It is surprising that all the leaders of Madhes and Tharuhat-centric parties representing in the federal parliament have blindly supported this agreement of the NC and CPN UML
There is a saying that smoke doesn't rise without fire. In other words, even rumours can hold a grain of truth. For the past few years, whispers of a major political shift have been circulating among the public. These weren't just idle talks over tea and coffee; perhaps, these 'arrows in the dark', as some called them, were coming from a very specific and public intuition. The recent alliance between the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML for the new government seems to confirm these suspicions. Over casual conversations, people openly discussed the possibility of major changes: dismantling federalism, establishing a bi-party system, and even curbing inclusive proportional representation. The recent agreement between the Nepali Congress and UML, as reported, seems to be laying the groundwork for exactly that.
Nepal no longer finds the constant power struggle, political jostling and formation of alliances for government and leading positions thrilling. This is, unfortunately, a well-worn trope of Nepali politics. The pursuit of power is certainly a driver of alliances in Nepal, but there are subtler reasons behind their formation and collapse. These reasons, though often discussed, remain less visible on the surface.
Negotiations and calculations that take place behind closed doors hold the key to understanding these hidden dynamics. Rumours swirl in tea-coffee centres that internal reasons, connected to various scandals, are driving the new alliance. The scandals allegedly involve the top leaders and their relatives. To protect them, some believe it is necessary to keep power in the hands of their own people. This might explain, some say, the reason for top leaders' reluctance to retire from politics.
The sudden talk of amending the constitution is a surprising element in the agreement between the NC and the CPN-UML. As of this writing, the agreement's contents haven't been made public; however, reported details suggest that proportional representation (PR) will be removed from the House of Representatives (HoR), reducing the number of seats. In other words, the mixed election system would be abolished, making the FPTP system the sole method for electing members of the lower and more powerful House. The size of constituencies will become larger. These changes related to the election will reduce the possibility of inclusive and proportional representation in the HoR. It has been proposed that the National Assembly, which currently represents the states and local levels, will be elected through the PR system. This shift would fundamentally change the National Assembly's role, transforming it from a body directly representing state and local levels. If this happens, it will be a frightening change in the basic concept of the federal parliament.
There is also news that the CPN-UML wants to increase the threshold to more than 3 per cent. This clearly indicates the two major parties' attempt to force a two-party system on the country. Their actions aim to prevent the emergence of small and new parties, believing it will ensure stable governance and maintain their grip on power. However, a more realistic possibility is that this could push the country into a state of anarchy due to rising dissatisfaction, anger and conflict.
The demand for amendments to the constitution began immediately after its declaration. Madhesi, Tharu, Muslim, indigenous people and Dalit communities demanded changes related to state boundaries based on identity, inclusive representation in government systems, population-based representation in the federal parliament, and issues related to language and culture. There was a tough struggle for this in Madhes and Tharuhat. The amendments being talked about today are exactly opposite to the demands of the marginalised people like Madhesi, Tharu, Muslim, indigenous people and Dalits. The aim is not to address their demands but is linked to the continuity of the grip on governance of the present power groups. It has nothing to do with good governance and prosperity, because everyone knows that good governance cannot be achieved unless there is a change in the mindset and commitment to the rule of law.
It is surprising that all the leaders of Madhes and Tharuhat-centric parties representing in the federal parliament have blindly supported this agreement of the NC and CPN UML. And hence, it seems as if they have lost the right to represent Madhes and Tharuhat. In such a situation, federalists across the country are in a state of confusion and in between the horns of a dilemma.
It cannot be said for certain that the constitution will be amended according to the thinking of the NC and CPN UML. Still, the agreement suggests a new version of the same extreme nationalism that was spread during the Madhes and Tharuhat movements in the past. Amending the constitution based on this agreement could increase the possibility of the country getting stuck in a permanent conflict.
The idea put forward is very dangerous. There will be talk of ending federalism, blaming it for the corruption spread all over the country, and curbing the marginalised people who are fighting for equality. Some people will also talk about the return of the monarchy. It is also possible that this claim of Congress-UML may backfire because the essence of the agreement is something else and the cover is something else. They must also know that this is not the time for such a regression. Even if it is dormant, the number of people fighting for equality, inclusiveness, and participation in state matters is very high and cannot be suppressed. Even if the proposal for constitutional amendment is just a cover, we will have to be careful because it proves that the cycle of regression is still intact.
Lal is President, Terai-Madhesh Democratic Party
