Demystifying Developmental Issues in Nepal
By Deepak Adhikari
Watching the Nepali docudrama Goreto Nisafko ( Path of Justice) directed by Pallav Ranjan in a cozy Kupandol reading hall of Spiny Babbler, I concluded that the issue it portrayed is just a tip of the iceberg while the crux of the problem is something else.
This is how the docudrama is reviewed in Spiny Babbler’s Website: Under the project HMG/UNDP Strengthening the Rule of Law Programme, Spiny Babbler was assigned to produce a documentary film Goreto Nisafko. Involving local inhabitants of Jaruwarashi (7 KMs away from the capital city) the film illustrates how local disputes in village areas and rural communities can be resolved/addressed through local mediation and arbitration.
Sorry for the digression. But, for me it’s a bit different. Whenever I attend programs explicitly or implicitly organized by UN, I think that they are mocking at our poverty. Their luxurious ultra modern vehicles are in sheer contrast to our abject poverty. While I was watching the film with fellow journalist Devendra Bhattarai, a young lady from UNDP barged into the hall in the middle of the show (obviously, a UN painted vehicle dropped her) and remarked about the docudrama giving an air of authenticity. She may be right with her points, but she seemed to be twice removed from the reality.
Moreover, when these “Bikase people” use certain terminologies, I wonder if they really know the ground realities. It’s always easier said than done.
I have few caveats. Who are the target audience: elite people living in air-conditioned UN building or those impoverished and downtrodden villagers? Who are the beneficiaries? After all, those village people will not watch this 10 thousand US dollar docudrama. They are struggling for two square meals a day. They don’t have time for all these glittering dramas. Where are the gadgets to screen such artifacts? It is said that the film will be aired in Nepal Television. But, NTV is watched chiefly in urban areas.
This effort seems to be utter waste of money and time. It would have been more effective, had the money been used for pamphlets and other awareness kits.
Do our village-feuds undergo a happy ending as depicted in the docudrama? I don’t think so. As an audience, I have few suggestions for the debut director Ranjan: It’s easy to find characters and the shooting spots in the periphery of Kathmandu Valley. All and sundry are doing that. He would have featured real people in his docudrama, had he been to some remote part of Nepal. Family feuds, delayed justice and lack of community works are pertinent issues, but they demand subtle insights. Technologically, it’s superb but the dialogues sounded artificial. Ranjan must work hard to prove his talent. And, UN must think seriously about utilizing its resources so that needy people could genuinely benefit.
6 Comments »
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.blog.com.np/wp-trackback.php/559
Dashing Deep,
Good point you brought forward. U.N should rethink about changing its administrative costs so that the poor and the needy ones get more out of every dollar the UN or other donor agency spend. Actually I was reading a TIME Magazine article that says in African countries, the people only get 6cents out of every dollar (U.S. Dollars) spent by the UN and other donor agencies. It must be the same in Nepal too.
Comment by Govinda Bahadur Ghale — 5/13/2005 @ 12:10 am
i think they should make copy of that documentry and show in each and every village in nepal and may be lure people by saying they will get free food or something like that. that would be good idea. and i agree with the idea of distributing pamplets and other awareness kit
Comment by raja — 5/13/2005 @ 12:51 am
The United Nations, without any doubt, is a White Elephant for Nepal and for the world. Lets not talk about its unbalanced representation of the world. Japan, second largest donor of the UN, is still struggling to have a permanent seat of the Security Council. India, world’s largest democracy, is nothing but dreaming to be in that elite club. On the organizational front, the UN needs serious restructuring. I am not aware about Kofi Annan’s latest proposal but I am sure that needs to be moved forward quickly.
About spending? What is UN for? And what are development agencies like UNDP for? For the benefit of poor? Oh..if so, I find those fancy cars and SUVs with long antennas sliding over Kathmandu roads in contrast to that goal. They are mocking out our poverty and sad situation. Working in Kathmandu for Nepali people, these UN guys at Pulchowk are living the lifestyle of an American. Come to your senses. Open up rose painted glasses of those fancy cars and see the situation.
I fully agree with Govinda Bahadur Ghale ji that “U.N should rethink about changing its administrative costs so that the poor and the needy ones get more out of every dollar the UN or other donor agency spend.” Why spend so much money for those staffs when many people don’t have enough food to eat? The UN is talking about Darfour and saying that nobody is serious about raising money for that region. Why don’t it set an example by reducing that unjustified salary and administrative expenditure?
If UN is for the benefit of poor people around the world, why make the jobs at that organization on of the most lucrative in the world? I have seen so many people in Kathmandu dreaming for a UN job. That is not unusual because a UN post offers so much salary and benefit that you try hard to secure one. If you talk about the benefit of third world, why make the job a first world class?
Comment by Wagle — 5/13/2005 @ 10:49 am
Yes it was not fully convincing thing, i salute D’s writing on Ranjan’s work.
Comment by An ex-blogger — 5/13/2005 @ 6:09 pm
I completely agree with your openion…great…you have very strong ideas on it. I appreciate
Comment by shankar paudel — 5/13/2005 @ 6:15 pm
Nicely put. I had read a feature in TKP about this docudrama. But your ideas stand in stark contrast with the writing in the TKP. Is it true that people take reality how media represent them?
Really, The UN shows more and does little, and nicely put, it mocks at our poverty.
Comment by Vishu — 5/15/2005 @ 10:21 am
United We Blog 