Three Madhesi political outfits have formed a joint front called United Madhesi Democratic Front (UMDF) to carry out their agitation forcefully and press the government to meet their six demands, which they made public through a press conference on Feb. 9, 2008. One of their key demands is for an autonomous Madhesi region with the right to self-determination.

While in the developed Europe countries with centuries old political boundaries are gradually erasing their border barriers to come nearer each other, some ethnic

communities in regions in Nepal are agitating to establish their distinct identities through the formation of separate autonomous regions or provinces with the right to self-determination.

It is the Maoists who first raised the issue of autonomy by including the demand for autonomy in their charter during the armed conflict. The Maoists put forward their idea of federalism constituting ethnic autonomous regions with the right to self-determination. Scholars trace its origin back to the Marxist literature, in which Lenin put forward his thesis of autonomy with self-determination in the context of Russia. Now, it appears that the Maoists have likened the demand to opening the Pandora’s Box and hence are revising their stand on the issue of self-determination. According to media reports, Maoists have retracted from their earlier stance as they believe that granting right to self-determination to the regions to be formed later on might lead to secession from Nepal.

Taking autonomy seriously, it does not require any other qualifications. Logically, since every determination is a negation, attributing any qualification to any subject, means limiting of its connotation as well as denotation. If we increase the connotation of the term “autonomy” by adding “with right to determination”; or “without right to determination”, it is supposed to negate its true meaning.

Literally, autonomy means the freedom for a country, a region or an organisation to govern itself independently. Similarly, the word self-determination means the right of a country and its people to be independent and to choose their own government and political system (independence). Essentially, these two terms have almost the same connotation and in fact, are complementary to each other.

In the political sphere, autonomy is a well-defined geographic area called a state or province: to be independent, whereas self-determination is the right of the people living in that area to govern themselves independently. If we add a qualification to it with the adjective ‘right to self-determination’, it, really, does not change its meaning and significance.

Similarly, if we take away ‘the right to self-determination’ from it, in reality, it will not change the actual essence of the term in any significant way. The issue of autonomy gained currency with the inclusion of the specific provision provided in the interim constitution of declaring Nepal a federal democratic republic. However, Nepal cannot be made a federal state without the formation of several states or regions within its fold against its present unitary and centralised form.

The people’s movement of 2006, if at all, has made the people sovereign; they are no longer the subject of any ruler or any ruling class. The status of citizens as subjects of any ruler or the sovereign themselves is also related to the idea of autonomy as a subject has no right to assert or ask for any autonomy from its ruler, as it will eliminate the very existence of the ruler. If a citizen is sovereign he will assert himself as a master and he will not go begging autonomy of other sovereign masters like him.

In order to form a federal structure, basically, it is the people of the region who are the final authority to decide, not any particular group or community. Denying the right to any

part or a region to secede or declare independent is the same old mindset of a

ruler, or a conqueror who wants to subjugate them forever.

Moreover, granting any such right to the seeker is to provide him the opportunity to use his wisdom to see whether he really needs it in his best interests or doesn’t need it as it may only land them in further trouble. A hungry man wants food first. But while eating he decides the quality and the quantity of the food.

To sum up, it seems that the demand for autonomous Madhes region is based on three factors. First, since the Maoists have already declared to give right to self-determination to the autonomous ethnic states, the UMDF appears to be within this parameter. Secondly, the demand for autonomy is a reactive demand to the century-old plight of marginalisation and discriminations that Madhesis have suffered. It looks like an anti-thesis of the age-old political hegemony. Lastly, It might have been used as a pressure tactic against the government to make their genuine demands met.

Prof Mishra is former election commissioner