"Prachandapath" for a New Nepal a Democratic Challenge
Prakash Bom
September 29, 2008
It has been less ambiguous in recent times that "Prachandpath" or the awe-inspiring vision for a new Nepal has had begun with the honest inquiry of Nepal Maoist party leaderships during People´s War up on the history of the communist movements, particularly the Russian Revolution that perverted people´s successful communist movement into the totalitarianism.
"Had Vladimir Lenin survived for a few more years after the Russian Civil War" as per the interpretation of the first elected Prime Minister of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal Puspa Kamal Dahal at India China Institute of New School, New York in his interaction speech program that "Lenin would have introduced the multiparty based competitive politics." Historically, only if Lenin´s New Economic Policy – public and private enterprise could have succeeded, which later after Lenin´s death Stalin completely abolished the policy.
However, this interpretation has not yet been turned true even after the downfall of Soviet empire. It is because there is still not a single communist nation on the face of the earth, which allows multiparty competitive politics. On the contrary, there are many communist parties that have successfully practiced competitive multiparty democratic politics even in the developed nation like Japan. But if this is the Prachandapath then such a vision is indeed doubtlessly promising, if not inspiring.
The successful People´s Movement II or "April Uprising" of Nepal has been a unique in the history of political revolution as Prime Minister claimed because the movement was incorporated with the synthesis of the People´s War or Maoists Arm Insurgency for the lasting peace and democracy. However, the peace and democracy will not reach that far without the rapid economic developments as Prime Minister cautioned. Therefore, setting up basic infrastructures for economic growth is essential to achieve the goal of people-oriented democracy. This is one of the major focuses of the current government.
It is indeed a cogent strategy that how a people-oriented democracy of Prachandapath can be the existence of a society, which has been conventionally governed by the feudal mindset in the name of democracy. But what would be like people-oriented democracy and how the people can exercise it are the challenges.
May be that´s why Maoist party has during people´s war chosen federal government scheme for restructuring the state. Logically, the acceptance of the federal system is the attempt to abandon totalitarian government system. This proves that Maoists have already confessed the historic fact of failure of totalitarian communist government scheme for people-oriented socio-economic political structure, which can be implemented with the architecture of federal government system.
But how the federal system can be implemented for people-oriented democracy, as Prime Minister reasoned that one cannot force it upon people but it all depends on what people mandate, is what needs tremendous clarity from among members of Constituent Assembly, political party leaderships and civil society of Nepal for people to see through.
Nevertheless, the worry of Nepali Diaspora in Northern America is about the centrally controlled bureaucracy of the old regime that needs complete transformation to minimize appalling nationwide corruption. The issue has been clearly brought to the attention of Prime Minister by several representatives of Nepali Diaspora organizations on different public interactions in New York.
But the question again is how under the federal government system such a centrally established feudal bureaucracy can be restructured to eradicate nationwide government corruption for the people-oriented democracy to keep it up. This demands a system of scientific distribution of human resources in a grass-root level, which can be implemented with the architecture of the federal government system through the workings of local governments.
Therefore, a federal government system of a nation that is devoid of the electoral architecture of self-governable local governments with the mandatory constitutional provision for its union states to implement cannot be people-oriented because such a federal system is repressive of power of people to manage their own community.
On the contrary, the federal model that mandates constitutional provision for people power is people-oriented and nations which have architect such a model such as Switzerland, Belgium and even United States their local constituents have self-sustainable electoral local government mechanism that is capable of responding to the need of its constituents. The foundation of the federal government system is the formation of the most productive electoral local government structure for the union states to implement as the mandatory constitutional provision of the federal nation.
If both the political parties which support or oppose state restructuring with the federal government system can reach to the political consensus for the self-governable electoral local government structure as the mandatory constitutional provision for the federal states to implement then it matters less how states are formed either linguistic or ethnic or geographical. Such federal government architecture can not only guarantee national integrity but also can redistribute human resources of over 50% of the current government employees to the local level as the employees of the local government on the basis of local residency.
Here is the outline of the agenda of Nepali Diaspora of Northern America presented to the Prime Minister Puspa Kamal Dahal in New York public interaction during his visit to the United Nations 2008 Assembly:
Statement: "The establishment of the Federal Democratic Republic setup will fail to address the current feudal socio-political and economic structures, if the new constitution fails to set the mandatory provision for the self-governable local government structure under the federal government system, of which legislative, executive and judiciary bodies can only be represented by the elected representatives of people of the respective constituents of a local government within the union states of the federal nation.
