Post-Conflict Power Sharing: The Case of Nepal (original) (raw)
Related papers
A Transitional Success Story: The Nepali Experience with Power-sharing
In November 2006, a ten-year civil war in Nepal formally ended with a peace agreement signed between the Maoists and seven major political parties. The agreement mandated power-sharing between the groups in an attempt to maintain unity in the country until elections could be held. Specific power-sharing measures to guide Nepal through this transitional phase included the formation of a grand coalition government and consensus decisionmaking. Despite the emergence of spoilers to the peace agreement, the positive-sum nature of the negotiations, the flexibility of the power-sharing mechanisms and the strong national ownership of the process all strengthened the likelihood of a successful transition from civil war to representative democracy. National elections were held in April 2008, and in August a new government led by Maoist leader Prachanda was formed.
Peace Process in Nepal: Successes and Failures
Abstract Every nation has its unique history of pains and pride. The pride of history constitutes an important motivating factor or driving force for co-existence of the population. As the history of many nations demonstrate, the sense of unity and integration (often defined as nationalism) of the population is often determined by the history of the national pride- the stories of success in building nation out of struggles for existence. The history of pride is taken by people as cardinal achievements of their predecessors. Nevertheless, the achievements may have been enjoyed only by a smaller elite group for its exclusive benefits. Nepal has been a typical example of this situation. This is evident from the system of governance experienced by the people over the last two centuries that an elite class has been in domineering position in all aspects of national life despite a fact that Nepal has been a nation of many ethnic minorities. No one can doubt that the overwhelmingly larger part of the population has always been isolated or excluded from the system of governance and access to development opportunities, thus it constitutes a major latent factor for conflict. In the past, Nepalese people have constantly waged struggles to correct this unjust system of governance and to transform the nation into a prosperous democratic country. These struggles were, however, always tricked and eventually made meaningless. The 2006 movement ended as a revolution as it succeeded to transform the nation into a modern state. The institution of monarchy, the most cardinal basis of feudalism, was abolished by this movement what is described as the most significant outcome of the movement. It was equally significant from the point of view that it succeeded to set a goal of reframing the structure of the State through a new constitution to be made and promulgated by a popularly elected Constituent Assembly. Furthermore, the 2006 movement played also a crucial role in ending the decade long violent conflict. The Interim Constitution and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) were two important documents envisaged to streamline the changes brought about by the 2006 movement. The expectations of the people towards smooth transition were, however, shattered by the subsequent political maneuverings, including games played by reactionaries and non-Nepalese forces. The formulation of the Interim Constitution as well as CPA confronted snags, and consequently suffered from several lapses. One of the serious lapses was related to the issue or process of the rehabilitation and management of the Maoist combatants. Through the CPA, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) fully inducted itself to the political mainstream and became a legitimate part of the Nepalese democratic process. The Constituent Assembly (CA) in this context was supposed to take responsibility of addressing the issue of the management of the combatants. They were now, as per the CPA, the matter of concern for the national government; they were no longer an outlawed rebellion force. Therefore, the State needed to develop a concrete mechanism to deal with them with a package solution. The general people widely expected that the CA would promptly act to detach the combatants from the CPN (Maoist), and would place them under it. It was widely believed that the CA would not allow a party to hold a private army. The combatants, however, continued to be under CPN (Maoist). This situation was primarily an outcome of the failure on the part of the political segments of Nepal to own combatants and deeply consider the necessity of promptly rehabilitating them. This issue could be effectively dealt with by formation of a Committee by the CA and placing both the armies under its authority until the issue of the management of combatants was not fully addressed. This approach would address the subsequent problem of squabbling. The political parties of Nepal totally overlooked this prospect of addressing the issue of the management of combatants. Indeed, the issue of the combatants’ management became a ‘abandoned football on the street’- everybody could hit it without having any objective. The leaders of the political parties used it as a matter of ‘cheap speech’. The CPN (Maoist) took the combatants as its organizational strength and other parties as an ‘enemy’. They both used it for their rusty politics. The implication of this game fell on the constitution making process. The lingered process and failure to come to a conclusion about combatants’ management posited a state of suspicion among political parties, which, in turn, seriously jeopardized the prospect of consensus on several contentious issues of constitution. Even the completion of constitution making in the given deadline is now widely suspected. And if so happens the nation may have to face a dire situation of fresh conflict. The change brought about by the people in 2006 has now come to a nasty turning point, with a danger of constitution making being a fiasco. Should the constitution making process be disrupted, the nation will have to face a catastrophic consequence. The conflict will be reinstated with danger of massive destruction of lives and resources. To avoid this dangerous situation, the political parties are urged to reinstate the consensus and go forward with expectations of people reflected on the 2006 movement. The formation of the national government is the need of the time, if the political parties are sincerely willing to rescue the nation from this crisis and lead it to the better future. The formation and running of the government in a politically transitional national should not be a game of numerical strength. The polarization of politics in a transitional nation is never acceptable ethically and pragmatically both. The present government should therefore promptly move for a mission of accommodating the CPN (Maoist) into the government and work out a concrete plan of actions for constitution making in time. The government must also vigorously engage in the act of resolving the issue of the combatants’ management without risking the disruption of the national military. If the government fails to do that it will essentially invite a catastrophic revision of the bloody conflict. Nepalese are optimistic people and they have a faith on negotiation as a means of conflict transformation. They should not let the history of their strong determination and prudent decision gets down. This article is a critical appraisal of some issues confronting the ongoing peace process. The issues have been critically analyzed with a sincere hope to help in the process of constitution making and peace building. Thus, the article has nothing to do with any political ideology or political party. It is, therefore, urged that no opinions expressed in this article should be viewed or understood as ‘critics of some political ideology or political party’. What the article intends to do here is to uncover trends of the political process in constitution making and peace building, and suggest some ways out.
