Proposal to establish Electoral Institutions for Federal System of Government in New Democratic Nepal
By Prakash Bom in Queens, New York (UWB received this article, around 6 thousand words, in email)
Manifestation:
It is time for Nepal to transform itself into a ‘New Democratic Nepal’ from its corrupt feudal oligarchic government practice that are imminent in contemporary ruling elites who have positioned in the state power with the mandate of people’s movement II.
Nepali men and women who participated in the movement in the country and around the world for the fundamental change in the practice of the government must continue their struggle to establish electoral institutions of Democracy from grass-root local level of administrative, judiciary & law enforcement bodies of local governments to the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary bodies of the Federal government.
The bodies of local governments and the bodies of Federal governments must be formed through the electoral logistics of Democracy with the popular votes of the people of Nepal.
This is the mandate of the people’s movement II to abolish the arbitrary practice of the government that are routinely exercised with the appointments of the government positions in the legislative, executive and judiciary bodies of the government by the contemporary ruling elites of the government.
Such inheritance of the governments’ attitudes in the mind sets of the ruling elites must be exterminated by the formation of the democratic institutions based on the complete electoral logistics of the Democracy.
If we “Nepali People” stand for “Complete Democracy”, we then must go ahead to establish the Democratic Institutions for Federal System of Government that gives people rights and responsibilities to manage their local bodies of the government through the decentralizations of state power. Federal System of Government will allow districts of Nepal to be ruled by the people of the district through electoral procedures of the popular votes under the multiparty democracy.
Ruling elites have ruled Nepal with the rule of arbitration even after the dawn of the Democracy with utter lies and hypocrisy. This happened either we people or political leaders or both did not know what is democracy, what is civil liberty, what is human rights protections, what is right to vote, what is equal opportunity and so forth. But if the political leaders knew all the fundamentals of the Democracy then why didn’t they implement in the government practices.
There are many impediments to institutionalize the electoral logistics of democracy in government practices. But the most deadly obstacles of all in our Nepali society are the leaders who neither want to initiate such logistics in their political party organizations nor in the government. The double standard is the legacy of ruling elites in our Nepali tradition of governance, which has conditioned our common brain that needs democratic mutations.
Prelude:
Nepali people have demonstrated most courageously in People’s Movement II from their hearts with national and international solidarity that they stand for the complete Democracy to create a Democratic Secular New Nepal.
Such a historic movement must continue until and unless we achieve our collective wish to establish unshakable foundation for complete Democracy. As per the mandate of the movement, we must successfully accomplish our national constituent assembly election to write a new (all inclusive secular) democratic constitution, which guarantees complete electoral system of governance.
We must understand “What is complete electoral system of governance?” as active participants of the People’s Movement II that all legislative, executive and judiciary bodies must be elected as many as by the popular votes from the village level to the Parliament. This is what it means complete electoral system of governance
Active participants (men and women) of the movement from Civil Society, Human Rights Activists, Lawyers, Journalists, Intellectuals, student unions, to the youths of Nepal must campaign nationwide for the public awareness to establish a Decentralized Electoral (Federal) System of Government.
We must flashback the facts of our past history of governance that had not only dominated our system of government but also our thinking that is conditioned to meet our ends need. We all are less or more conditioned with the feudalistic way of life and oligarchic system of administrations and public managements.
Therefore, we never had the vision to establish the complete democratic institutions from the local grass-root level to the Parliament. In last twelve years of democracy we only had the Parliamentary level of institutions to govern the county from the centrally controlled feudal oligarchic logistics of administration and public managements.
Many of us, especially the politicians from different parties might not know how the developed world’s democratic nations work with the complete electoral systems of governance most profoundly from the local grass-root levels.
We often imagine about such decentralized electoral systems of governance because we do not have experience of other than the feudal oligarchic and autocratic centrally controlled systems of governance.
We have faced such practice even in last twelve years of Democracy that the politicians from all different parties did not have the vision and courage to abolish the feudal oligarchic and autocratic logistics of governance from the local levels to the cabinet.
For example, the politicians themselves did not allow the elected district chiefs to form the district cabinet to administer the districts. But they kept appointing chief district officers from the central government to administer the districts. They knew such appointments are based on the feudal oligarchic and autocratic government practice.
To our surprise in the developed world’s democratic nations not only the parliamentary, local states and counties assembly representatives are elected by the popular votes but also the district judges, attorneys, law enforcement district officers (police chiefs) are elected as per the basis of their permanent residential local status.
The Prime Minister or the Presidents of the nation can only nominate Supreme Courts Judges and Federal Attorney General in judiciary system of governance before the Parliamentary hearing and voting.
No cabinet chief can appoint for any position in legislative, executive and judiciary bodies of the nation with out Parliamentary hearing and voting.
So in order to fulfill the mandate of the People’s Movement II for the complete Democracy we must stir our movement to eradicate the feudal oligarchic and autocratic government practices such as the appointments of district chief administration officers (CDOS, LDOS and so on).
We must abolish such establishments by restructuring the complete electoral system of governance for the people and by the people through the election of national constituent assembly election and with the rewriting of a new democratic constitution.
We must establish autonomous regional district level of government bodies elected by the popular votes of the people of each district to achieve following logistics for administration and development of the district:
1. Such local governments must have rights to form cabinet to administer the district from the elected members of district assembly.
2. Such local governments must have rights to legislate local regulations through district assembly hearing and voting as per the article of the nation’s constitution.
3. Such local governments must have rights to assemble revenue from local taxes to meet the expenses of the district administration and development.
4. Such local governments must have rights and responsibilities to build infrastructures for the developments of the district.
5. Such local governments must have rights to receive annual funds for districts developments such as education, health and natural disaster funds from the Federal government as being a part of the local body of the nation.
The leaders of political parties of Nepal are prone to get succumb to their parties’ self-interest for power. Once they get into the government their minds get lost even at this critical stage of national crises. We have presently witnessed such vested interests for just forming a cabinet to pave the road for Interim Government and accomplishing the election of National Constituent Assembly to write a new constitution for our New Nepal.
Nepali people have let them do this in the past. But now at this juncture we must actively be vigilant to guard the verdict of the People’s Movement II getting slipped away from the political party leaders’ wicked hands so that they cannot continue with the old oligarchic logistics of the government and do away with the mandate of the movement.
Until we successfully accomplish the foundation of the complete democracy through the election of the Constituent Assembly – for Republican or ceremonial monarchical Multiparty Democracy, we must not put an end to the People’s Movement II. We must keep moving on with it until we reach to our destination.
People’s movement II have warned the political leaders of all parties that they must not repeat the same mistakes again as they had committed in last fifteen years. What mistakes they committed and how they lost the trust of people was mainly by continuing the nation’s governance with the old regimes’ oligarchic and autocratic logistics of administrations.
Now we must fight with such psycho-political conditionings (mentalities) of leaders and ruling elites through the election of the Constituent Assembly. We must therefore most precisely and vigilantly establish the secular Democratic legislature, executive and judiciary logistics to abolish feudal autocratic and oligarchic system of government, which are creeping viruses among ruling elites and government agencies.
We must face the oligarchic administrative logistics as dominant elements of feudal autocratic regime that all ruling elites find easy to grab power from it even in the name of Democracy. Oligarchic logistics are not only corrupt with its administrative procedures but also parasitical in the government practice. Such system is based on catch-twenty-two principle to keep its subjects in backwardness with administrative regression.
Therefore, we all participants (men and women) of the movement from Civil Society, Human Rights Activists, Lawyers, Journalists, Intellectuals, student unions, to the youths of Nepal and Nepali living around the world must campaign to abolish such logistics. Thereafter we must bring about changes in the ‘New Constitution of People of Nepal’ that gives fundamental rights and responsibility to the people to be governed by people themselves.
Aide Memoire:
We must ask ourselves the question – “what are the feudal oligarchic and autocratic administrative, judiciary and law enforcement logistics of past and present governments of Nepal?”
We all know the history when and how feudal oligarchic and autocratic logistics began to centrally control Nepal from its capital Kathmandu. These logistics were developed and implemented by Shah and Rana regimes through their birthright family heritage, through the network of nepotism, favoritism and the practice of caste system.
The objectives of the feudal oligarchic and autocratic logistics are to rule the people of Nepal as the subjects of his majesty’s and their majesties’ governments. Once appointed HMG subjects become the civil servants or law enforcement officers (police) or army men under oligarchic logistics they become no more subjects but become the integral part of the HMG. Thus as per the program of the feudal oligarchic logistics they act and treat people as second citizens.
We know it that by changing a name of the government from HMG to NG will not change the government practices that are dominant with the oligarchic and autocratic logistics. Because the popularly elected democratic government for last twelve years was not even able to change such practice from legislative, executive and judiciary bodies of the government. But, they continued with it intentionally to fulfill their parties’ vested interest.
As active participants of the People’s Movement II we must question ourselves why the governments that get formed after the successful popular movements have to continue with the government practices of the old regime? What’s going on in the minds of these politicians who promised Democracy before getting on the state power?