A new Nepal cannot be therefore built without the electoral power of people in local level for people to manage their own community independent of the intervention of the government appointed administrator – state or central."
Rationale: "Nepal may be a small country with its national geography, but its natural geography is complex and diverse as its diverse human demography. There are villages in remote mountains, which cannot be even easily managed from its district headquarter. Those government officers who are appointed to govern the district under the current government system are often not the local resident of the district. People have been ruled by this system of government even in last twelve years of democracy that did not make any difference in the daily life of people of local residency of entire nation."
Conclusion: "If the Constituent Assembly, the government and the Prime Minister Puspa Kamal Dahal with his charismatic leadership fails to set the mandatory constitutional provision for the union states to implement the electoral architecture of self-governable local government for people to manage their own community, then the pledge of Prachandapath for people-oriented democracy will make no difference in the lives of local people. It will as in the past democracy be disgraceful to the electoral right of the sovereign people of sovereign nation.
Consequently, the formation of states either with the right to self-governance or autonomous without the mandatory constitutional provision for the state to implement the electoral architecture of the local government can put the nation on the verge of disintegration.
Since the fundamental strength of the federal government system solely depends on the workings of electoral architecture of the local government, without which neither the economic development can make any difference in the daily lives of local people nor can it respect their electoral right to take responsibility for their own community. Indian federal system is the example, which renders to local people the least and last of the leftover from both state and central governments. Therefore, rural India has still remained backward."
In my observation it is obvious that without the rational and scientific approach to implement federal government system neither the new Nepal nor the people-oriented democracy of Prachandapath can be ascertained.
More than anything that can make difference in the lives of local people is the transformation of the current practice of government bureaucracy through the scientific architecture of the federal government system for state restructuring. The difference can only be turned into if the current government employees are allocate by 50% in local governments, 30% in the state government and 20% in the federal (central) government not as the employees of central government ministries but of the departments of local, state and central governments.
In retrospect, it was the current feudal model of bureaucracy that pulled the legs of past regimes and politicians of twelve years of democracy and got hell out of them. The traps are set all around the Prachandapath and against the people from getting such electoral power if the bureaucrats did not remain in power on top of the hierarchical tree to control their business in the name of the government. The only solution is the implementation of people-oriented architecture of the federal government system for people to manage their own community with their electoral power.
"Had Vladimir Lenin survived for a few more years after the Russian Civil War" as per the interpretation of the first elected Prime Minister of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal Puspa Kamal Dahal at India China Institute of New School, New York in his interaction speech program that "Lenin would have introduced the multiparty based competitive politics." Historically, only if Lenin´s New Economic Policy – public and private enterprise could have succeeded, which later after Lenin´s death Stalin completely abolished the policy.
However, this interpretation has not yet been turned true even after the downfall of Soviet empire. It is because there is still not a single communist nation on the face of the earth, which allows multiparty competitive politics. On the contrary, there are many communist parties that have successfully practiced competitive multiparty democratic politics even in the developed nation like Japan. But if this is the Prachandapath then such a vision is indeed doubtlessly promising, if not inspiring.
The successful People´s Movement II or "April Uprising" of Nepal has been a unique in the history of political revolution as Prime Minister claimed because the movement was incorporated with the synthesis of the People´s War or Maoists Arm Insurgency for the lasting peace and democracy. However, the peace and democracy will not reach that far without the rapid economic developments as Prime Minister cautioned. Therefore, setting up basic infrastructures for economic growth is essential to achieve the goal of people-oriented democracy. This is one of the major focuses of the current government.
It is indeed a cogent strategy that how a people-oriented democracy of Prachandapath can be the existence of a society, which has been conventionally governed by the feudal mindset in the name of democracy. But what would be like people-oriented democracy and how the people can exercise it are the challenges.
May be that´s why Maoist party has during people´s war chosen federal government scheme for restructuring the state. Logically, the acceptance of the federal system is the attempt to abandon totalitarian government system. This proves that Maoists have already confessed the historic fact of failure of totalitarian communist government scheme for people-oriented socio-economic political structure, which can be implemented with the architecture of federal government system.
But how the federal system can be implemented for people-oriented democracy, as Prime Minister reasoned that one cannot force it upon people but it all depends on what people mandate, is what needs tremendous clarity from among members of Constituent Assembly, political party leaderships and civil society of Nepal for people to see through.
