A united effort from the political parties while nominating the aspiring members of the NA could have reinstated public faith in the democratic process and ensured that the NA would function as a genuine representation of the diverse voices within the nation
In the lead-up to the National Assembly (NA) elections, the political landscape is ablaze with a fiery debate surrounding the selection process of aspirant candidates. This contentious discourse adds an extra layer of drama to the unfolding narrative of Nepali politics. The ruling coalition is strategically positioning itself for what it hopes will be a decisive victory, setting its sights on all 20 soon-to-be-vacant NA seats. The formidable vote weightage of the Electoral College, a composition of provincial Members of Parliament, executive heads and deputies of local bodies, seems to tip the scales in favour of the ruling coalition.
However, amidst this strategic posturing, the main opposition is playing its card, maintaining a hopeful stance. Its optimism hinges on the anticipation of potential cross-voting scenarios that could act as a catalyst, propelling some of their candidates into the coveted NA. The political stage is thus set for an intense electoral tug-of-war, hurtling towards an intriguing climax. This promises a spectacle of political prowess and strategic maneuvering in the upcoming elections, capturing the attention and scrutiny of the nation.
To contextualise this political drama, it is essential to understand the structure and role of the NA within the broader framework of Nepal's governance. Established as a federal democratic republic with a bicameral legislature, Nepal's constitution outlines a House of Representatives (lower house) and the NA (upper house). The HoR comprises directly elected members and those nominated by the political parties based on the proportional representation principle. In contrast, the NA is conceived as a chamber representing the diverse intellectual, cultural and geographical dominions of the country.
With a structure reminiscent of the British House of Lords, the NA, as a permanent legislative entity, sees the terms of one-third of its members concluding every two years. Subsequent elections are held to elect new members, with the expectation that the Assembly comprises seasoned and accomplished individuals from diverse backgrounds. It serves as a critical institution designed to oversee and balance the proceedings of the House of Representatives, which, in turn, represents various sectors, including the inexperienced grassroots levels.
Despite these intentions, concerns arise regarding the NA's efficacy in ensuring representation from diverse ethnic and regional groups. Neither the ruling coalition nor the main opposition have convincingly assured the representation of different underprivileged clusters, including Madesh, Dalits, individuals with disabilities and women. This perceived imbalance raises red flags, risking the exacerbation of existing social tensions and potentially undermining the unity and inclusivity crucial for a stable and prosperous nation.
Nepal has continuously grappled with frequent changes in government and political instability. The NA has not remained immune to this turbulence. Internal party conflicts, personal agendas and power struggles have taken precedence over the broader goal of serving the people's interests. This internal strife threatens the stability of the legislative framework and undermines the very foundation of democratic governance.
Adding to these concerns is the perceived lack of accountability and transparency within the NA, coupled with doubts about the competence of its members. A particularly notable incident is the embarrassingly misguided debate on the Electronic Business Bill, where members misunderstood its content, mistaking it for a discussion on electricity trade. Moreover, crucial decisions that impact millions are often made behind closed doors, escaping thorough public scrutiny. This opacity not only contradicts democratic principles but also creates an environment ripe for corruption and unethical practices.
Regrettably, the anticipated ascent of the majority of aspiring members of the NA paints a less than promising picture when considering their track record. Among the candidates are individuals who have faced repeated failures and rejections in past elections, supporters closely aligned with political leaders, and those lacking essential experience. Moreover, controversial candidates with grave corruption allegation are on the top of the list. Given this composition, there is a legitimate concern regarding the potential impact on the dignity and effective functioning of the NA.
Rather than opting for such individuals, it would have been more prudent for political parties to nominate unanimously acceptable esteemed figures from various walks of life. At this crucial juncture, the NA calls for an urgent attention to rectify the deviations from its originally envisioned democratic path. A united effort from the political parties while nominating the aspiring members of the NA could have reinstated public faith in the democratic process and ensured that the NA would function as a genuine representation of the diverse voices within the nation, regardless of the members' political affiliations.
Unfortunately, without a committed adherence to these democratic principles, Nepal has risked descending further into political instability, undermining the very social fabric that binds the nation together.
Learning lessons from the past setbacks, it is imperative for the parties and their leaders to prioritise the people's interests over personal or partisan agendas. This shift in focus is crucial to guide the NA back on track toward a more robust and healthier democratic future. Only through such dedicated commitment can the true essence of the National Assembly be realised, serving as a beacon of democratic values and effective representation of the people.
Dr Joshi is senior scientist and independent opinion maker based in Germany
pushpa.joshi@gmail.com