Nepal’s administration from local to the central, police force and army are still run today with the oligarchic and autocratic logistics of the governance.
The appointments of the district chief officers for seventy-five districts are completely based on oligarchic and autocratic logistics. Similarly the appointment of district attorney and district judge are based on this logistics.
The formation of the police force of Nepal is completely based on this oligarchic and autocratic logistics. It practices nepotism and favoritism to appoint police officers for the districts and regions. All in all, the objective of the police force in Nepal is to favor government but to less care general people.
Logistically administrative and security agencies instructed to treat people as second citizen with greater priority to protect the government bodies from the common people.
Likewise is the army of Nepal. Army authority practices the utter nepotism and favoritism in army logistics to appoint army officers. Army officers are more protected than army men. Army men in overall protected from their commit civil crimes such as rape, rubbery, random killing etc. Common people have no rights to bring convicted criminal army men to the civil court.
All the corruptions, crimes and injustice have come out of such logistics of governance in Nepal. This is our embedded parasitical problem of people of Nepal, which have prevented us from Democracy and the development of the nation.
Critique
To establish “Complete Democracy” in Nepal is to establish local level of electoral institutions to form local level of administrative, judiciary, and law enforcement logistics of governance
We must campaign to establish an autonomous district level of government through our New Democratic Constitution to be governed by the popularly elected members of the local assembly members and district chief or governor.
Such electoral establishment must abolish the centrally controlled administrative logistics of the old regimes – Rana oligarchic and Shah autocratic governance logistics that insists on appointees to administer the nation for their vested self-interest.
In the name of the Parliamentary system of democracy we cannot run the nation only with the popularly elected members of lower house whose upper house members are nominated and indirectly (Panchayeti or totalitarian way) elected.
Such Parliamentary system without the local electoral governance logistics is the continuation of the old regime – the oligarchic and autocratic logistics of the governance.
No matter Nepal will be ruled by seven party alliance or the Maoists in the future with their patent model of government if their governments continue with the oligarchic and autocratic logistics of the old government, for instance with the maximum appointees in government bodies, then there will be no new Nepal with the complete Democracy.
For example, in last twelve years of multiparty system of government CDOS gave no place for the elected members of district assembly and district chair to legislate and administer the district. But CDOS were protected one way or other from parties and palace with any responsibility to corruptions, injustice in the administration and development of the districts of Nepal.
We have to understand the fact that any system of government that allows central government’s appointees such as CDO to administer the state or district violates the fundamental rights and responsibility of people.
Ruling elites in the government bodies – legislative, executives, judiciary, military, and political parties with the expertise of the old regime’s logistics may not agree with such changes and my try to twist the old regimes’ logistics in the name of Nepali tradition, culture, literacy, geography and so on.
Basically if we are human beings, we need civil liberty and basic human rights to live a life in freedom and justice. It is self-deception to think to establish a democratic system that suite to the Nepali soil in the name of oligarchic nationality, belief and tradition.
If the Democracy portrait by the political leaders and ruling elites of Nepal does not abide the basic democratic norms and principle then it is not a Democracy. For fundamentals of Democracy lie in the institutionalizations of the Electoral Logistics for establishing government bodies from grass-root local level to the Parliament.
We have to understand that the birth of Democracy in a civic society is an inevitable part of human evolution that transforms man from tribal tyrant to the responsible civil representative of a civic community.
Premise of Electoral Logistics:
No nation after the successful people’s movements or revolutions for Democracy against the set of arbitrary rule of law and its establishment can continue to rule again with the same set of arbitrations in appointing legislative, executive and judiciary positions in the government from central level to the local. The mandate of the people’s movement is to institutionalize complete democracy with the transparency of the electoral logistics of democracy.
There should be no compromise with this basic premise of Democracy. Otherwise there will not be any difference in the government systems between feudal oligarchic monarchy and the governments borne with the mandate of the people’s movements for Democracy.
For example, if the governments formed with the people’s movement for Democracy continue with the same arbitrary rule of law – appointing government positions without basic electoral procedures such nominations for the Parliamentary hearing and voting, there is no change in the attitude of the ruling elites despite their promise to the people to establish complete democracy. This will be the same old story of the monarchs ruling the nation for thirty years in the name of Democracy.
Formations of the Federal Government bodies:
In the old fashioned British style of Parliamentary system the political party in full majority or collision of the parties in greater majority in the lower house can form the federal government cabinet. The cabinet members of the government are nominated from among the members of lower house and upper house.
In the Modern Parliamentary system the Prime Minister is popularly elected by the people of the country to form the federal government cabinet entirely from his own party’s members of the Parliamentary from lower house if his party is in the full majority. Otherwise the cabinet is formed from members of the Parliament as collision cabinet among the members of lower house and upper house of different parties.
If Nepali people wish to have the modern Parliamentary system like in Canada we can popularly elect our Prime Minister and Deputy PM for 4 or 5 years as per the time condition of our New Constitution. This way we can have a steady Prime Minister for next 4 or 5 years provided in an extreme case he or she can be impeached.
This is one of the options that we have to consider during the draft of our new constitution after the elections of the constituent assembly.
As per the basic norms and principle of the Democracy we have to institutionalize the electoral logistics of Democracy to abolish the arbitrary rule of appointments by the cabinet for the positions in both local and federal government bodies – legislative, executive and judiciary.
Particularly, the members of the Lower and the Upper house of the Parliament must be elected by the popular votes of people of Nepal. The old fashioned and old regime’s political nominations for the members of the Upper house by the political party and the king must be dismissed as per the premise of the complete electoral system of Democracy.
To balance the political power and stability in the county the candidates for the members of Lower house of the Parliament should only come from political parties and the independent individuals.
The numbers of the contender for the Lower house of the Parliament should depend on the population of each district of seventy-five districts of Nepal on the premise that the larger the population of the district the greater the number of the representatives of the lower house of the Parliament.
The candidates of the Upper house of the Parliament must come from among the members of the civil society, intellectuals, and veteran professionals such as lawyers, journalists and human rights activist one representative from seventy-five district of Nepal. So Upper house will have seventy-five representatives of the Parliament from among the non-political parties of civic society of the country.
This option must be considered during the drafting of the new constitution of Nepal. However, there should be no compromise with the premise of the electoral logistics of Democracy that all the representatives of both Upper house and the Lower house of the Parliament must be elected by the popular votes of the people of Nepal whether contenders come from political parties or non-political parties of civic society of the country.
Thus popularly elected representatives of the Parliament can only give the mandate to form the cabinet of the government to a representative of a political party in majority in the Parliament as Prime Minister.
Appointment Procedures:
The appointments of the government positions in the bodies of Executive and Judiciary in the government must follow the electoral procedure of the Parliament as follow:
The cabinet or the Prime Minister nominates the candidates for the positions of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court judges, Attorney General, Secretariats and so on for the Lower and the Upper house of the Parliament hearing and voting.
First the Lower house of the Parliament through its commission investigates the nominees’ profile. Then begins hearings for each nominee for the position.
Then as per the findings and recommendations of the commission the both house begins voting on each nominee. The successful nominees get recommendation for appointment by the cabinet.
There should be no compromise with this procedure of the appointments in drafting of the new constitution of Nepal. Without the institutionalization of such electoral logistics in the Parliament we can never marginalize our old habit of the feudal oligarchic practice of nepotism, favoritism and the enticement.
Formation of the District cabinet to administer the district
The new constitution of Nepal must allow to popularly elected district chair or governor to form the district administration (cabinet) from the elected assembly members of the political party in full majority; if there is no full majority in a political party in the assembly the district chair or governor must be allowed to form collision district administration or cabinet.
All district administrative, development and law enforcement government agencies must work under and in cooperation with the popularly elected district governor and his or her district administration body or cabinet.
District governor and his or her cabinet must follow the district assembly procedures such as hearings and voting for the district’s development budgets, taxations, plans and projects as well as public safety and regulations.
Formation of the District Court
The new constitution of Nepal must not allow the district judges to be nominated either by the Prime Minister or the Supreme Court judge or the head of the state.
The new constitution must have provision for the district judges to be popularly elected as qualified candidate who is the permanent resident of the district for the position for 4 or 5 years as per the time condition of the new constitution of Nepal.
Popularly elected district judge will be fully responsible for the district judiciary procedures, district judiciary regulations and civil justice under the provisions of the new constitution of Nepal.
Formation of District Attorney
The new constitution of Nepal must not allow the district attorney to be nominated either by the Prime Minister or by the head of the state.
The new constitution must have provision for the district attorney to be popularly elected as qualified candidate who is the permanent resident of the district for the position for 4 or 5 years as per the time condition of the new constitution of Nepal.
Popularly elected district attorney will be fully responsible for the district civil prosecution procedures, district prosecution regulations and civil arrest under the provisions of the new constitution of Nepal.