Nevertheless, the worry of Nepali Diaspora in Northern America is about the centrally controlled bureaucracy of the old regime that needs complete transformation to minimize appalling nationwide corruption. The issue has been clearly brought to the attention of Prime Minister by several representatives of Nepali Diaspora organizations on different public interactions in New York.
But the question again is how under the federal government system such a centrally established feudal bureaucracy can be restructured to eradicate nationwide government corruption for the people-oriented democracy to keep it up. This demands a system of scientific distribution of human resources in a grass-root level, which can be implemented with the architecture of the federal government system through the workings of local governments.
Therefore, a federal government system of a nation that is devoid of the electoral architecture of self-governable local governments with the mandatory constitutional provision for its union states to implement cannot be people-oriented because such a federal system is repressive of power of people to manage their own community.
On the contrary, the federal model that mandates constitutional provision for people power is people-oriented and nations which have architect such a model such as Switzerland, Belgium and even United States their local constituents have self-sustainable electoral local government mechanism that is capable of responding to the need of its constituents. The foundation of the federal government system is the formation of the most productive electoral local government structure for the union states to implement as the mandatory constitutional provision of the federal nation.
If both the political parties which support or oppose state restructuring with the federal government system can reach to the political consensus for the self-governable electoral local government structure as the mandatory constitutional provision for the federal states to implement then it matters less how states are formed either linguistic or ethnic or geographical. Such federal government architecture can not only guarantee national integrity but also can redistribute human resources of over 50% of the current government employees to the local level as the employees of the local government on the basis of local residency.
Here is the outline of the agenda of Nepali Diaspora of Northern America presented to the Prime Minister Puspa Kamal Dahal in New York public interaction during his visit to the United Nations 2008 Assembly:
Statement: "The establishment of the Federal Democratic Republic setup will fail to address the current feudal socio-political and economic structures, if the new constitution fails to set the mandatory provision for the self-governable local government structure under the federal government system, of which legislative, executive and judiciary bodies can only be represented by the elected representatives of people of the respective constituents of a local government within the union states of the federal nation.
A new Nepal cannot be therefore built without the electoral power of people in local level for people to manage their own community independent of the intervention of the government appointed administrator – state or central."
Rationale: "Nepal may be a small country with its national geography, but its natural geography is complex and diverse as its diverse human demography. There are villages in remote mountains, which cannot be even easily managed from its district headquarter. Those government officers who are appointed to govern the district under the current government system are often not the local resident of the district. People have been ruled by this system of government even in last twelve years of democracy that did not make any difference in the daily life of people of local residency of entire nation."
Conclusion: "If the Constituent Assembly, the government and the Prime Minister Puspa Kamal Dahal with his charismatic leadership fails to set the mandatory constitutional provision for the union states to implement the electoral architecture of self-governable local government for people to manage their own community, then the pledge of Prachandapath for people-oriented democracy will make no difference in the lives of local people. It will as in the past democracy be disgraceful to the electoral right of the sovereign people of sovereign nation.
Consequently, the formation of states either with the right to self-governance or autonomous without the mandatory constitutional provision for the state to implement the electoral architecture of the local government can put the nation on the verge of disintegration.
Since the fundamental strength of the federal government system solely depends on the workings of electoral architecture of the local government, without which neither the economic development can make any difference in the daily lives of local people nor can it respect their electoral right to take responsibility for their own community. Indian federal system is the example, which renders to local people the least and last of the leftover from both state and central governments. Therefore, rural India has still remained backward."
In my observation it is obvious that without the rational and scientific approach to implement federal government system neither the new Nepal nor the people-oriented democracy of Prachandapath can be ascertained.
More than anything that can make difference in the lives of local people is the transformation of the current practice of government bureaucracy through the scientific architecture of the federal government system for state restructuring. The difference can only be turned into if the current government employees are allocate by 50% in local governments, 30% in the state government and 20% in the federal (central) government not as the employees of central government ministries but of the departments of local, state and central governments.
In retrospect, it was the current feudal model of bureaucracy that pulled the legs of past regimes and politicians of twelve years of democracy and got hell out of them. The traps are set all around the Prachandapath and against the people from getting such electoral power if the bureaucrats did not remain in power on top of the hierarchical tree to control their business in the name of the government. The only solution is the implementation of people-oriented architecture of the federal government system for people to manage their own community with their electoral power.
Print
Email
