March 11

Session One: (8:30 to 10:15 am)
TARAI IDENTITY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
Dr. Tatsuro Fujikura "Translocal Interactions and Social Transformations in
Western Tarai: The Case of Kamaiya Mobilization"
Prof. Hari Bansh Jha "Change in Religious Composition of Population in Terai"
Dr. B.C. Upreti "Politics of Citizenship in Nepal: Issues in Discrimination and
Marginalization of Tarai"
Chair: Dr. Harka Gurung
Papers were presented by Prof. Hari Bansh Jha and Dr. Tatsuro Fujikura. Dr. B.C. Upreti was absent and his abstract was read out by Dr. Sudhindra Sharma.

After the floor was opened to questions, Hari Sharma asked Prof. Jha how he would interpret the data he had presented and what it showed about religious conversion in the Tarai. This question was followed by comments from other people including the chairperson of the session Dr. Harka Gurung who remarked that Prof. Jha had simply presented data without following them up with adequate interpretation.

Hari Sharma said that he was happy to hear in Fujikura's presentation that a social movement based on kamaiya identity was emerging and thanked Fujikura for providing a perspective that showed the connections between local and global events. He further asked about the policies required for the empowerment of kamaiyas and the moral dilemmas faced by the Nepali state due to the kamaiya problem.

Dr. Ram Bahadur Chhetri asked Fujikura about the nature of the freedom of kamaiyas. "Was it really the kamaiyas who were freed?" he asked, "Or was it the state and landlords who were freed of a deep moral wound?"

Dr. D.N. Yadav asked Prof. Jha what he thought of the demand made by some for declaring Nepal a secular state. He also asked why the Muslim population of Nepal was so large. D.N. Yadav then asked Dr. Fujikura why he thought the kamaiya emancipation program was not succeeding.

Ekraj Chaudhari said that Dr. Fujikura had not mentioned the 1994 survey on Tharus that showed that 24% of the Tharu communities were kamaiyas. He went on to say that the Tharus continue to suffer from many other practices besides that of the kamaiya institution.

A participant, commenting on Prof. Jha's paper, stated that the history of the Tarai has been a history of conversion. He said mention of Jhas and Mishras as Buddhists could be found in ancient documents and they later converted to Hinduism.

Bishnu Pokhrel, a journalist from Samaya (Nepali weekly magazine), criticized the organizers for not presenting papers that raised the "real" issues that Madhesis faced.

Prof. Habibullah asked Dr. Fujikura about the impact of the Maoist insurgency on kamaiyas.

Raja Ram Subedi, commenting on Prof. Jha's paper, said that conversion rates had increased for Kirats and Buddhists as well as Hindus. In response to Dr. Fujikura's paper, he said that the kamaiya issue had successfully been politicized while other similar oppressive institutions still existed in various parts of the country but had not received the same type of exposure.

In response to the questions posed to him, Prof. Hari Bansh Jha gave the following reasons for the declining numbers of Hindus: there is no state-run campaign to promote Hinduism, many political parties have been advocating for a secular state after 1990 and Christian missionaries have been able to attract large numbers of Dalits and other oppressed groups. He refused to give an opinion on the question as to whether Nepal should or not be a secular state.

Dr. Fujikura said that much work had to be done for the empowerment of kamaiyas and that merely freeing them from slavery was not enough. Responding to Ram Bahadur Chhetri, he stressed the continual need for the state to work towards kamaiya empowerment.

Session Two: (10:30 am to 12:15 pm)
STATE, FORESTS AND BAZAARS
Dr. Jagannath Adhikari, Om Prakash Dev and Hari Dhungana " State and Forest: a Historical Analysis of Policies Affecting Forest Management in Nepal Tarai"
Dr. Sondra L. Hausner "Border Towns in the Tarai: Sites of Migration"
Mrinmoy Majumder "Social Inclusion of Nepal's Tarai: A Macroeconomic Perspective"
Chair: Dr. Elvira Graner
Papers were presented by Dr. Jagannath Adhikari (et al), Mrinmoy Majumder and Dr. Sondra L. Hausner.

Dr. Ram Dayal Rakesh asked Dr. Hausner whether there were Madhesi girls involved in prostitution in the border towns she studied. He also asked whether she was in favor of legalizing prostitution. Dr. Hausner replied that Madhesi women were indeed involved in prostitution and that this group included some married women as well. As for legalization, she said that the situation was complex, but one argument for legalization could be made on the grounds that it would help in labor regulation of prostitutes.

Dr. Ram Bahadur Chhetri asked Dr. Hausner whether there had been a change in factors of migration across the border to India. He also asked whether there were caste/ethnic patterns present in this trend.

Dr. Chhetri went on to ask Dr. Adhikari why community forestry hasn't been a real success in Nepal. Adhikari responded by saying that the question asked was an important one, but that his research was historical and that ethnographic research was necessary to answer questions about the problems of community forestry.

Ranju Thakur stressed the need for an emphasis on the plight of Madhesi women.

Dr. Hausner concluded her remarks by distinguishing between the terms 'prostitution' and 'trafficking', saying that while the former is voluntary, the latter is not. The open border, she said, is an issue in trafficking, but is not one for prostitution as such. Poverty is almost always the reason for prostitution, she said. In addition to conflict, globalization and economic crisis are the main reasons for migration across the border.