Formation of the District law enforcement (Police Force) academy
The new constitution of Nepal must not allow the district law enforcement officer (police officer) to be appointed either by the Prime Minister or by centrally controlled national police chief.
The new constitution must have provision for the district law enforcement officer to be popularly elected as qualified candidate for the position who is the permanent resident of the district for 4 or 5 years as per the time condition of the new constitution of Nepal.
Popularly elected district law enforcement officer (police officer) will be fully responsible for the district law enforcement procedures, district law enforcement regulations and public safety under the provisions of the new constitution of Nepal. Under his or her supervision the district police academy (district police training center) must run to provide district wide law enforcement services.
All the law enforcement personnel of district must be the permanent resident of the place where they stationed. If the law enforcement personnel are stationed in the ward of the city or village or district they must be the permanent resident of the same ward as per the prerequisites of the permanent resident status regulations.
Formation of Municipality for City and Village Administration
The new constitution of Nepal must allow to popularly elected city or village mayor to form the city or village administration (cabinet) from the elected assembly members of the political party in full majority; if there is no full majority in a political party in the assembly the mayor must be allowed to form collision city or village administration or cabinet.
All city or village administrative, development and law enforcement government agencies must work under and in cooperation with the popularly elected city or village mayor and his or her city or village administration body or cabinet.
City or village mayor and his or her cabinet must follow the city or village assembly procedures such as hearings and voting for the district’s development budgets, taxations, plans and projects as well as public safety and regulations.
Formation of School District Management in City and Village
We Nepali people and political leaders do not know what School District is and what it has to do with the grass-root local level administrative, judiciary and law enforcement electoral logistics of Democracy. In most of the developed nation the public schools are managed through the city and village local level school district electoral logistics.
School districts exist within the locality of the village or city. A village might have one or two school district. But a large city like Kathmandu might have hundreds of school districts, perhaps one school per ward or one school two wards area.
Public schools are managed through the electoral logistics of the school districts. In each school district school district chair and school district committee members are elected to manage the public school of each school district.
School district management is supported financially by the local governments, by the district (state) governments, and by the federal governments to meet the national standard of education.
In most of the developed nation’s public schools’ 1st grade to the 12th grade are provided free to the children of the taxpayers (citizens) of each school district. How does it work is through the local wages taxes, property taxes, local sales taxes and other local revenues plus support from the revenues of the Federal and District (state) governments.
Children of a family of a tax payer of a certain school district can only send his or her children to a public school in his or her residential school district for free education. But if he or she wishes to send his or her children to other school district than his or her residential district then he or she might have to pay certain amount of school fees.
Now you can see how public school in developed nations are managed to provide free education to the students of the taxpayer residents of a particular school district through the institutionalizations of the local level of electoral logistics.
Thus the New Constitution of Nepal must have provisions how to provide the children of the taxpayers of the nation the free public education from grade 1st to 12th – the high school education.
The drafting of New Constitution of Nepal must consider the following national election ballot as represented in the imaginary national and local district electoral prototype table with academic qualifications of the contenders:
Table 1 (Click here to download Table 1 and other tables)
The election for the grass-root local level of administrative, judiciary and law enforcement can be performed in the same day with the national election for the Parliament – both upper house and lower house members of the Parliament.
Formation of revenues resources from grass-root local level to the federal through taxations
The New Constitution of Nepal must have provisions to distribute revenues collected from taxations from grass-root level – village or city, district or the federal governments.
In developed nations highest percentage of the taxes collected from local level go to the local governments. For example, the property tax does not go to the federal government (central government). But all property taxes are kept in the village or city governments.
Table 2
This is how we also can manage our country from the grass-root local level of management and developments with major responsibility given to the local levels – to village and city level.
Simply, if villages and cities of the nation can take care of the all-basic human needs through local level of management and development then there can be fewer burdens on state and federal governments.
This is how complete democracy works by giving full rights and responsibility to the people of the grass-root level of governance with complete decentralization through the electoral logistics of democracy. It is only possible through the complete electoral procedures of popular votes of the people.
To administer the nation through the appointments and nominations with centrally controlled mechanism the nation can never achieve complete democracy to protect civil liberty and freedom, can never achieve economic prosperity and developments.
Formation of National funds for taxpayers’ retirement and health insurance
In developed nations the national funds for taxpayers’ retirement and health insurance is called “Social Security Fund”. All taxpayers pay for the social security fund for their retirements. The fund is raised through taxations of the wages.
How does it work? The employees with any working positions from blue color workers (farmers, factory workers, construction workers, sanitation workers, hotel and restaurant workers, etc) to the white color workers (secretary to the professionals) pay 7% of his or her weekly or monthly salary to social security fund and legitimate employers add 7% more to his or her employees social security fund.
The fund is protected by the constitution not to be touched by any authority of the nation. The federal government or state government can borrow the fund as loan.
The fund is invested in the nation through the financial institutions in business and industries. That’s how the developed nation do not need fund from other country to borrow as loan for the county’s development and budgetary funds.
Table 3
The individual taxpayers start drawing the benefit when they become 65 years old. If the taxpayer happen to be disabled to work before his or her retirement age can begin to draw the benefits as disabled person with medical certification and medical treatment proofs.
Conclusion:
We must campaign for New Democratic Constitution that can clearly define the off-limits of the Central Government’s role in order to institutionalize the Federal System of the governance.
The New Constitution must secure independence of the local government to form its own cabinet with the popularly elected district chair or governor.
The constitution must assure the district as autonomous government so it can formulate its own specific district government logistics and policies through the legislature of the local assembly.
For instant, the local government must have policy to collect local tax such as property tax, local wages tax, local sales tax, local income tax etc as its revenue.
In this New Constitution there should be clear distinction between what local revenues are and what federal revenues are. Yet federal government must have policies to audit the local revenues to figure it out for the purpose of the budgetary projection of the nation.
Similarly the elected member of municipality and village council must form a cabinet under elected mayor to administer the cities and the villages.
There should be no appointees from the central government to administer the local body of the government. Rather with the recommendations of the local governments the central government should establish its agencies’ services on Education, Population, Agriculture, Industries, Transports etc. The district Public Commission agency should provide the human resources for the managements of local government as per the local government’s recommendation.
The New Constitution must make clear that the elected members of the district assembly and chairperson, and elected members of municipality assembly and mayor and members of village assembly and mayor must administer the local bodies of the government.
The New Constitution must have provisions to make it unconstitutional for the central government appointees to rule the local bodies of government. If the New Constitution did not abolish such logistics of oligarchic governance then that will be utter violation of the fundamental rights of people of Nepal to have right and responsibility to rule themselves.
The electoral members of National Constituent Assembly must define the off-limits of the central government in the New Constitution precisely and thereby let people put their houses together themselves in their own home districts, municipalities and villages.
Party leaders and ruling elites must have observed the significance of the local governance from the successful example of the Community Forest Managements that took place in last twelve years’ democracy in Nepal!
In most of democratic countries the law enforcement logistics are established from the local level of government. The ‘county’ village law enforcement officer ‘sheriff’, municipality and district law enforcement officers must be the permanent residence (from 6 months to 2 years’ residency) of the (state) district. In general election they are in the ballot with rest of the candidates.
The district, municipality chief law enforcement officer (police officer) and village sheriff (village chief law enforcement officer) must be the permanent resident of the district, municipality and the village and they must be in the ballot of every general election.
There should be the provision in the New Constitution of Nepal for police academy in every district from where the police forces are trained and supply to demand of the district, municipality and village. Provided members of police forces are the permanent resident of the district.
The New Constitution must distinguish between law enforcement (police) as local force and the national investigation agency as national crime investigation and security force to be coordinated through the field assignments network with the local force.
Therefore, the national police force as centrally controlled mechanism as it is now must be converted as national investigation and security force. The local force (police) must be independent of the centrally controlled procedure of the old establishment. Thus the New Constitution of Nepal must not allow central government to appoint a law enforcement officer from the district of Bhojpur to police the district of Jumla. Otherwise this will be the violation of the fundamental rights of people of Nepal to choose to rule themselves.
United We Blog 
Comments
44 responses to “Establishing Electoral Democratic Institutions in Nepal”
Baf re kasari padhne yatro lamo text?
I have not even started reading it,
but I remember V.S.Naipaul saying:
the european idea of democracy is locally so much adapted to the people that at the end not much of it is left.
In Nepal too, people vote for their clan, for their caste, but not for democracy.
Tooo long article..
I haven’t even started going through it..Going to read it now,lets see upto where my eyes support me….C’ya later
Wagle ji, could you print it on Nepali news papers in Nepalis so that the ordinary nepalis can read it. It is by far the most fitting article by concerned and well informed nepali citizen. British/India style (old) parliamentary system in Nepal does not work. If it were to work, then we would not have so much turmoil in our nation. People, not a party should choose the president/prime minister. A prime minister choosen by a party always has to please his own cadres. Whereas a prime minister choosen by the people will be responsible to the people.
Article is a good one & once thorugh is recomended though many things r repeated unnecessarily.
