Although bogged down in political uncertainties at present, Nepal is going to hold constituent assembly (CA) polls in the near future. The elected CA then will work towards drafting a new constitution. This will provide a great opportunity to prepare a truly “people’s constitution” in order to create a new and prosperous Nepal. This unprecedented event will mark a great triumph for the Nepalis who will, in real sense of the term, be determining their own future. But the people will be able to determine their own future only if certain conditions are fulfilled.

The first and foremost condition concerns the atmosphere of the CA polls. The elections must be free, fair and peaceful. Secondly, massive popular participation is crucial for the success of the CA polls. But for that, voters need to be educated enough to know the candidates who can best serve the popular interest. In a real democratic political system, the voters have the right to know about the candidates. Educating voters will help them make a judicious decision while casting their votes. Besides, it should not be forgotten that the right to information is a unique and universal trait of democracy.

So it is essential that the personal details (along with criminal records, if any) of the candidates be made public before the polls. This is among the voters’ fundamental rights. Moreover, such disclosures are very important for the survival of democracy in the sense that it promotes the cause of a key democratic element — transparency. Transparency entails that the voters can conduct a “social audit” of the candidates. But, for such audits, the voters must be well-informed about the candidates’ past. The candidates also need to furnish all the details of their economic and educational background, which will help the voters make up their minds better before casting their ballots. Such informed voting is a requisite of freedom of expression. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinion and to receive and import information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.”

As regards transparency of the candidates, the United States Congress has set a good example. It has instituted an independent agency to monitor financial activities of the contesting candidates. The personal properties, the private lives and the corporate links of candidates are also normally brought under the media’s sharp scrutiny. In Britain, those found guilty of one or more offences and those convicted on any grave charge cannot contest any election.

The verdict of the Indian Supreme Court in response to a petition filed by the Peoples’ Union for Civil Liberties on May 2, 2002, is also worth noting. That verdict made it mandatory for the candidates to furnish information about their criminal antecedents, assets and educational qualifications at the time of filing nomination for elections.

The Court further said that people’s right to information is vital in choosing proper candidates to the legislature. It laid down a basic principle: “In a democratic form of government, voters are of utmost importance. They have the right to elect or re-elect on the basis of the antecedents and past performance of the candidate. The voters have the choice of deciding whether holding of educational qualification or holding of property is relevant for electing or re-electing a person.” For this to happen, relevant information regarding the candidates should be available to the voters, including on “assets held by the candidates, his academic qualifications... and whether he was involved in a criminal activities.”

There have been umpteen cases in India where law breakers have been elected as law makers. A major reason behind such an irony was the lack of information to the public about the candidates. The voters were therefore totally unaware of the candidates’ past. A recent research showed that 25 members of the Indian parliament had direct links with criminals. It is also said that one in 10 Members of Parliament and one in three Members of Legislative Assembly there have criminal records.

As Nepal prepares for the historic event of constituent assembly elections, it could learn from the experiences of other countries in this matter. Although the Election Commission has proposed a number of election bills, they have not covered the information about the candidates’ past. The bills would do well to incorporate provisions making it mandatory for the candidates to furnish information about their criminal antecedents, assets and educational qualifications at the time of filing their nominations. This will contribute a lot to holding of free and fair elections and empower the voters to make an informed choice.

The author is a lawyer