Session Three: (1:15 to 3:00 pm)
REPRESENTING THE TARAI

Ganesh B.K. "Madhesi (Tarai) Dalit ra Arakshyan-ko Prashna"
Bhaskar Gautam "Pratinidhi tatha Sahabhagita-ko Rajniti ra Tarai"
Jayprakash Gupta "Madhesh: Bived-ko Rajniti ra Bhavishya-ko Disha"
Dhirendra Premarshi "Tarai-ko Tutulko Matra Dekhne Nepali Media"
Chair: Prof. Yogendra Yadav

Papers were presented by Bhaskar Gautam and Dhirendra Premarshi. Ganesh B.K. and Jayprakash Gupta were absent and their abstracts were read out by Hari Sharma.

Tula Narayan Shah said that every paper presenter had only spoken of the oppression Madhesis have had to face historically but in doing so, they were hiding some things about Madhesi culture. He expressed that it was important to ask whether all the problems of the Madhesi were the results of political oppression or whether they were also due to something inherent in Madhesi culture.

Mohan Mainali, a journalist, in response to Mr. Premarshi's assertion that the media was always negative in its portrayal of the Tarai, stated that the media's job was to look at negativities. He characterized the media's role as one of a watchdog, and went on to say that if the media softened its stance, it would become a mere "lapdog". Mr. Premarshi replied by saying that, if that was so, the media, as a watchdog, should also bark at those who "steal" from Madhesis.

Bijay Karna agreed with Gautam's argument for a need to deconstruct the current Nepali identity before replacing it with another more inclusive one. He asked how Gautam envisioned the deconstruction taking place and what he thought would need to replace the old symbols of identity.

Gautam stated that there was still a lack of sensitivity towards Madhesis even among anthropologists and other intellectuals; that there was also a lack of adequate number of organizations to champion Madhesi rights; and that even the judiciary was biased against Madhesis.

Panel Discussion: (3:20 to 5:30 pm)
CHANGING DYNAMICS IN THE NEPAL TARAI
Chitra Lekha Yadav
Dr. Dambar Narayan Yadav
Ram Rijhan Yadav
Sarita Giri
Sita Nandan Raya
Ram Preet Pashwan
Moderator: Kedar Bhakta Mathema
Facilitator: Hari Sharma
The panel members were all either practicing politicians or activists.

Ram Rijhan Yadav:
Even as he expressed pleasure at being a participant in the conference, he stated that he wasn't satisfied with the papers presented. The Maoists, he said, had made a note-worthy contribution by raising awareness on problems faced by the Madhesi community. He went on to define the distinction between the terms 'Tarai' and 'Madhesh': the first refers to the place, the second to a community. He advocated changing the current political structure through a constituent assembly and stated that his party, Janamorcha Nepal, was in favor of a federal system of government.

Dr. D.N. Yadav:
He thanked Social Science Baha for giving the Madhesi community an opportunity to come together and discuss their issues. He said Madhesis had the potential for achievement and that their culture was not inferior to any other. He claimed groups like Madhesi Mukti Morcha and Madhesi Tigers would become more violent than the Maoists if Madhesis' problems weren't politically addressed and stressed the need to include Madhesis in nation-building.

Chitra Lekha Yadav:
Mrs. Yadav said that "a Madhesi is both a Madhesi and Nepali at the same time and when we talk about Madhesi, we are talking about the majority of the Nepali people". Quoting the Mahabharata, she went on to say that an injustice done to one is an injustice done to everyone. She asserted that the issues of Madhesi and Pahadi people should be taken objectively rather than otherwise. She felt there had not been any radical change in Tarai. For instance, agriculture had never flourished there and there was still no major irrigation planning.

Sarita Giri:
Mrs. Giri appreciated the feeling of participants like Usha Jha, Prof. Habibullah, Amresh Jha among others. She preferred to talk as a political aspirant representing the Nepal Sadbhawana Party. She said the demands of Nepal Sadbhawana Party are federalism and constituent assembly.

The floor was opened and the Buddhist scholar Mr. Shakya said that since nobody had defined the historical origin of the word 'Madhesh', he would do so by referring to the Tripitaka. In it, he said, Buddha refers to the land of Janak as "Majjhima Desha". According to Mr. Shakya, it was Majjhima Desha that would later be referred to as 'Madhesh' or 'Madhyadesh'.

Bijay Karna expressed the need to dismantle the artificial borders and restructure borders within Nepal according to language and ethnic boundaries. He stressed the need for federal representation and, to lead towards this, the bringing together of a constituent assembly.

Sudip Jha criticized Sarita Giri and the Sadbhavana Party on the grounds that they did not adequately represent the Madhesi languages like Bhojpuri and Maithili, as their emphasis was only on Hindi.

Dr. Ram Dayal Rakesh said that racial discrimination was the chief problem of the Madhesi people and that even the media was biased against them. He went on to say that Madhesis were not allowed to express their identity and that when they did so, Pahadis accused them of being communal.

Buddhi Narayan Shrestha suggested recommendations be made to the state based on the conference discussions and proceeded to enumerate a few. He stressed the need for an east-west railway system in addition to a north-south highway as well as new cities in the Tarai.

Tula Narayan Shah asked Sarita Giri why her party hadn't raised the issue of constituent assembly in 1990 if that issue was so important to the party.

Ramawatar Yadav said that the term 'Madhesi' was both ascriptive and prescriptive.

Prof. Lok Raj Baral said that he learned the difference between the terms 'Madhesh' and 'Tarai' at the conference, something he hadn't been aware of even though he himself was from the Tarai. He went on to say that the state has been exclusionary and stressed the need for inclusion. The present system of government was not a democracy but an "electocracy". A restructuring of the state was necessary for building a pluralistic society.

The moderator Kedar Bhakta Mathema summed up the salient points of the discussion. He then concluded by emphasizing the need for conferences in the future to focus on specific topics like education and health. He requested that the findings of the conference be made available to policy makers.

Due to a lack of time, Hari Sharma ended the conference before the panelists could respond to the questions posed to them.