Theme lies in Adoption of Federal System of Governance that stresses popular vote to be represented in every aspect of lesgistalive,executive & judiciary bodies from local levels.
Means total Decentralization of Governance.So as locals are governed by locals,still being a part of the Nation as a whole.
Mr.Wagle,
Yea it would be a really great contribution to the Society if you could do something in publishing this article in Nepali Newspapers as Kantipur (as said in #4).
This article stresses the Adoption of Federal System of Governance which is the very need of transiting Nepali society to head for being a Complete Democratic State & is on the good time to be discussed.
Mr.Wagle,
I insist, plz do something producing this article in Nepali newspapers.
Its obvious that u are continuously contributing our society through this blog for the establishment of Democratic & Peaceful Nepal.
Now add contributions.Do our society one more favour.Do smth for publicizing this article in Nepali, Kantipur would be the better choice as it is read my more common Nepali people.
When I went through middle of this article to find the similiarity to the American system of governace, which could not bring justice to Black Americans for two and half centuries, I moved up to see the writer and was not astonoshed finding him to be a New Yorker. I will not be surprized if it is a part of his thesis or of some thing like that.
I just like to raise few questions on this article.
1.What are the basic constituents of federalism?
2.What are the bases of that federalism?
3.How an administrative system can be dismantled overnight without French, Russian or Chinese revolution like.?
4.Worst of all, he nowhere hints how the ethnic unsimiliarity will be adjusted in that federal system?
Dear Wagle Ji,
Thank you very much for publishing this article. It is honest concern for Nepal to transform into ‘Electoral Democracy’ which people have called it ‘Complete Democracy’.
I do not know whether the leaders and followers of political parties have understood what people meant by ‘Complete Democracy’.
In my visit to Nepal this June 06 I tried to meet political leaders to talk about the institutionalization of the Electoral Logistics of Democracy. But to my disappointment either they didn’t have such set of mind (upbringing) to understand it or they were afraid of its mechanism that gives full rights and responsibilities to people.
In my observation political leaders do not have direct knowledge of experience of such logistics working in the Democratic system.
Fortunately there are many Nepali professionals and workers are in the west living their daily lives by participating in such electoral democratic process.
Two weeks back in a function in Queens New York I had chance to as Nepali Cogress vice president Susil Koiral this question “Why the 7 party government is continuing with the government practice of old regime – the feudal oligarchic logistics by appointing poistions in the government bodies arbitrarily?”
The answer was “It is a transit period and we have to consider so many issue with the old regimes establishments and the Maoist issues. But I will take your issue to Nepal.”
My simple concern is if this 7 party government initiates electoral procedures such as nominating positions for the Parliamentary hearing and voting and as per the Parliament’s recommendation appointing the position.
This is basic premise of the democracy. But 7 party government has failed in this regard. But succeeded in appointing arbitrarily as per the logistics of fuedal oligarchic logistics.
As all previous readers have suggested to publish this article in Nepali I would deeply respect if you (Wagle Ji) can publish this in Nepali in local Nepali News Paper.
On the website http://www.nepalcivilsociety.org which I have registered myself to refine the premise of the civil society of Nepal has old verson of this document. I also met Devendra Raj Pandey in Nepal to remind him that civil society must be non-partisan, independent to protect the civil liberty of the people.
Thanks again. I will be sending you more two more article on Cheif Justice of Supreme Court and the Scrutiny on Main Player of 7 party allaince.
Let see how far we reach with the feudal oligarchic pre-conditioned brain of ours.
Dear Raj,
I understand your concern. But this article is not my thesis. I am an IT worker in Katherine Gibbs School of New York. I came from Doti district of Nepal. After king Birendra’s family massacre I became US citizen simply because I did not wanted to be the citizen of Gyanendra and his family clan. I am registered Democrat and I caste my vote every elections in the USA.
I will try to answer your questions. All what have written in this article are based on the premise of the Democracy that protects and guarrenttees the Civil Liberty of People in a democratic nation.
What is Civil Liberty – “One’s freedom to exercise one’s rights as guaranteed under the laws of the country – fundamental individual right protected by law and expressed as immunity from unwarranted governmental interference”
refer to: wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
“Civil liberties are protections from the power of governments. Examples include the right to life, freedom from torture, freedom from slavery and forced labour, the right to privacy, the right to a fair trial, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and the right to marry and have a family. These are usually guaranteed and protected by a constitution or by adherence to an international treaty.”
refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_liberty
As per your one of the questions that these premises are not fully materialized in any democratic country. But most of the western democratic countries in Europe, Canada, USA, Australia have more that 75% implemented in their practice. Most of these countries have Federal System of governance.
Your Questions:
1.What are the basic constituents of federalism?
Basic constituents of federalism electorally established bodies of government – both local and central government bodies based on multi-party system of democracy.
2.What are the bases of that federalism?
Bases of the Federalism is the decentralization of power to the people or people’s direct participation in the governance of the nation meaning people have rights and responsibility to the nation through electoral logistics – decided by the popular votes of the people from grass-root level – local level to the central.
No more party arbitration in appoiting their men and women in government postions to continue with nepotism, favoritism and briberies, no more totalitarian or feudal oligarchic supremacy in the government.
“Federalism is a political philosophy in which a group or body of members are bound together (Latin: foedus, covenant) with a governing representative head.
Federalism underlies a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units (like states or provinces), creating what is often called a federation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation.
3.How an administrative system can be dismantled overnight without French, Russian or Chinese revolution like.?
To establish Federal System of Government we donot need French or Russian or Chinese Revolustions. First of all these revolution took in times where human brains primarily evoloving to liberations from tribalism of class systems.
This is 21st century the literacy of the human population on earth have 50 times more than during those revolutions. You do not need to sail a boot to cross Atlantic these day how Columbus did. But you can fly on a jetliner to reach there in the matter of 6 hours!
The change to occur in Nepal will not be that easy not because it will no work in Nepal but because of our feudal oligarchic and totalitarian set of mind or conditionings. This will be mostly prevented by the political leaders with the lobby of the ruling elites and families whose households are from the time of Panchayet in the government positions appointed arbitrarily with family links etc.
Becasue these elites and political party leaders will have to fight the elections to reach to such post if there is Federal system of governance.
4.Worst of all, he nowhere hints how the ethnic unsimiliarity will be adjusted in that federal system?
First of all the federal system is based on the principle of the union of the state. For example, Nepal has 75 districts. These districts become the unioun. The administration of the members of the unioun is based on the premise of the autonomous governance. That means thoough electoral logistics of the democracy the administration body, judiciary body and law enforcement body are elected from among the contenders from political parties or independent unit who are the PERMANENT RESIDENT OF THE DISTRICT.
No more appointment of the elite by the central government to rule for example Jumala by the appointee who come from Biratnagar.
I hope my answers will give you some insight. I personally love the federal union system of the government. This will natually unite Nepal and solve the question of ethenicity as per the members of the union.
Please do not try to jumb arbitrarily without thorough reading on it. These days you can ready easily on the internet such as http://en.wikipedia.org/ and others.
We Nepali people are heavily conditioned (our brain and blood) with the feudal oligarchic way of thinking and life style. I do not see any political leaders who claim to be democrat or social democrat or communist comrade have visions for the nation, but only their vested political interest and agenda to fulfil their own political dream.
Honestly, their dream is not the dream of people of Nepal. Our dream as human being is to be able to live our lives by the rule of law that gives us basic human rights for Civil Liberty as per the Univesal Declaration of the Human Rights.
Well, at least you are all TALKING about doing something.
Don’t fall into the same trap that you’ve all fallen into before, however. Just because an idea is long and makes a pretense towards comprehensiveness does not make it holy writ that must be rushed into “Nepali newspapers” as soon as possible.
These ideas are a start, sure, but they are ideals not a working plan. I got a little excited when I got to the heading “Premise of Electoral Logistics: ” hoping to find some actual logistics and the premise behind using such logistics as the heading implied; but I was soon discouraged to read the somewhat boilerplate political theorizing therein, which had absolutely nothing to do with the heading.
People, no more English practice. We must articulate our ideas with perfect clarity or else their debate, revision and improvement potentials are quickly lost in rhetorical confusion.
Look carefully at what the author is trying to say; and above all look critically. There is a bias here and a viewpoint–easily found by close reading. Be skeptical of the author’s overuse of the phrase “feudal and oligarchic” and the timeliness and relevance of the concepts the author presents.
For instance, concepts like Federalism and establishment of a District attorney place Nepal’s cart miles before the horse.
Don’t get me wrong here. This article is very positive in that it represents one of the first serious attempts by a Nepali citizen to take government concepts by the throat and try to interperet them for the good of all. To this I say bravo! But perhaps we should not let a more valuable chance slip by: This article gives us all a chance to add our own thoughts, revise, discard and debate a possible future Nepal constitution. We should take this opportunity very seriously.
So, cherish this author’s ideas, but don’t give them a free pass. Pull them apart, idea by idea, and offer good strong criticism.
