The polling day is just nine days away. Political parties continue to hurl allegations of violation of the election Code of Conduct at one another, claiming that they themselves are the best respecter of it. In particular, the big parties and certain Tarai-based ones account for the largest number of violations, especially when it comes to intolerance and violence. However, when any two parties are compared, one may often happen to be a greater code violator than the other. Violations also come in many shapes and sizes. Intimidation, coercion, force, and violence fall into one category, and the use of any of these methods to influence the election outcome is condemnable and punishable. The growing poll-related violence has become worrisome, to the point of souring the relationships of the political parties, especially the major ones, even beyond April 10, and of threatening the political course the country has been taking since Jana Andolan II two years ago.

The alleged election campaigning by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) soldiers also raises the question of a breach of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which requires both the state and Maoist armies to remain in the barracks during the polls. The Election Commission has rightly expressed concern over these reports, of which the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN), stationed here to monitor the two armies and the election, has taken note. Similarly, the recent import of alleged arms in three trucks, which led to questions about whether it constituted a violation of the peace accord, also caused public doubt about motive, though interested groups like political parties did not push alike for full details of the matter to make everything transparent. As for the writing of slogans and pasting of posters on walls, the political parties, heeding the EC direction, have removed many of them. But when it comes to campaign funds, there does not seem to be any effective monitoring mechanism, and this makes it unlikely that the EC will be able to take action against those candidates who exceed the spending limits.

The lack of transparency and of strict regulations and penalties in matters like party and campaign funds has contributed to ugly and costly practices in Nepali politics. Any leader of a political party will obviously claim that his party is spending within the EC limits, and none of the leaders will disclose the sources of party funds and the total amount of ‘donation’ raised. Some of the non-SPA political leaders have alleged ‘discrimination’, lack of action against ruling parties for code ‘violations’, etc. The EC has threatened ‘strong action’ against breaches of the code. Under Clause 29 of the Election Commission Act 2007, it has powers to fine any candidate or political party to the extent of Rs.100,000 or disqualify any candidate from contesting an election for up to six years. Attention should also be directed at stopping or punishing the use of undesirable temptation, for instance the use of money, to sway votes. There are so many ways, besides violence, capable of making an election not so credible.