Submit your Article

Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba is under immense pressure to announce local elections dates. On January 25, the Election Commission issued yet another statement, urging him to soon fix the dates.

Other Nepali Congress leaders, members of civil society, and media are warning him against paralyzing local governments by deferring polls. But then his key coalition partners want to postpone local elections from April/May to November. CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) are of the view that elections should be held six months after the expiry of local bodies’ terms in May this year.

Says Nepali Congress Central Working Committee member Min Bishokarma, PM Deuba is making utmost effort to convince coalition partners to agree to April-May local elections. “As the prime minister is in favor of holding local elections by removing legal ambiguities, it is incorrect to imply that he wants to defer elections,” says Bishokarma.

The main opposition, CPN-UML, is in favor of timely elections. On January 23, UML came out with a strong statement against postponing elections under any pretext. But the best way for UML to ensure timely local elections, say Congress leaders, is to agree to reopen the parliament.

UML chief whip Bishal Bhattarai does not think the opposition has a substantive role in creating an environment for elections. “We are in favor of holding timely elections but some parties in government fear losing and want to postpone them,” he says.

Deuba fears that a unilateral decision on elections could split the coalition. Says Bishokarma, though Deuba is in favor of timely elections, he does not want to upset coalition partners either, which means Deuba won’t announce poll dates without consensus within the coalition.

There are also other issues on which there are divergent opinions inside the ruling coalition, affecting Deuba. For instance, he wants early parliamentary ratification of the MCC compact. But his coalition partners particularly CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) oppose that. They say the MCC compact can be endorsed only after its amendment.

Also read: Local level facing an acute shortage of civil servants

Deuba also wants to avoid the possible communist re-unification or alliance ahead of the upcoming elections. He attributes the NC’s poor showing in 2017 elections to the left alliance formed on their eve. It would be easier for Nepali Congress to emerge as the largest party if communist parties continue to share bad blood. 

To do so, he seems ready to share some seats with left parties, mainly in the constituencies of their top leaders and where NC’s position is weak. Deuba also feels politically and morally obliged to keep the coalition intact: he could not have become the prime minister without the support of the Maoists and Unified Socialist.

Despite his firm commitment to retaining the current coalition, Deuba is not fully optimistic about its longevity either. So, he is also mulling a Plan B.

A few weeks back, Deuba for the first time since becoming prime minister last July reached out to UML Chairman KP Oli and proposed power-sharing along with the endorsement of the MCC compact. But the meeting apparently didn’t serve the intended purpose.

PM Deuba is reaching out to opposition parties to create an environment for elections, says Bishokarma. “Deuba has told UML that lifting of parliament obstruction will pave the way for timely local elections.”  

If the opposition removes the parliament obstruction thus clearing the legal challenges for local elections, the two sides could come together. “In the meeting with PM Oli, Deuba had requested UML join the government and help endorse the compact, he had also shared his difficulties with current coalition partners,” says Bhattarai.

Moreover, there is a strong sentiment in the NC that the party should rethink the coalition’s continuation. They fear the communist parties in the government are using the Congress party to create an electoral environment in their favor.

On January 24, the Shekhar Koirala faction of Nepali Congress concluded that one, elections must take place on time and two, that the party should not ally with communist parties.  Says senior NC leader Jagadish Narasingh KC, the government is preparing to postpone elections without any discussions inside the party.

It would be suicidal to take vital decisions on local elections and amendment of laws without holding consultations inside the party, says KC. NC and PM Deuba apparently have little to gain but a lot to lose by deferring polls. On the other hand, the main opposition’s principal strategy at this point is engineering a split in the coalition to turn the electoral balance in its favor.

Even if there is an agreement in the ruling coalition on poll dates, its partners will start to bargain with Deuba on a small-scale electoral alliance. But, again, there are strong voices inside NC that the party should not strike any alliance with communist parties.

Deuba may be in a comfortable situation in and outside the party but national politics could lose way if there is a crack in the coalition. For instance, if the coalition splits and UML does not rescue him, Deuba could dissolve the Parliament.

The first elections of local governments in 2017 to be held under the new constitution were mostly smooth even though they had to be conducted in multiple phases to accommodate Madhes-based parties. Initially, due to reservations over the constitution, they were reluctant to join the electoral process.