It is the first step towards a unified national debate.
-=blogdai
Dear Blogdai,
I appreciate your creative critique on this article. I really want the readers and people of Nepal to ponder over these ideas.
There may be many mistakes in the clarity of idea, electoral logistics and perhaps in the language to be mend through meaningful discussions.
The article is there on the blog to have dialoque and churn the goodies from all participants.
My basic stands lie on following facts or observations that Nepali politicians are basically conditioned (or brought up) with the centrally controlled government mechanism.
They do not have direct experience of the logistics of the decentralizations that gives people to manage thier own communities and unions.
Politicians always want to control the power from above to acheive their agenda, dream, and ruling power to remain in the government as long as they can like in the system of feudal oligarchic of Rana and Shah, which has its strong grip in the government practices and in the minds of ruling elites.
The unconditing of such political set of minds is only possible if we establish Federal System of Government by creating unions of the 75 districts of Nepal that will bring about decentralizations for people to take their rights and responsibilities in grass-root level.
This will be the inevital future for Nepal. The successful example of such is the establishment of community forest unions during 12 years of multiparty democracy.
A nation to function economically in this 21st century it must distribute its centrally controlled power to the locals to manage their own communities, resources and so on.
Centrally contoralled nation will fail in the evolution of the Democracy and global economy.
If we want prosperity and success in our country with its unique natural beauty and resources then establishment of the Union of Federation for Federal Government system is must.
All are welcome to cut and put together the ideal presented in this blog.
Thanks again for your thought.
They are wonderful and essential ideals, Prakash and I wish you great success in their realization.
My question is: What is step one?
You have many good ideas but what do we do to mobilize mass support of them? I mention over at blogdai some of the things that COULD have been done to galvanize public unity and support had a different type of individual taken over government; but your ideas, as wonderful and as important as they may be, must find favor and resonance to the point of stirring activism in the average Nepali or none of the things you outline will stand a chance of implementation.
We know what we want, how do we get it? Therein lies you logistics essay.
-=blogdai
While ‘new’ seems to be the buzzword that gets so easily distorted – depending on one’s perspective and rhetoric, I am continually amazed at the level of public perception and expectation regarding all political forces that are currently at play in Nepal. Before we presume to even know what Nepalis want – or have foreigners tell us what we would ideally want, let us – as Nepalis – be sincere and focus on some of the fundamental issues concerning our disposition to all things political. And when talking about establishing electoral democratic process/institutions in Nepal, I believe we need to first reexamine how powerful or active Nepali population is in respect to making such processes and institutional remotely functional. A critical self-analysis leads me to believe the following:
i) Nepali public need to function somewhere between relying wholehearted on government to take them to utopia and proactively demanding overnight quick-fixes from such governments while ignoring basic conditions of our country – be it historical, political, social, economic etc.
ii) That ‘somewhere’ is a space Nepali public need to create by themselves; nobody is going to hand-in a comfy bubble to float us in. We left it to the Kings; they built their own castles while we slept empty stomach, we trusted the parties; they only made it worse and brought back the tyrants, we let the Maoists in; they only threaten to dislocate us elsewhere and takeover our house. These are the lessons learned. From them Nepalis need to create their own game plan where politics – and consequently the political parties, do not rule over our individual lives and social existence anymore; in contrary, making it possible for people to govern the politics of Nepal and its parties, instead.
iii) Participation by general public is a must, and those who believe that People’s Movement II was not sufficiently universal in character, need to get out there – in media and propose REAL solutions – not only drumbeat excruciatingly empty rhetoric and spew venomous remarks among participants; possibly hit the pavements and bring about tangible change rather than unnecessarily propagate the doom and gloom theories on blogs without any substantially worthwhile ideas to change the course. Be proactive; instead of reacting to failures and critiquing senselessly.
In conclusion, we cannot have it both ways – have your cake and it too; we cannot afford to stay on the sidelines when governments after governments come and fail to live up to OUR expectation while we remain ardently complacent on OUR role in shaping our own lives and destiny. Has anybody asked lately: “what is MY role and contribution to my country”, other than endless diatribe on failure of monarchy, parties and Maoists? If we can’t be concerned to take care of our house, we cannot complain when Moriartys and Mukherjees start boarding up on our foreclosed fatalism.
gajadi doesn’t have patience of going thru such a long piece. perhaps thats why she’s such a myopic. she can’t see beyond her nose. but she belives that there is no such thing called ‘complete democracy’.
no democracy is complete. and will never be.
gajadi perhaps would have scanned the article but when she came across such sentences from the author, she gave up the idea
“In my visit to Nepal this June 06 I tried to meet political leaders to talk about the institutionalization of the Electoral Logistics of Democracy. But to my disappointment either they didn’t have such set of mind (upbringing) to understand it or they were afraid of its mechanism that gives full rights and responsibilities to people.
In my observation political leaders do not have direct knowledge of experience of such logistics working in the Democratic system.”
And more:
“I also met Devendra Raj Pandey in Nepal to remind him that civil society must be non-partisan, independent to protect the civil liberty of the people.”
mr. BOM, gajadi becomes sick when she reads such sentences.
Rather interesting thesis, in spite of litany of incriminations of feudal/oligarchic systems for the failure of the state, which they rightly deserve and long awaited ‘New Democracy’, whose shape and size almost abstract, nevertheless, demands a celestial belief in its miracles, while the ubiquitous premonition over the slightest doubt on efficacies of New Democracy’s– be left behind as in rapture.
The fear of left behind, makes us run amok, usually the intellectuals, looking for respite or solutions at past or present social/economical/political models, which have been tried or under practice in different communities/countries around the globe. One among such is an ‘electorate system’ an epitome of the US political system, pardon my ignorance, there might be other countries practicing such system, but can’t help think of US since they are the harbinger/beacon of ‘New Democracy’.
Indeed, imitation is the greatest form of flattery, but which might not get you anywhere when two societies are poles apart in every conceivable aspect. But, disingenuous, half baked idea is anytime better than anarchy, since it has a potential/hope of evolving into something local that might work best, beside in failure of old systems, society as whole should have commitment/determination to come up with, if not an innovative political system at least remodel the old ones to work best in the given constraints.
I applaud the author for this spirit to try new things, but I have my doubts of his proposed system working in Nepali political system, since he fails to see the present social/economical structure. His claim/belief that usurping the power from oligarchy/feudal, and decentralizing those to the grass root would flatten the playing fields for ‘everyone’, which is a tad hopeful and the realistic picture.
Well, ‘everyone’ might be inclusive semantically, but in Nepal’s social structure it is still strictly exclusive. If decentralization of power were to happen, who are the beneficiaries, anyway? Undoubtedly, ones at the upper echelon of caste system, in no way this is an incriminating remark, but is a fact, since they are at advantage to begin with, more education, more resources, more networking.
Yes, when decision making power is shifted from dismal percentage to another 30% to 40% percent of population, is indeed a decentralization, but not of the balance and equality when you discard another 50% or more so of population. Grass root indeed, but selective grass root, where some patches are greener than the other.
If ‘electoral system’ were the panacea to all the problems, then minorities in the paradise of ‘electoral system’—the US, would not have been discontent and at disadvantage. In our case, right now Maoists are fighting for the unequal distribution of resources, if such system (ES) were to be realized, they would be fueled by the ethnic lines.
Staying in New York, giving funda’ to Nepalese as if there were no “Bujruk” in Nepal. Praksh Bom, you should write something on your adopted country like “US foregin policy “. Even the conclusion of your article (???) is 2 pages, have not your learnt anything yet in US? Even if you are writing graduate thesis, your conclusin is way too long. Your advisor/committees won’t read it man. Hare Shiva… Tero budhdhi Dahain Pachhi Firijaos, Durga Bahavani ko Kripale
hi mr. bom,
lot of nepali people are desperate for food, good health care and peace at this point of time. it’s preposterous to expect nepali people to be concerned about the western democratic model when they are dying from hunger and easily curable diseases.
and u are living in the America and defending American model of democracy “where everyone is free from torture, free from slavery and forced labour, has the right to privacy, the right to a fair trial, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and the right to marry and have a family or what they want to do.”
it’s all [icd] and you became American citizen because Gayendra killed his family members. what do u think Bush doing in your country he is killing vast number people, noone knows how many. Bush makes Gayendra like saint, it doesn’t mean i m defending Gayendra. i even don’t bother asking question to US citizen who left Nepal to enjoy bush administration. hahahaha same same
one man, one vote costs on Dhaal Bhaat
This concept should get good analysis.