The Nepalese Peace Process: Faster Changes, Slower Progress
2014
The ongoing structural reform process in Nepal is the outcome of over one decade of negotiations among the former ruling Monarch, Nepali political parties and the Maoist movement, under the impetus of civil society mobilisation for change – with demands ranging from power, rights and dignity for people at the community level. This paper analyses the ways in which the peace process, which put an end to the armed conflict in Nepal in 2006, has sought to address popular demands for inclusive democracy. It does so by reviewing the various cycles of negotiation, codification and materialisation of political reforms since the People’s Movement of 2006, the Comprehensive Peace Accord and the (first and second) Constituent Assemblies. It focuses in particular on one area of reform that has been widely debated among political and civil society sectors, namely, state restructuring through power decentralisation. Overall, the paper develops the arguments that although there is a widespread con...
Politics and Governance in Nepal
It is argued that lack of vision among political leaders and the ruling elite, and the inability to understand the consequences of socioeconomic exclusion, are the roots of current political crisis in Nepal. The centralization of power, together with a bias towards urban development over the three decades of import substitution regime, encouraged corruption, and increased poverty and inequality in the country-€" both horizontal (between territorial, ethnic and religious groups) and vertical (between classes within the society) inequality. In the absence of genuine political commitments and institutional reforms, the minority and underprivileged classes have been excluded from opportunities in governance and mainstream politics since the unification of the country 238 years ago. There is a need to introduce bold reforms in economic policy, politics and the institutional setup to sustain growth and increase collective voice and a bargaining power for all disadvantaged groups. Nepal would have been politically a more stable nation today if political leaders and the ruling elite had a vision for the nation, intellectual depth to understand the consequences of socioeconomic exclusion and appropriate strategies to address them.
In November 2011, the Supreme Court of Nepal ruled in favour of a fourth extension for the promulgation of the constitution. A final deadline of 27 May 2012 was set for the delivery of this mandate. However, once again the task has not been fulfilled and this stalemate will certainly push Nepal into a deeper political crisis. Inter-and intra-party politicking, ideological clashes and the inability to reach a consensus on the state's restructuring process on the basis of ethnic federalism have altogether hampered the major political parties from working together. Although some political headway has been made in the recent months, the transition to a federal democratic republic and the overall peace process in Nepal will remain incomplete if a constitutional crisis persists.
From Insurgency to Democracy: The Challenges of Peace and Democracy-Building in Nepal
International Political Science Review, 2009
The failure of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes spurred a global surge in democratization in the 1980s. However, efforts at democratization have been challenged by path-dependent institutional and political variables that can inhibit the growth of western-style democratic pluralism. Nepal is no exception to this experience. When the king sidelined the political parties in an attempt to revive the absolute monarchy in February 2005, the political parties and the Maoist guerrillas resisted this move and forced the king to revive the dissolved House of Representatives. Subsequently, parliament proclaimed Nepal to be a federal democratic republic, ending the 240-year-old Hindu monarchy. Today, there is both optimism and pessimism regarding the ongoing peace and democracy-building project in Nepal: optimism because there is a consensus, albeit vague, on building political and economic institutions that will transform Nepali society for the better; pessimism because the due process ...
Electoral bottlenecks and problems of governance in Nepal
… : Philippine Journal of …, 2007
This paper assesses the electoral system and problems of governance in Nepal focusing on various phases of political developments since the 1950s. It analyzes the setbacks encountered in the democratization of the country. The article explains the function of Nepals electoral system at various junctures of its recent history and traces the struggle of the people for democratic governance against an entrenched feudal culture of authoritarianism. It analyzes the role of the king, the political parties, and the geopolitics in the region in obstructing democratization, good governance and accountability. Finally, it shows how electoral deviations and lack of good governance have combined to engender Maoist insurgency. The paper argues that only a peaceful solution of the present day conflict brought about by Maoist insurgency will strengthen the democracy in Nepal.