 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
| |
| |
|
The Agenda of Transformation: Inclusion in Nepali
Democracy
24 and 26 April, 2003
Kathmandu
Perhaps the most pressing political issue facing
Nepal over the last dozen years of Nepal’s
democracy has been the question of representation
and inclusion within that democracy. The hope
of the 1990 People’s Movement was that it
would usher in a pluralistic state structure and
polity, reflecting the country’s enormous
diversity of demography, opinion and experience.
It is now amply clear that the people at large
do not feel ownership of Nepali democracy. The
causes have partly to do with structural challenges
such as those inherent in the 1990 Constitution
and in the electoral system. But it is also the
inability of the institutions to live up to the
liberal ideals enshrined in the same Constitution,
and these include the political parties, bureaucracy,
judiciary, academia, media and civil society as
a whole.
Many scholars believe that the formal structures
of the Nepali polity are adequate, but that they
have been misused by opportunistic and short-sighted
actors in the political scene. But others are
of the view that the Constitution promulgated
in 1990 overlooked the diversity of the country
in terms of language, ethnicity, region, gender,
caste and class. Thus, while recognising Nepal
as a ‘multiethnic’ and ‘multilingual’
country, the Constitution did not discard the
Panchayat’s conception of Nepal as a monolithic
state resting on the pillars of one people, one
language, one nation, and even one religion. Voices
that pointed out that anomaly were brushed aside
as inconsequential to the larger task of nation-building,
and demands for change by the historically marginalised
groups were ignored. One of the consequences has
been the Maobaadi movement and the rapid spread
of the insurgency which has now been recognised
widely as fed less by ideology and more by the
unfulfilment of social expectations raised by
the second advent of democracy in 1990.
The state’s response to the voices of
discontent took the form of goodwill gestures,
such as the establishment of women’s and
dalit commissions, or an ‘academy’
for the janajati communities. Meanwhile, Kathmandu’s
academia and the national educated classes as
a whole have not been adequately engaged in demanding
more sensitivity and action from the governments
of the past decade. While discourse has certainly
not been lacking in the effervescent Nepali press,
there could have been more scholarly commitment
towards making Nepali democracy more pluralistic
and inclusive.
Nepal remains mired in unprecedented political
violence as this is written, but it would be wrong
to await till this fury blows over to address
the agenda of transformation of the polity. The
Maobaadi challenge certainly provides the context
in which it becomes necessary to study changes
necessary in the polity; however, the organisers
feel it important to look deeper and beyond the
political demands of the Maobaadi, and address
the underlying theoretical and practical aspects
of creating an inclusive, representative, participatory
system of government that rejects the institutionalised
neglect and exclusion of the past and present.
Processes for introducing participatory democracy
at all levels have to be formulated, and grievances
articulated over the past twelve years have to
be examined, and a strategy devised to incorporate
them without undermining the national fabric.
While there may be structural and institutional
defects, there is no alternative but to make Nepali
democracy deliver, particularly for a country
that has been through three decades of an unrepresentative
Panchayat era. The political system has to be
made more representative of the country and people,
which is why the Social Science Baha is organising
an international conference on 24-26 April 2003
to address the matter of representation, pluralism
and inclusion in Nepali democracy. The conference
will bring together Nepali, South Asian and overseas
scholars to address diverse areas of concern,
in relation to the makeup of Nepali society, the
structure of the polity, and the nature of political
participation, so that a clear understanding shall
emerge on the way ahead for the country.
Some of the topics identified for discussion
at the conference include: reforming the 1990
Constitution vs. drawing up a new constitution;
representation in a pluralist society; practices
in genuine inclusiveness; the feasibility of positive
discrimination in the Nepali context and lessons
from elsewhere; the role of religion, and the
use of symbols for exclusion; and so on. The themes
have been left deliberately open at the outset
to allow for maximum diversity in approach and
treatment of the submitted paper proposals.
Conference participation and details
The Social Science Baha invites papers from scholars
all over the world. The title and abstract (approximately
500 words) of the paper has to be received at
the address given below by 3 February, 2003. Submissions
will be selected by the end of February. Further
information will be posted on the website as and
when necessary, and a second circular sent out
to everyone who responds to this call for papers.
The conference will tap the experience of Nepali
and non-Nepali scholars, to look closely at the
specificities of Nepal’s own diversity as
well as make comparative analysis in order to
provide a background against which changes can
begin to be charted. The expertise present at
the conference will represent the range of relevant
disciplines, from history to ethnography, geography,
linguistics, political science, economics, jurisprudence
and constitutional law, and so on. The conference
is termed ‘international’ because
a large volume of active social science expertise
relevant for guiding the future of the large and
complex country that is Nepal, also exists beyond
its borders.
The organisers expect a core of about 40 scholars
to be present at the conference, with another
hundred or so invited observers. The conference
will be designed to include several keynote addresses,
plenary sessions, and panels. The themes under
which papers will be aggregated presented will
be announced after the submissions are selected
in mid-January 2003. There will be simultaneous
translation into the Nepali language from English
and vice versa in the plenary sessions to promote
local understanding and participation. Edited
proceedings of the conference will be published
in English as well as in Nepali, and the organisers
will pay particular attention to disseminating
information from the conference to the public.
The Social Science Baha
The Social Science Baha is an institution that
was set up to support social science research
in Nepal and to enhance its quality. It is centred
in a social science library located at Patan Dhoka,
Lalitpur. The Baha runs under the umbrella of
the non-profit Himal Association, with its long
involvement in the areas of research, publishing,
investigative journalism, documentary film festivals,
and public information.
The conference organising committee is made
up of Deepak Thapa (Editor, Himal Books/Director,
Social Science Baha) as Conference Secretary,
Novel Kishore Rai (linguist, diplomat), Kanak
Mani Dixit (Editor and publisher), Rajendra Pradhan
(Chair, Social Science Baha, anthropologist) and
Santa Bahadur Pun (commentator, engineer).
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