But I have lots of questions;
Don’t you see the danger of faction in Nepal in your concept? and in this situation of danger of civil war and collapsed and probability of division of the country according to caste? It is not the normal situation like of 2047 andolan. The country has been put in danger of civil war and coup chances by international figures. The current SPAM themselves are weak infront of people due to the violating of human rights by the maoist and mismanaging the democracy in 14 years by SPA leaders. In this situation how do you feel your concept can be feasible even if they try? Most of the present leaders of the parliament are definately going to loose the election, do you think they accept the free and fair election? Till now the situation has not been created by maoist to spread the messages of political forces to the voters without fear. To have a meaningful election, countries need to focus on election law that permits full participation by all parties and candidates, an impartial, and independent election management body, and adequate financial resources. Our parties are on the process of CA election but in hurried mood, whereas majority people even don’t know what is CA. They are not caring about voters education which is also imperative to insure that the people fully understand both their rights and their responsibilities as citizens.
The king’s move of Feb 1, 2005, although very unpopular now but people had easily accepted just thinking that that will give some way-out to political and economic crisis. Who knows tomorrow even another authoritarian form of government maybe accepted if some thing goes wrong with the expected peace and democracy. There is cases like 54.7% of Latin American citizens are willing to support an authoritarian form of government if it resolves economic problems. Likewise 38.6% of Latin American citizens agree that the president may go beyond the law and all methods of measurement show that there is a great degree of dissatisfaction with their democratic systems. In our case we have now danger with the maoist aggesiveness and their unknown strategies. They might be another choice like king before. That mightbe maoist who try to make democracy failure in future.
It has been practised around the world that democratic success is not achieved when there is only electoral institutions that guarantee clean election in the federal level of government. There is a need of guarantee in low level elections because it is in these levels that poverty grows and where civil rights are more easily limited. This case is identified in South America. What about in Nepal?
Hi physco,
Thanks for your comments. Actually, I do not live in a country where there is no civil liberty meaning there is no Democracy that gaurettees basic human rights as declared in the Universal Human Rights Declaration of the UN. Go it.
The economic problem of Nepal cannot be solved only the the land reforms. But by the industrialization in the Tarai belts and vallays, exploring hydroelectriciy to bring it to the international market, tourism promotions, human resources skill development to supply to the global job markets.
Nepal can be very rich if the people with totaliarian radicalism and feudal oligarchic fanatism understand the world and have some realistic vision.
There is no why to provide equal opportunity to the people of Nepal with the Electoral Logistics in the institutionalizations of Democracy.
If you wish to have Democracy with the undercurrent of the totalitarian authoritarian and feudal oligarchi authoritarian, you reach no where. You can not cross a river having your two legs on two boats. You got it.
Study well and try to understand human being as yourself, not as an egocenteric Nepali individual who is succumbed to its premitive way of life.
If another dictator comes in Nepal either feudal oligarchic – Shah or Rana or totalitarian I will not step in that land until and unless Democracy returns. Go it.
The US constitution gaurenttees civil liberty and maintains Universal Human Rights Declaration as far as there is no national security threat.
I beleive in International citizenship. I am a pacifist and oppose nationalism and religious fanatism. I do not worship any patritoism. You got it.
Hi fanta,
I do not know whether you and other readers in this blog understand what Federal Government really mean.
Federal Government logistics are based on the principle of union of the states or districts or regions.
A federation (Latin: foedus, covenant) is a union comprised of a number of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central (“federal”) government. In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states are typically constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of the central government. The form of government or constitutional structure found in a federation is known as federalism (see also federalism as a political philosophy). It can be considered the opposite of another system, the unitary state.
Federations may be multi-ethnic, or cover a large area of territory, although neither is necessarily the case. Federations are often founded on an original agreement between a number of sovereign states.
Read this at list:
Federations often employ the paradox of being a union of states, while still being states (or having aspects of statehood) in themselves. For example, James Madison (author of the US Constitution) wrote in Federalist Paper No. 39 that the US Constitution “is in strictness neither a national nor a federal constitution; but a composition of both. In its foundation, it is federal, not national; in the sources from which the ordinary powers of the Government are drawn, it is partly federal, and partly national….” This paradox stems from the fact that states in a federation maintain all sovereignty that they do not yield to the federation by their own consent. (Example: see the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article 3 of the Constitution of the Swiss Confederation.) The sharing of sovereignty between a federation and its constituent states sometimes makes it difficult to differentiate between a sovereign state and a non-sovereign state. Refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation
You bloggers on this site react arbitrarily just like the feudal rulers of Nepal and those politicians whose brains are conditioned with it.
Nepal has the ideal political and ethenic geography for the Federal system of the government. You can evenly settle with the demands of the ethenic autonomousity under the Federations of the system.
Example, Switzerland has federal system of government which has solved the mixed ethenic population of the country – Swiss Italians, Swiss Germans and Swish French.
Do not tell me again arbitrarily at random Switzerland does not have Swiss Italians and so on without studing. I have lived in Switzerland and Germany and most of the European countries that have federal systems of government.
Read today’s news how the sectarian differences in Iraq is going to settle with the formation of the federal government system on the premise of the Federalism. This will make Iraq a union of made of three reagonal members – Shia, Sunni and Kurdish a autonomous reagon of Iraq the sovereign nation.
Do not say again the Federalism is American idealogy. All knowledge and information belong to humanity. Neither the concepts nor the idealogy not the scientific discoveries belong to a nation or an individual or a group of people.
Mutation is necessary to the brain which is conditioned by the narrow traditions, superstitions, patriotism and stuborn arrogance.
This is 21st century Nepal can not stand alone with its typical traditions that allow chupping heads of animals on the street temples of Kathmandu.
Time will bring that mutations in the brains of people of Nepal eventually and that will be inevitable despite those blogs who speak arbitrarily with full of assumptions.
Prakash ji,
it’s truly blessed to have an opportunity to live in a land where such ideals(advocated by you) holds, and not many people can enjoy such liberties.
having said that, you sound like an Evangelist at my door on sundays. the urgency, that i be saved, since you’ve been saved and tasted the fruits of his (you know who) divinity. fine, i have no qualms about your new found happiness, but the moment you think that i would find the happiness in the same thing that you found in, sounds a little judgmental. nevertheless, we appreciate your genuine concerns.
and, it’s a reasonable doubt to question about your authenticity of concerns regarding Nepal, while you hop around looking for better political environment that suits your need, whatever that might be. No, problem with that, if given a chance, I might do that myself, but I can’t disparage another commenter just because he/she happens to question genuineness.
good luck and hope those stripes flutter in the billow of liberties forever and fifty of those stars shine bright to show the path to the ‘new pilgrims’, who has just hopped ashore on the Plymouth Rock rummaging for the ‘new democracy’ in the ‘new found land’.
Ciao and one nation under ‘the’ god
got it??
to qoute you:
“The US constitution gaurenttees civil liberty and maintains Universal Human Rights Declaration as far as there is no national security threat.”
ah ha!! there is a trouble in paradise too!!! so, it’s not only in the society of primitive cave dwelling ppl…just being rhetoric….
Prakash Bom,
Keep your funda’ with you. Nepalse know how to develope or how not to develope Nepal. Who the dickens are you to lecture? School kid, talking about human rights/wrongs Democracy, good for your scholl project. Who does not know what you wrote here? What makes you think you know better than others? Every single Nepalese will rot the slogans of tourism, terai industry and blah blah….You live in some country where human wrongs are institutionalized and I feel sorry for your thinking.
Mr. Bom,
Interesting name by the way.
“Thanks for your comments. Actually, I do not live in a country where there is no civil liberty meaning there is no Democracy that gaurettees basic human rights as declared in the Universal Human Rights Declaration of the UN. Go it.
US treats UN as toilet paper. Use it and throw it. You are joking if you say that the US actually follows declerations of the UN on human rights or anything else. Iraq was is suffice to underline the fact. Torture and abuses in different cells in Iraq and cuba further illustrates the fact that US really does not give a crap about the UN. The phone tapping, arrests without warrants (specially of muslims)and guilty untill proven innocent philosophy (specially against muslims) also shows how democratic, liberal and impartial the US is.
“The economic problem of Nepal cannot be solved only the the land reforms. But by the industrialization in the Tarai belts and vallays, exploring hydroelectriciy to bring it to the international market, tourism promotions, human resources skill development to supply to the global job markets.”
Tell us something new man. If our leaders do not know this yet then we are seriously fcuked.
“Nepal can be very rich if the people with totaliarian radicalism and feudal oligarchic fanatism understand the world and have some realistic vision.”
We need a leader with vision. Great point. Why did we not think of this before.
“There is no why to provide equal opportunity to the people of Nepal with the Electoral Logistics in the institutionalizations of Democracy.”
I can not even comperehend the above paragraph.
“If another dictator comes in Nepal either feudal oligarchic – Shah or Rana or totalitarian I will not step in that land until and unless Democracy returns. Go it.
Oh my god. I really hope that democracy in this country is never threatened again so that you can set foot inside Nepal. I can not imagine you refusing to visit us time and again. I pray for our democracy. and yes sir, I GOT IT.
“The US constitution gaurenttees civil liberty and maintains Universal Human Rights Declaration as far as there is no national security threat.”
What national security threat? it is all a farce. Lies man, lies. And should not civil liberty be unconditional, man? The world has changed, no one or no country is absolutely safe, so does that men human rights decleration does not need to be maintained?
