Mistakes of the Government
Mistakes of the Government
By Bipin Shah
Could this government hold a fair and peaceful election to the Constitution Assembly (CA) within the stipulated time? These days the government seems to have been grappling with too many problems which are diverting its attention from its main objective. Is the government getting hapless? Has it grown weaker? These are some legitimate questions. But the main question is-where have these political uncertainties suddenly popped out of? After all, this is the same government which, after coming into power following the April Movement, took so many historic decisions that ranged from striping King Gyanendra of the status of the head of state to bringing the Maoists into the mainstream politics. This is the same government that enjoyed an unprecedented popularity. So, where has the government missed? Some may see the protests of the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) or the Janjati Mahasang or the other groups as efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the government. There is already an extremist view circulating around, which is trying hard to characterize these protests as designs of reactionary and regressive forces. We can blame every other thing that is not within the boundary of our interests for the political chaos we have been witnessing after the Madhesi Movement. This could be one way of seeing the issue from just one side of the fence. When one sees the issue from the other side, the story becomes a lot more interesting and contrasting. Promulgation of an interim constitution that was inherently flawed and not up to the expectations of the people can be considered the seed of all the present problems. Instead of realizing that, the government went on a spree of committing mistakes that only exposed its predilections and vulnerabilities. Those mistakes clearly showed that it did not have its fingers on the pulse of the ‘entire’ country. The first mistake was to treat the political activists of the MJF as some street hooligans when they were protesting against the interim constitution. This clearly showed the anti-Madhesi stratum of the government. The second mistake was not only to let the Nepalgunj event happen but also to not be serious enough to properly investigate it and bring the culprits to justice. The third mistake was to not take immediate initiatives to tackle the situation in Lahan, when a Maoist cadre gunned down a young schoolboy. The Lahan incident was really intriguing. After the incident Prachanda said his party would investigate and punish the culprit, if found guilty. I wonder, who is supposed to investigate, prosecute and punish if the crime of murder is committed- a party or the government? Who do you think is making the government weak? We all know what followed the Lahan incident. And after the Madhesi Movement and the lives of 29 Madhesis, where are we now? At the heap of some promises and the myriad of uncertainties. These promises may get translated into constitutional amendments, but whether it will be done completely, clearly and honestly is yet to be seen. I hope this time the government does not make any mistakes. The government has yet to take the MJF and the Jantantrick Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM) in confidence to bring them to the negotiation table. The Janjati Mahasangh and other groups have continued protesting for their rights and demands. Accusing them of trying to weaken the government can be as ridiculous as it can get in a democratic society. Forming a talks committee and merely sending out letters asking the discontented groups to come to the negotiation table without creating a favorable environment is not going to achieve anything. Everybody knows how long it took and how many compromises the government had to make to bring the Maoists to the negotiation table. Why not make some compromises this time too? What the government should have done is to make a Madhesi the home minister. Is there anything wrong with the notion? There are many Madhesi leaders in the ruling parties, who are capable and experienced to run the home ministry. When the government expresses determination to ensure the unbiased participation of the Madhesi into the political process, why not live by examples? Such a decision by the SPA and the Maoists would have sent a clear signal that the government is serious to address the problems and flexible to sit for talks. There are arguments that resignation of Krishna Prasad Sitaula may have negative impacts on the peace process with the Maoists. Is it necessary that he be the home minister for the peace process to go forward? The seven-party alliance (SPA) and Maoists could have come to an agreement to change his ministry. This could have been a genuine first step to taking the agitated groups into confidence without discrediting Sitaula’s contribution to the peace process. It is not to say that the government has to accept all the legitimate and illegitimate demands of every other group that comes out on the street. But the government should try to remove all possible blockades, if there are any, when it decides to sit for talks. The MJF has put forward three pre-conditions for talks: resignation of the home minister, formation of a high level probe commission and punishment to those who are found guilty of suppressing the Madhesi Movement. It is striking that the MJF should not even have had to ask for the latter two conditions. The government itself should have immediately formed a commission to probe into the incidents that occurred during the Madhesi Movement. Formation of probe commissions has taken place after each movement in Nepal. What is different this time? Is there something to hide? The home minister recently conceded that mistakes may have been made. Why not bring those mistakes out in public? It becomes all the more surprising when the government shows so much promptness to form a commission to probe an incident of stone pelting on the Mercedes of Gyanendra. When Lena Sundh, representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (HCHR) in Nepal, points towards the need of an impartial investigation into the deaths, injuries and destruction of property in Terai during the Madhesi Movement, it indicates how keenly the international community is watching our political decisions and judgments. These are historic times. These are times of transition. The task of the government is not only to conduct the CA elections, but also to honestly protect and safeguard the interests of the whole country that it is supposed to be working for.