Posts
Nepal has been in a state of political crisis for many decades, but this crisis has reached a new level of intensity recently. This May 2012, Nepal descended into a new crisis after rival political parties failed to reach an agreement on a new constitution before the national legislature’s term expired at midnight. The issue of ethnic states has sparked protests and violence across Nepal. It created a situation of community-caste conflict, likely disintegration of the nation-state and more so of a dangerous financial slide.
Nepal's prime minister has called elections for November after the country's warring political parties couldn't reach agreement on a new constitution.
Political instability has been the defining feature of the Nepali state during the last two decades. Nepal has had 20 governments since the introduction of democracy in 1990, the country is still emerging from the conflict with some aftershocks. Whereas, the people of the country are not sure when they would get their constitution and how would the constitution could affect the issues of development and governance even if written. The country has seen Dictator type Regime i.e. Rana Regime, Monarchy, Multiparty democracy with Constitutional Monarchy, and A decade long Armed Conflict i.e., Maoist Insurgency; Whereas, now After years of Long Armed Conflict, Nepal is moving towards reconstruction, towards state building process; a transformation phase with higher priority to constitution writing; however, People’s voice has not yet been successful in making its way into the new constitution and the policy process. With failure government, the state is struggling hard not to be tagged as “state of failure”.
The concept of federalism is being introduced by politicians and academicians as a solution. Whereas, there is raising concern why the governments in Nepal do never became stable? What governance system do people want? How do people define Development? What does freedom mean for people? How they imagine about the new leadership?
Nepal's prime minister has called elections for November after the country's warring political parties couldn't reach agreement on a new constitution.
Political instability has been the defining feature of the Nepali state during the last two decades. Nepal has had 20 governments since the introduction of democracy in 1990, the country is still emerging from the conflict with some aftershocks. Whereas, the people of the country are not sure when they would get their constitution and how would the constitution could affect the issues of development and governance even if written. The country has seen Dictator type Regime i.e. Rana Regime, Monarchy, Multiparty democracy with Constitutional Monarchy, and A decade long Armed Conflict i.e., Maoist Insurgency; Whereas, now After years of Long Armed Conflict, Nepal is moving towards reconstruction, towards state building process; a transformation phase with higher priority to constitution writing; however, People’s voice has not yet been successful in making its way into the new constitution and the policy process. With failure government, the state is struggling hard not to be tagged as “state of failure”.
The concept of federalism is being introduced by politicians and academicians as a solution. Whereas, there is raising concern why the governments in Nepal do never became stable? What governance system do people want? How do people define Development? What does freedom mean for people? How they imagine about the new leadership?
2 comments:
This is what Nepalese people are suffering form. Since constitution assembly was dissolved, people got peace in the community, and may be for a short period of time. One can remember, there was a situation of communal riot in different part of the country. Dispute between 'Madhesi' people and 'Pahadiya' in Navalparasi and Kailali before may 28 was an extreme example of seed of communal riot. People almost came to attack in Kathmandu grouping themselves into 'Janajati' and 'non-janajati' . People had intense fear of communal riot and disorder in the community if the constitution would have been promulgated with "Federalism"
So, is that meaning people don't want federalism? Why people were for 'united far-west' or 'united mid-west' and so on? Why people were against the ethnic federalism? These are the questions to be addressed by the political leaders in the days to come.
Dipak Bhandari
Kathmandu, Nepal
(Online Volunteer for Development)
Why do people need to be governed? Why should do demons rule the world and why should god? Why should any opnion or ideology rule the world? Mine question is would you tolerate being governed by any king, dictator, politician, any policy, or law for each and every choices that you make in your life. What short of freedom then you have been delivered? And the next thing why should you govern anyone else? What’s the reason behind that? I have got a simple solution. The solution might be living with the self realization of responsibility towards the nation. Mine statement is very simple if everybody lives his/her life with complete honesty and with self realization of responsibility towards the nation, with self realization of responsibility towards the mother earth, I assure no policy and no government would be required in this world. However since, this simple solution is not preferable by this civilized world, I doubt this remains as a “philosophy” till all the paths are discovered and tagged useless.
Post a Comment