“I beleive in International citizenship. I am a pacifist and oppose nationalism and religious fanatism. I do not worship any patritoism. You got it.”
Well, that is what all the immigrants say. It makes you sound like a great philosopher and then you do not have to live with the guilt. I believe in international citizenship, my a**.
And Mr. Bom,
Judging from the english you have used in your comments, i am sure you did not actually write the article yourself. You could have copied it from different books but i am sure you did not write it all by yourself.
And BOM,
“Hi fanta,
I do not know whether you and other readers in this blog understand what Federal Government really mean.”
Man! you are so full of yourself.
Hey B,
You can judge the way you want. But there have been some mistaken (typos) while writing following paragraph:
“There is no why to provide equal opportunity to the people of Nepal WITHOUT the Electoral Logistics in the institutionalizations of Democracy.”
I apologize if there have been more mistakes.
Take it easy, pal. You try to be pretty critique! I can be very tough with you. However, it took me five months to write this article.
THIS IS WHAT I WANT FOR MYSELF IN NEPAL. YOU GOT IT?
IF YOU DO NOT CARE AND TRY TO BE THE BOSS OF THIS BLOG THEN YOU KNOW YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE THIS BLOG SAJHA.COM.
IF DO NOT HAVE COMMON SENSE TO FIGURE IT OUT THE MEANING BETWEEN THE LINE RECOGNIZING THE TYPOS AND OTHER MISTAKES THEN YOU ARE TRYING TO GET INTO MY NURVE DELIBRATELY.
Nepal is not only your country to bring about change in every field. It is the country of people who live there and also it is the country of people who live around the world to countribute there support for common cause.
PEACE AND DEMOCRACY IS THE COMMON CAUSE. PEACE THAT IS LONG LASTING AND DEMOCRACY THAT HAS INSTITUTIONALIZED COMPLETE ELECTORAL LOGISTICS.
If you behave like the dictators by dictating others writing para by para without common sense then you go ahead and take the position of Gyanendra.
You may be one of them spoilt brats who came from corrupt family to judge and condemn others without common sense.
What is your vested interest on this? Are you employed by the blog to get paid for judging and condemning others?
I like to know.
Hi Yahoo,
I personally do not care whether the commenters on this blog questioning my genuineness. What I really want to see change in Nepal that what I wrote in this article.
You can remove my name from it and make it anonymous. I won’t have any problem as long as such changes occur in Nepali politics.
I have not only request Wagle Ji to publish this article on this blog but also I met Nepali deligation leader KP Oli, DPM personally to present this document.
Lets take this article or proposal as anonymous and consider whether such electoral system of democracy is feasible or not for Nepal.
I will be writing the justifications on estiblishing Federal System of Government in new Nepal.
For any mistakes that I made on these comments (live – consider I am writing this in my work between the works I perform) such as syntax, paragraph, typos and so on I appologize to you all honestly.
I hope beleive me that it took me five months to write this article or proposal.
Thanks for reminding me what other commenters questioning my genuineness.
Hey B
This you what you wrote: “Judging from the english you have used in your comments, i am sure you did not actually write the article yourself. You could have copied it from different books but i am sure you did not write it all by yourself.”
If you find exactly matching syntax on this article from any book or articles or documents online or offline then you tell me what really I am. Otherwise you shut off with your arbitrary assumptions.
I still say this article can be anonymous. I do not care what I want from it as long as Nepal and Nepali people have their ‘Civil Liberty’ gauranteed unter the new constitution drafted by the members of constituent assembly.
I believe in Federal System of Government for Nepal to resolve its diverse ethenicity by creating union of federation. Such federation will gaurantee the autonomous region to be govern by the members of the assembly elected by the popular votes of the people from each region.
Such reason can be determined as it is with the 75 districts or 14 zones or as per ethenicity group. These are all the options to be considered.
This is my thought despite your judgement and condemnation on the basis of the syntax, and typo errors.
I know how to get the crap out of you in American language.
i am back again, my lack of life, drags me to UWB, and engage in discourse, which never gets anywhere. and we are ego-centric morons, who help to stoke the popularity of Wagle ji. seer number of commenters he receives for good/bad/ugly (mostly ugly) write ups is amazing, must have had celibrety stature by now in jouron community. nevertheless, i am his fan.
but, what the hell, better than watching TV. so me speakth again.
DEAR BOM ji,
i never questioned your authorship of this article, and i have no problem believing that you penned it, and as i said earlier, which is an intersting but plausible proposal.
what i doubted was your efficacy of your advocacy, and just pointed out, your rash way of discourse.
regardless of our ideologies and political inclinations, i suppose, all the bloggers here are thinking ppl, some less some more, nevertheless members of exclusive club– pesudo intellectuals.
now, Bom ji, if you have trouble selling your ideas to this ‘club’, i am not talking about you making us believe or convert, at least engage in discourse/discussion in respectable manner.
if you pitch in your idea, some would agree, some would disagree, some would ridicule it, some would sling mud at you, for just fun of it. and that is how any idea is tested in the kiln of free thinking society, ideas with substance and oomph would stand out and ones without with wither away.
good majority of blogers, taking a liberty here to speak on ther behalf, i would presume, have had some international exposures or some western value education, if you have trouble selling your idea to us, how do you expect to sell them to conditioned Nepali (as you have put it)–our leaders, Maoist and semi-literate Nepalis.
there is no denying that you have tried more than some of us here or may be most of us, or may be all of us, to genuienly improve an archiac political structure in Nepal by proposing your thesis and meeting with the law makers, but it doesn’t mean that most of us do not understand ‘federalism’ just because you happen to work on it, may be the idea of ‘federalism’ is new to us, but it doesn’t mean that it is incomprehensible to us.
all we have done is, refuse to take it at its face value as advocated by you/
justification:
“good majority of blogers, taking a liberty here to speak on ther behalf, i would presume, have had some international exposures or some western value education, if you have trouble selling your idea to us, how do you expect to sell them to conditioned Nepali (as you have put it)–our leaders, Maoist and semi-literate Nepalis”
before anyone slings a s**t on the fan for the above statement, let me don my rain-coat.
in no way tried to disparage our traditional education system, what i meant was, it should have been easier for Mr. BOM, to sell western values to western indoctrinated jombies like us.
i shall stop my rant here, shoot me, if i type another letter.
To Critiques of blog:
First of all I am not trying to sell my idea. I donot care whether trash it or worship it. Just punch the damn idea for idea’s sake.
But I’m just suggesting you that do not imagine from the blue moon that somebody wrote this article because I in hurry committed some typos and syntax errors.
Such speculations are out of the ethics of critique. I would say you are indeed morons who do not realize the off-limits of your blog criticism.
Try to see the off-limit from other’s boarder line. I will not take your shit for granted.
Calm down Mr.Bom,
Why do you care about Nepal so much? Specially if you do not believe in patriotism or citizenship.
Such speculations are out of the ethics of critique. I would say you are indeed morons who do not realize the off-limits of your blog criticism.
Sorry broke the code of conduct of blogging online. I am sorry though, if you feel hurt.
THIS IS WHAT I WANT FOR MYSELF IN NEPAL. YOU GOT IT?
Sorry sir. Whatelse do you want for yourself in Nepal? What can i do you for, sir? And did you not say that you do not feel patriotic about any country and why do you want so much for yourslef in Nepal?
IF YOU DO NOT CARE AND TRY TO BE THE BOSS OF THIS BLOG THEN YOU KNOW YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE THIS BLOG SAJHA.COM.
Come on man, just look at what you are saying and honestly tell me, do you really think you make sense?
Nepal is not only your country to bring about change in every field. It is the country of people who live there and also it is the country of people who live around the world to countribute there support for common cause.
I wish i could bring about any changes in Nepal. Of course, Nepal is every one who thinks of her as his or her country and loves her for making us Nepalis. I totally agree with you man.
If you behave like the dictators by dictating others writing para by para without common sense then you go ahead and take the position of Gyanendra.
I now realize that you do not know what dictator means. And where did mr. gyanendra come in. Did he steal your loly pop too?
“You may be one of them spoilt brats who came from corrupt family to judge and condemn others without common sense.
What is your vested interest on this? Are you employed by the blog to get paid for judging and condemning others?
I am a spoilt brat because i criticized you? I never condemned you man. You are great. But yes, i condemn others without common sense. What is my vested interest in criticizing you? Man, if you just read your article and then your comments, you will see what i see? I would have been in your greatest interest to not have written the comments at all.
I apologize for a slight digression but I couldn’t help notice the following:
The bold fonts are really annoying when everyone else is satisfied with using the regular. Are you by any chance attempting to stress your senseless points by making paraphrases bold – just to make your post look significant and stand out amongst those of others? You do a good job; it makes your post look substantive, but without an ounce of creative input to match with the author’s article.
While articles need not necessarily appeal to everyone of every political inclination – or no particular inclination, it beats the purpose of of blog commenting when slanders are exchanged at more personal level.