In a sense, the 2017 elections were a story of stability and contributed to deepening democracy at the grassroots. The tenure of local governments elected in 2017 expires on 19 May 2022, and there are doubts over timely elections. The Election Commission (EC) has proposed April 27 as the election date. If the ruling parties are committed to timely elections, the government needs to announce a date this week: the commission needs at least 120 days for preparations.

Major parties are under pressure not to create a vacuum at the local level. Until two weeks ago, some members of the coalition were reluctant to hold timely elections. Following widespread pressure, their tone and tenor have changed. A meeting of the ruling coalition on January 18 committed to local level elections as per the constitutional and legal provisions. But the commitment meant different things to different parties. 

The Local Level Election Act (2017) says there should be no vacuum at the local level and elections must be completed before the expiry of the local bodies’ tenure, which contradicts the constitution which says elections can be held within six months of the expiry of term. The commission decided to follow the Act to forestall a possible political vacuum in local governments. But some parties are trying to delay elections, arguing that the constitution should prevail over other laws.

So, despite their commitment, there is still no surety of timely elections to forestall a vacuum. Until now, only two parties—Nepali Congress and CPN-UML—are clear that elections must be held by April. Initially, Congress Chief and Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba was in favor of federal parliament elections. But now Deuba thinks holding local level elections first would allow him to stay in power for another year and half at the least.

Also read: Ruling coalition agrees to hold local level elections in April

If parliamentary elections are held first there could be a change in government leadership and NC could be denied a chance at holding local elections, says a leader close to the PM. So Deuba is putting pressure on coalition partners to agree to timely local elections. NC calculates that the split in CPN-UML could work to its advantage.

The civil society is cautioning political parties on possible political vacuum at the local level. PM Deuba is cautious about his image and does not want to take the blame for derailing the democratic process at the local level, something he has communicated to coalition partners. Historically, Deuba has been blamed for making local bodies defunct after 2002 when he was also the prime minister. The tenures of local representatives had ended that year.

At the time, a legal provision allowed the local bodies’ tenure to be extended by a year but Deuba still choose to end their terms and hand over local leadership to unelected civil servants. But he could not hold elections due to the raging Maoist insurgency. Deuba does not want to repeat the mistake in the final years of his political career. Similarly, the main opposition UML also wants timely elections. But will Duba’s coalition partners CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) agree?

The two parties want to buy time to strengthen their organizations. They fear that if they fare poorly in local elections, their national election campaigns could also be affected. Maoist Center and Unified Socialist seek an electoral alliance. “An alliance among coalition partners is a condition for holding three-tier elections,” says Ganga Lal Tuladhar, deputy general secretary of Unified Socialist.

In the 2017 elections, of 753 local governments, UML won 297, Congress 274, CPN (Maoist Center) 107, and the remaining parties won 76 seats. After the UML split, around 10 percent of its elected representatives deserted to the new Unified Socialist led by former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal. By holding local elections first, NC wants to benefit from the UML split.

Also read: Rural municipalities, municipalities urge government to fix date of local level elections pronto

Maoist Center and Unified Socialist are not opposed to local elections but they want to exploit the constitutional provision to buy time.

As per this plan, there will be a political vacuum at the local level after May 19. Unified Socialist leaders say election dates should be announced only after harmonizing Local Elections Act and constitutional provisions. There are also voices that the local level vacuum would facilitate free and fair federal and provincial elections, as incumbent local government heads could otherwise misuse their offices to influence voters.

If the parties stick to constitutional provisions, April elections are unlikely. Says Maoist leader Dev Gurung, in principle, parties have agreed to hold local elections within the framework of constitution and relevant laws. “But the confusion over the constitution and the laws should be first settled to clear the way for elections,” says Gurung.

Some in the ruling coalition want November local elections, taking advantage of the constitution’s leeway. The ruling parties may also use the third Covid-19 wave as an excuse to postpone elections. In a ruling coalition meeting on January 19, some leaders had advised PM Deuba to analyze the pandemic before announcing elections. But virologists say April elections should not be affected.

