The division of power between national and subnational levels of government is instrumental to democratic governance. This is the first time in Nepal that the constitution has shared state power between the centre, provinces and local levels. The legitimacy of self-rule is measured by the meaningful participation of citizens in the conduct of public affairs. During the Lichchhavi period in the hoary past, Nepal consisted of 13 constituencies. The number has fluctuated through history—12 in Prithvi Narayan Shah’s time, 39 under Bhimsen Thapa and 69 districts during Jung Bahadur Rana’s rule. Coming to modern times, a local representation system seems to have been initiated with the establishment of Bhotahiti Municipality in Kathmandu in 1919. It was entrusted with the task of managing solid waste.

In 1949, village and municipal panchayats with legislative, executive and judicial rights and responsibilities were envisaged by the Municipal Panchayat Act and Village Panchayat Act. Biratnagar, Birgunj, Bhaktapur, Kantipur and Lalitpur were municipalised on the basis of population and local income under Nepal Municipal Act, 1952. During the Panchayat and multiparty systems, local bodies remained as a mere appendage of the centre. The local elite and coteries enjoyed the power and resources. Presently, there are 3,157 village development committees (VDCs) and 217 municipalities in the country. The objective of restructuring the local level is to create convenient structures for self-rule and autonomy.

Inaccessible centres

The proposal to restructure the existing local bodies into 565 units has been rejected by political parties and citizens. The new entities have been created by keeping the previous wards intact. Surkhet district provides an example of the issues involved. The plan to restructure the entire district into five village councils and three municipalities is irrelevant. The minimum population to be declared a municipality in the Tarai and inner valleys has been fixed at 95,000.  Birendranagar contains only 93,000 people. By merging Ratu and Gadhi VDCs into the municipality, the population can be boosted to 98,447.

The population criteria set for local levels means that 70 municipalities across the country could lose their status. According to the census of 2011, the Himalayan, mountainous and plain regions is home to 6.73 percent, 43.01 percent and 50.27 percent of the population respectively. The emphasis on population has overshadowed watersheds, historical and geographical continuity, sources of water, physical infrastructure and forests. It has been proposed to combine Lagam, Betan, Bijaura, Gutthu and Ghatgaun VDCs and establish the service centre at Bijaura, which is not easily accessible.

Neta, Rajena, Ranibas, Awalching and Pamka VDCs are prevented from merging into a conurbation in spite of their commonalities. The entire area has a population of about 19,000. Adding another VDC will make the service centre inaccessible. Even by grouping eight VDCs from the Simta belt—Ghoreta, Kaphalkot, Aagrigaun, Bajedichaur, Rakam, Dandakhali, Kaprichaur and Khanikhola—into one council, the population will not be more than 25,845. The area is big so citizens will have a hard time getting to the service centre.

A healthy balance

The basis for restructuring local units should be strongly bound by the principle of identity and capability. Identity is characterised by language, culture and ethnicity, and historical and geographical continuity. Capabilities include the availability of physical infrastructures, natural resources, economic interdependence and administrative proximity. Large-sized local units that do not adhere to this principle are not viable in Nepal. Structures have to be socio-cultural diversity-friendly in terms of equal opportunities and easy access. An appropriate number of village councils in Nepal would be about 1,500. About 3,000 local market centres have to be upgraded throughout the country. The number is applicable to the proper restructuring of 957 areas across the country.

According to social science theory, society is maintained by the interaction and balance between centripetal and centrifugal forces. The centripetal force integrates the social and national integrity of a country while the centrifugal force leads society and the state to autonomy and diversity. Successful democratic countries maintain a balance between these two energies. The absence of a balance between centripetal and centrifugal forces either leads to the state’s becoming more centralised or society’s heading towards anarchy. Socio-cultural diversity, population distribution and sources of generating income locally have to be kept in mind while restructuring the local levels.

BK is a lecturer at the Department of International Relations and Diplomacy, Mid-Western University, Surkhet