is unnecessary to structure four development councils above the 14 state councils or governments. Because the big size of regional or state government with the fewer number will be ineffective and will breed the unnecessary burden of bureaucracy.
However, the greater number (14 states) of state governments with the greater number of self-governable local governments - municipalities, boroughs, townships and school districts – (though what minister Kirati meant for 800 district local and 4000 municipalities - if it is demographically viable is unclear) can yield people liberty from the rule of the expertise and corruption of the government employees through the competitive electoral democratic process for government responsibility.
The worry of the constitutional experts about how ordinary people of the village could govern their local bodies of the government is what should be obsolete from the scene of the contemporary socio-political and economic revolution of Nepal. Those political experts and party leaders who think in this line of "people-distrust" for not letting people to have chance to govern their communities through the process of competitive electoral democracy should be subject to nationwide criticism for public awareness.
The question is whether the people should know first to claim their stake on their community or the constitutional experts and government authority should yield to people. Basically, local people should knock down the government employees´ authority over their community by inaugurating their own government that is formed through the competitive electoral democratic process. That is why federalism has evolved out of democracy for people to have system of government in which they can play competitive democratic electoral role for the responsible governance of their local units of government in the grass-root level.