Ram Pradhan

P eople’s ballot is the ultimate yardstick of a genuine democracy. Any attempt to undercut it either through political maneuvering or in the pretext of “unavoidable circumstances within” has to be examined very carefully and with a heavy dose of skepticism. One and half years back when King Gyanendra took the controversial decision to delink Sher Bahadur Deuba from the privilege of power on grounds of incapability, the moot issue then was to grant or not to grant the asked-for postponement of the parliamentary poll beyond the statutory limit. The monarch has on March 28 pledged the initiation of the critical vote to the Lower House within the year 2061 B S (by mid-April 2005).

The royal assurance comes amid fairly accurate assessment that given the current security scenario the promised poll is not feasible. Insofar as the prime minister and his seemingly disparate cabinet colleagues were making the statement to this effect, nobody bothered to pay much of an attention. There goes the claim of this government enjoying executive power. But now the pledge has come from the institution whose “inherent feature is to be guided by popular aspirations, ardently safeguarding the interests of the people and nation.” Election has to be held because there is no other way to find out on whom, after all, the people wish to give the mantle of governance. The people have suffered enough to deserve a fair deal. It is reasonable to trust that the monarch is aware of the magnitude of the task ahead, not to mention the inevitability of some sort of an accommodation with the insurgents if the proposed poll is to be free and fair.

On the government’s side, it appears the nothing doing with the terrorists posture is mellowing if one were to take Minister Kamal Thapa’s invitation to the Maoists to join the electoral fray with any degree of seriousness. In some ways it is hoping against hope. The rebels aren’t going to oblige because they think or want the whole world to believe that they are winning. Even if they decided to contest the ballot, rather unlikely, the process of formally registering their party, the CPN-M, with the Election Commission is not a cakewalk. The government will do well to go out of way, if need be, to bring the Maoists to the negotiating table ideally with the help of indigenous civil society and the United Nations. By the way, the UN is not a foreign agency. A word of caution here should be in order. UN mediation is welcome but it is doubtful the proponents of the naya satta (new regime) will accept any form of presence of the United States, Britain and India in the international team because, as they say, these “consulting” countries are a party to the conflict by virtue of their military assistance to the purano satta (old regime).

The political parties, should they foolishly end up boycotting the parliamentary vote, will have nobody but themselves to blame if what they call - the “regression” - gets prolonged. A parliament freely elected by the sovereign people is the surest bet against autocracy and “unconstitutional aberrations.” Not to participate in what is the ultimate test of popularity in a democracy will be a shame, even perhaps a cowardly act. The challenge before all Nepalis today is how to make the poll free and fair. The monarch clearly acknowledges as we all do that it is the duty of “all concerned to create an environment wherein governance of the country can be handed over to elected representatives.” Don’t just dismiss the possibility of an all-party government in the near future.