Momentum picking up against federalism

Yuba Nath Lamsal

Lately, a fresh and new momentum is picking up against federalism in the country. This initiative came in the name of a joint front comprising leaders of different political parties, journalists, academics and professionals of various sectors.

Until a few days ago, people and politicians seemed to be afraid of talking against federalism. This was because all political parties had supported the idea of federalism. Only a single party’ Rastriya Janamorcha Nepal ( National People’s Front Nepal or RJN) led by Chitra Bahadur KC had the courage to remain consistent in its views that federalism was not in the interest of Nepal. This party consistently opposed the idea of federalism right from the beginning, for which the RJN in general and its leader Chitra Bahadur KC in particular deserve special appreciation.

Federalism is a vital national issue, which needs thorough national debate on its pros and cons. However, this issue was accepted without the national debate and without taking people’s views. In the Interim Constitution, it has been mentioned that Nepal should be a federal democratic state. This provision has bound the political parties to accept federalism without any doubt and question. Perhaps, this was a grave mistake committed by the parties to incorporate such a national issue in the Interim Constitution without taking it into the debate among the people. This is also an incident that shows how parties and leaders take the people just for granted.

Federalism is originally the agenda of the Maoists. Until the 12-point agreement was reached between the then seven parliamentary parties and the Maoists, federalism was the sole agenda of the Maoists. After the 12-point agreement was reached, seven parties accepted the Maoist agenda of federalism and republic. Now republic has been endorsed by the people but the issue of federalism is yet to be approved by the people.

Ever since Nepal was created, it has remained a unitary state. Nepal was created by physically assimilating tiny principalities that had their unique cultures, languages and system of governance. The unification was a historical necessity and this was done by Prithivi Narayan Shah, the then king of Gorkha and later the king of a unified Nepal. Prithivi Narayan Shah was a visionary personality who saw the danger looming in the existence of Nepal as an independent country if Nepal was not unified. He saw this danger as the British colonial rulers had already gobbled up entire India and they had been eying Nepal as the next target. Against this background, Prithivi Narayan Shah unified Nepal because of which we now have sovereign and independent country. There are some elements that try to defame Prithivi Narayan Shah and his unification campaign, which is also objectionable. The other equally objectionable issue is the attempts of some elements who want to take benefit out of the historic role played by Prithivi Narayan Shah. Their claim is that since Nepal was created by Prithivi Narayan Shah, his dynasty should have the authority to rule the country forever. This is a feudal mentality which is totally objectionable. Nepal is in the present condition of backwardness and poverty because of the Shah rulers, who came in power after Prithivi Narayan Shah, who exploited the country and people for their personal benefit. Thus, the decision of scrapping monarchy and declaring it as a republic is also a historic necessity for the best interest of Nepal and Nepalese people.

The republic is also a Maoist agenda, which other parties and the people later accepted. As the Maoist vigorously pushed this agenda and got it approved by the people, the Maoists, too, deserve high degree of appreciation. Had the Maoists not taken this issue so strongly, Nepal would still not have been a republic because it was not the political agenda of other parliamentary parties including the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. Thus, the Maoists are the genuine republican force in Nepal.

Right after the unification, the approach and policies that the rulers in Kathmandu adopted were based on the strategy of consolidating the newly created unified country. But the later rulers adopted wrong policies that left the many communities and regions in a state of backwardness politically, economically, culturally and linguistically. It is true that some communities and regions remained backward for years and decades. The advocates of federalists claim that unitary system is the root cause of Nepal’s backwardness and they are now pushing for federal structure. But Nepal’s backwardness was not because of unitary system but because of the flawed policies of the monarchist regimes in the past.

After federalism was incorporate dint he Interim Constitution, people belonging to different geographic regions and ethnic and linguistic communities have proposed different models of the federal structure. Some have demanded federal states on the basis of ethnicity. Some political parties have backed this proposition. The Maoist party first mooted the idea of federal states on the basis of ethnicity. But the notion of creating states on the basis of ethnicity is obsolete and unscientific. Moreover, Nepal does not have any area where one particular ethnic group commands majority in terms of population. Different ethnic people are scattered all over Nepal. More dangerous is the proposal of the right to self-determination for the federal states. This may ultimately lead to disintegration of the country. We have seen the examples of Balkan states and former Yugoslavia where ethnic politics ultimately tore apart the country.

We must also learn lessons from the Soviet Union, which was disintegrated into several states on the basis of the constitutional provision of right to self-determination. After the success of the October Revolution that established a socialist republic under the leadership of V I Lenin, the Soviet Constitution incorporated a provision that gave the rights of self determination to the Soviet states. It was reported that Lenin, at one point, had also accepted that provision of right to self determination would harm the Soviet Union once the central government weakened. This came true in 1990 and we have several states created out of the former Soviet Union.

Nepal is, no doubt, a multi-ethnic and multi-lingual country. This is our national character. What is unique in Nepal is its geographical variation and diversity. In such a tiny stretch of land, we have the mighty Himalayas, great river systems and fertile plains. Accordingly, we have climatic variation with unique ecological diversity. These geographical conditions have created different cultures and life styles. Thus, ethnicity and culture did not create the geography, but geography conditioned the culture of Nepal.

This diversity must be preserved and developed. But federalism alone cannot preserve this diversity and resolve all problems of the country. Moreover, federalism is a costly system, which poor country like Nepal cannot financially afford. We must address the problems of the country and ensure that there is equitable development and distribution of resources. We have already adopted the system of proportionate representation which has ensured representation of all ethnic, lingual and cultural groups as well as the backward groups like women, dalits and indigenous population. This is a perfect system for ensuring development of all communities, regions and groups. Instead of adopting federal structure, true decentralization and system of strong and effective local self-governance would serve better in Nepal. Thus, we must seriously reconsider our decision on the issue of federalism. We must, therefore, launch a nationwide debate before we taken any decision on this issue.