The point – if necessary, is not to attack the person who wrote the article but the content of such articles, and I can hardly say that except for few, most seem to focus on the subject as an easy target rather than go through the brunt of reading long articles and make any coherent criticisms about them.
Hi Freeyoursenses,
Thank you sir. That is what I mean.
I personally have nothing to gain from the proposal of this article.
No matter how I put that peice together it does not matter. But what it matters whether the article has any weight or reality to deal with the political context of Nepal.
Nepal is a country of ethnicities. We are people from different ethnic background, we have our own native langauges, tradition, beleifs etc.
In this context you can compare Nepal with Switzerland which has diverse ethnecity – Italian Swiss, German Swiss and French Swiss. The political system which solved such difference with unity is based on federalism.
In my observation federal system of government might resolve our regional, ethnic diversity in the country. Because in the Federalism the state power is decentralized to the grass-root level of governance. Meaning the regional bodies of the government can have autonomous administrative independence.
The impediments lie on the ruling elites and thier family members who have been in the government positions and power since Panchayet period or before.
Believe me there are ruling elite family chained with the government for generations.
Let us dialogue on the crux of the matter, but not on the petty little things like ‘your English on these comments suggests that you did not write this article’ or ‘this was your thesis’ or ‘you’re trying to sell your idea to Nepali people and if you could not sell us on this blog then how can you sell to Nepali people’ and so on.
Unnessary confrontations with each other is not the way of criticism. But to make others’ think over the matter is the creative criticism.
To be honest, I am not trying to sell my idea to anyone. But I believe on the premise that if the idea has some realistic weight it will simply make its way to bring about change in the society.
Otherwise it is a garbage to trash it no matter who has written and no matter how blog critiques rate it.
I hope the participants in this blog realize the off-limits of the libery to critique such idea thrown on the blog for exploration.
Mr. Bom,
I accept that i did get a little carried away. My sincere apologies. May be i concentrate too much on trivial things too much while ignoring the bigger picture. Sorry for the distress caused.
What i did not like about your comments was, you do not consider yourself a nepali and in fact, you do not even believe in patriotism or citizenship of a particular country. However, i sense a very strong “this is my country too” sentiments in your comments. The fact that you have spent so much time writing the article also suggests that you infact have some feelings for the country but are unwilling to accept it.
“I beleive in International citizenship. I am a pacifist and oppose nationalism and religious fanatism. I do not worship any patritoism. You got it.” (agreeing to a comment i have not imphasized it)
This i really do not understand. What is your interest in Nepal? Of course, i agre with your article and the changes you have suggested however, the problem with our country is not lack of ideas but implementations of them
Mr. Bom, once again, my intention was not to insult you or your intelligence but to understand your sentiments towards Nepal.
Mr B,
People who reside in Nepal are in the first place human beings with all the qualities and potentials of human on earth – borne equal.
But we are happened to borne in that land to be conditioned (brought up) with our social, cultural, political way of life, ethenicities, religious beliefs, traditions, and so on.
Social conditioning as such of human beings in any society is inevitable.
But to be able to stand on earth as a human being with no fear of others one has to be able to realize how did I become of all these – “my name, my identity, my nationality, my attachment to my culture, tradition, belief, superstition and rest of the values.”
This realization is only possible if one has wondered about all these and quetioned oneself honestly with the genuine feeling this question of “how did all these become of me?”
Once you are aware of all the process you have gone through in your life to become Nepali or someoneelse then you can clearly see what responsibilities you have to take for yourself, for your family, for your society and so on at NOW – this moment in time and space.
For us to act and live here is only at NOW. If you understand time perhaps then you see – what happened yesterday was happened in the NOW and what will happen in the future will happen NOW.
The past and future exist only in the human memories either recorded in hard copies of paper, stone, metal or electornic.
What determines our (humans) future what we do now.
For example, if we all Nepali people have clear vision for our country NOW in this politically crital times then that will determine our future.
Historical example, in the life time of Albert Einstein if he had not done what he did the change in the science, especially in physics could have been never been evolved this much at present.
This is how the human action in ‘NOW’ determines future of human society.
Some human actions have capacity to change in whole human existence and some have only in the local arena – such as in a family, or in a tiny village of Mustang or in the street of Kathmandu.
But every human action counts for change in the exitence of humanity be good or bad as per the consequence of the action.
What political situations we have got in Nepal with the collective effort of people’s movement II and its success to right direction of the mandate of people for ‘Complete Democracy’ will depend on what we do NOW with our thought, speech (utterance) and action.
I love Nepal for Nepal’s sake. But let me live now as a human being who happened to be borne in Nepal and who have family and social ties in Nepal.
I hope I made myself clear to you.
So now lets move on with what is important to ponder over, talk over and act to bring about right political change in our county with the mandate of people’s movement II for ‘COMPLETE DEMOCRACY’.
If we begin NOW it will sooner or later bring about transformation.
Thanks you.
Mr. Bom,
Clear, may be. But look i understand that the past and the future are not real and even the present does not exist. Yes, life is a maya or whatever. Because, even present (or NOW as you call it) does not exist for long enough for you to realize it. What is NOW? Now is gone even before you can say now.
Coming back to matter, complete democracy, what does it mean? of course, for you it would mean abolishment of monarchy but what is in it for the people? Do you really think SPA and the maoists are sincere enuff to deliver and work in the interest of Nepal and Nepalis?
Hello B,
First of all I do not believe in Maya. I only see NOW as exitence for all lives and things on the universe.
To me Maya is a religious belief or imaginary idea. NOW is the existence.
Secondly, I do not care whether Monarchy gets abolished or not. But that decision has to be determined with the popular votes of the people of Nepal.
For me complete democracy means to establish institutions of Electoral logistics of Democracy so not nothing in the nation is done without the electoral procedures.
Memebres of Parliament both upper and lower house, the district governors and assembly members, the mayors of cities and villages and assembly members are elected by the popular votes during general eduction.
District judges, district attorenys and law enforcement officers are also elected by the popular votes of people of each district, provided they are the permanent resident of the district.
The appointments of government positions in the bodies of government – legislative, executive and judiciary from district to the central are elected with the following steps electoral procedures:
First nominees are selected by the cabinet for hearing in the Parliament or district assembly
Second the Parliament or district assembly begins hearing to find out the professional skills and fact about nominees’ profile.
Third the Parliament or district assembly caste thier votes.
Forthly, the successful nominees get recommended by the Speeker of the house or district assembly to be appointed by the cabinet in respective positions.
I donot care monarchy or Republic. But what I care is institutionalization of the electoral logistics of Democracy to live our lives by the rule of law.
No more arbitrary appointments in overnight to make someone the Cheif Justice of the Supreme Court.
Therefore I want to abolish the government practice that are conditioned with the feudal oligarchic logistics.
Feudal oligarchic logistics in the government practice in Nepal are based on the ruling elites’ networks that sustains nepotism, favoritism and corruptions.
I think you have either did not read this article or could not understand the proposal.
My stand is that every political procedures for the government bodies to establish complete democracy must be done through complete electoral logistics.
No more appointment of CDO from Kathmandu to adminster Jumla. I tried to lobby in last 12 years of democracy in Nepal to abolish CDO appointments by giving authority to district chairs to administer the district. Go and ask President of Nepali Congress Democratic Deupa.
Unless we institutionalize such logistic we cannot change our society with democratic culture.
I suggest if you are honest with your participation in this blog please question reasonably; meaning you’ve read the article carefully and tried it to understand with your best.
Mr. B
Your second question:
“Do you really think SPA and the maoists are sincere enuff to deliver and work in the interest of Nepal and Nepalis?”
This question indicates that you are outrigh pro king. This means you like to continue with the old government logistics which I call it feudal oligarchic.
Comminists in Nepal attack feudalism but I see problem with the feudal plus oligarchic establishment that has washed the brain ruling elites since the period of Rana regime.
There should be no questin about the honesty of SPA and Maoists. They seem to be trying their best from where they have come.
It does not mean they have the vision for the country towards the complete electoral process of the Democracy which only can give full rights to people and protect the civil liberty.
Who can deliver what to people? That’s very tricky question. What can deliver people estiblishing institutions of Electoral Democracy.
If you are asking what can SPA and Maoists deliver to me, then you are pure feudal oligarchicist. Perhaps in this time such school of thought only exist in Nepal.
SPA is following the guideline of International communities to institutionalize the Democracy in Nepal. This is very good start.
Maoists are trying to come in the mainstream politics (there is no other choice despite thier political agenda and sologans) by fulfilling their political agendas that will justify their revolution. Since they are armed revolutionary they can not just jumb over it. They have to step by step cool down the mind set of thier party members.
Hopefully, the result of all these will be good for the nation.
But person like you will rumour around the country saying “Maoists were also just like other politicians for power.”
So who gonna cook your meals free for Nepali people? This question is not for Nepali people to asnwer (who have nothing to do with our dialoque) but it is for you answer to yourself (not to me) to ponder over.