The announcement of an insurance cover for all the candidates demonstrates the government’s determination to hold the polls. Introduced in the country for the first time, this scheme reflects the difficulty the government has been facing to get a ‘coalition of the willing’ to contest an election being boycotted by all the mainstream political parties, derided by the civil society and others, and of doubtful value in the eyes of the international community. No less important is the Maoists’ threat to foil the polls at any cost, including the use of ‘physical or people’s action’ against those contesting or helping to hold the polls. The decisive impact of all this was felt on the nomination day yesterday in the Kathmandu Valley and other towns where the candidates have reportedly fallen short of the total number of seats, whereas in the past every seat had several or even dozens of fierce contestants.

Judging by this, the municipal elections, 12 days ahead of the polling day, already appear to be a washout. Even the pro-palace Rastriya Prajatantra Party, led by Pashupati Shumsher Rana, and the Nepal Praja Parishad (its chief Keshav Sthapit intended to be a strong contender for mayor in Kathmandu) have decided not to participate. In the fray remain only those parties or candidates whose names, except one or two, the general people have never heard of. The candidates, if the past and the present Maoist threats are any guide, are sure to be the targets of the ‘people’s action’. It is anybody’s guess therefore how many will finally remain in the field after the day for nomination withdrawal.

Under such a shortage of candidates, the polls, if held at all, promise to be characterised by the lowest ever voter turnout in Nepali history (and there is no insurance for the voters). The seven-party alliance has decided, among other things, to stage a social boycott of the candidates. They have also warned that ‘the future democratic government will recover the money misused in enacting the drama of the so-called election the same way as government revenue is recovered.’ Though it has become late and calling off the election at this stage might mean some loss of face, it would still be the better option for the government than going ahead with the polls, which would not achieve any of its stated objectives. Critics would, in either case, show the government to be a failure and therefore unfit to remain in power. But the government would be salvaging its image if it took the bold step towards finding a broad-based political solution of the national crisis.