Opinion
The days ahead
The opportunity to gain from effective implementation of the constitution should not be missedJagannath Adhikari
The opening of all trade routes with India—for whatever diplomatic and military-security reasons—should certainly be happy news for all of us. For this, we must also be grateful to the Madhesi Morcha leaders who took a courageous decision to open the border by putting aside some of their grievances that are still not fully resolved. In taking this decision, they have even taken risks of becoming unpopular among some of their constituencies. In our traditional thinking, we assume that a leader withdrawing from a conflict is ridiculed as a loser. But in reality, good leadership also means having the courage to retreat, give up, or even flee when the situation is affecting innocent people or when what is to be feared is happening. It was quite evident that the blockade was leading to what all of us feared—an economic/humanitarian crisis—that could feed political crisis. The earthquake victims had to bear the brunt of this problem; reconstructing houses and restoring livelihoods were becoming difficult for them.
Economic progress
The economic/humanitarian crisis that could have deepened because of the continuous blockade would have brought political instability. And, this instability would have wiped out all the gains made so far in the democratic political system and development. At a time when we desired faster economic growth, a dismal economic performance would have been catastrophic. The history of economic development clearly reveals that economic progress that improves people’s lives enhances their loyalty to the political system and the state. Developed countries like the US and European countries have made stable democratic systems through economic and social prosperity. Taking the example of India, there is also a positive correlation between economic progress and relative stability in the political system. It is because of this general economic progress that we do not see the political instability in India the way we used to prior to 1990. All of us who studied in India in the 1970s and 1980s witnessed the manifestation of this instability in our studies. Because of constant strikes linked to politics, a four-year course used to take six or seven years to complete. Of course, the growing inequality in the distribution of benefits arising from economic progress can also threaten the political system in a country. But this is an entirely different matter.
Nepal has gone through a long phase of political transition. One of the reasons for this is that frequent political changes in the past two-and-a-half decades could not bring much economic progress. As a result, the internal economic system remained stagnant. Such stagnant or semi-stagnant societies cannot meet people’s expectations such as job opportunities, higher wages and government services. This is especially so in a country like Nepal where the youth population is swelling. Fortunately, foreign employment has come as a safety valve to release the pressure of the unemployed youths and the remittances have been the savior of the country’s economy. Under such circumstances, any obstacles to the economic system and to the livelihood of people would lead to unhappy consequences for all.
Positive aspects
The acute shortage of essential commodities people faced after the blockade has taught us that this kind of obstruction should not be a tool for political gain when other ways of protests are available. We know that Nepal’s democracy is not perfect, but it has given space to people to exercise democratic rights to resist the government and its policies. It is because of this space for protest or resistance that we have witnessed various political changes in the last two-and-a- half decades. When such systems of resistance are available, the movements for political rights should not obstruct or enroach on other people’s rights. On the other hand, the government and responsible institutions should be sensitive to peaceful protests and resolve the problems swiftly through dialogues and deliberations.
At the international level, there is also a realisation that instruments like sanctions or blockades are not effective in putting pressure on a country. Rather, these instruments would lead to negative impacts on the level of human rights and democratisation. They could even bolster a ruthless and illegitimate government to dismiss human-rights concerns of the people. In our case, the government easily used the blockade to justify its inefficiencies and vested interests, including the delay in reconstruction works, widespread corruption, black marketeering and rise in prices of essential commodities. Moreover, this blockade did not lead us anywhere except to the loss of lives, jobs and incomes. This, however, does not mean that people’s grievances should be overlooked. On the contrary, the remaining grievances of the dissenting political parties or the Madhesis need even more attention now than before. At the same time, these parties should also reach out to the wider Nepali society to expand their support-base, as some of their demands contradict with those of other groups. They should realise that if the demands are legitimate, people will constantly struggle to achieve them and they will be realised sooner or later.
Apart from the constant struggle to refine the constitution, we should not let go of the opportunity to gain from the effective implementation of the constitution. There are many positive provisions for social inclusion in the statute. For example, there should be at least 40 percent seats for women in local government and 33 percent in the regional and central governments. If local elections are held quickly, we could see a large number of women in political institutions, and these women could elect their own representatives in decision-making bodies. Taking the case of the impending election in the Nepali Congress party, 42 percent of members would come just from ‘reserved quotas’ for socially excluded groups. At every level of their organisation, this ‘reservation’ norm has to be maintained. This means that excluded groups should take the chance to expand their representation by putting pressure for the effective implementation of the constitution and other policies.
Adhikari is a social scientist