Says virologist Sher Bahadur Pun, the third wave triggered by the new Omicron variant is unlikely to remain active by April even though the situation may not be completely under control. “The experiences of South Africa and other countries suggest infections will go down after four weeks. In Nepal, too, cases will start to decrease after two or three weeks,” he says.

On the face of the third wave, parties have limited their activities. Experts say Covid-19 cannot be used as an excuse to delay elections. In India, even amid the Covid-19 crisis, the country is holding state assembly elections in Manipur, Uttarakhand, Punjab, and Goa in February. So Covid-19 should not hinder elections in Nepal as well.

Timely local elections will also allow for timely polls to national parliament and federal assemblies. But first there needs to be consensus among political parties on election dates.

“Election laws that contradict the constitution must be amended before announcing elections, for which the parliament should be allowed to operate unhindered,” says Tuladhar.

Personality, wit, charm, charisma. These are among the attributes voters look for in leaders of political parties they are thinking of supporting. That is why, when parties head into elections, they announce the names of their prospective prime minister candidates. 

Ahead of the 14th General Convention of Nepali Congress, there were suggestions that the party should select its new leader such that he or she would be capable of taking on a heavyweight like CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli in upcoming elections.

Many in the party were in favor of replacing Sher Bahadur Deuba as party chair after the NC’s humiliating outing in the 2017 elections. Deuba, they reckoned, had lost his mass appeal. In the recent general convention, the likes of Shekhar Koirala, Prakash Man Singh and Bimalendra Nidhi had challenged Deuba for party presidency by making the same argument. 

Yet Deuba won the party presidency again—and comfortably. This again ignited a debate if he would be more of a liability rather than an asset heading into elections. But when youth leaders like Gagan Thapa, Bishwa Prakash Sharma, Dhanaraj Gurung, Badri Pandey and Jiwan Pariwar were elected office-bearers, alongside Deuba, many felt the party had already been rebranded. 

Says political analyst Geja Sharma Wagle, the victory of Thapa and Sharma as General Secretaries has created excitement not only in the party but also among the masses. “They will be NC’s poster boys in NC’s election campaigns. Many neutrals are likely to vote for Congress because of their presence,” says Wagle.

Also read: Can Dahal again revive the Maoist party? 

Kalyan Gurung, NC Central Working Committee (CWC) member, also reckons the new set of leaders will boost the party’s image during the upcoming elections. “What the general convention also showed is that party representatives from across the country still feel Deuba is best placed to win elections for Nepali Congress,” says Gurung, who had also contested party presidency at the convention. 

Even though there is a strong presence of youth leaders in the party’s 15-member officer-bearer team, there are doubts about its effective functioning. Most elected youths are from anti-Deuba camps and they have repeatedly clashed with Deuba on national and party issues.

A senior NC leader requesting anonymity argues the new team under Deuba is better than the previous one. “Deuba can manage election funds while our youth leaders are good orators and visionaries,” he says. But on possible electoral alliance with other parties, Deuba and youth leaders are already at odds. Youth leaders are against any such alliance, while Deuba believes such an alliance is vital to ward off a grand alliance among left parties.

Says NC youth leader and analyst Shankar Tiwari, the presence of young faces as the party’s office-bearers will create a new vibe in the party’s election campaign. “Leaders such as Thapa, Sharma, Dhan Raj Gurung and Badri Pandey can rouse the masses. They are seen as principled politicians as well,” says Tiwari.

Party leaders say Deuba’s re-election does not necessarily mean that he is the only face of NC in the elections. Deuba, who has already become prime minister five times, can still project a new leader as a prime minister to pull voters. 

NC has done something similar in the past. For example, in the 1999 parliamentary elections, then party President Girija Prasad Koirala projected Krishna Prasad Bhattarai as future prime minister. The party secured parliamentary majority and Bhattarai became prime minister. 

Also read: 2021: A year of politicization of democracy 

“To win elections, Deuba should be pushed to project a new face as prime minister,” says Tiwari. Many in and outside NC say Gagan Thapa should be projected as prime minister. But getting Deuba to agree to that arrangement would be nigh-impossible. 

Deuba plans on becoming prime minister again if the NC reemerges as the largest party. “In that case, the situation in the party will favor Deuba,” says the aforementioned senior NC leader. 

As senior leaders like Ram Chandra Poudel, Prakash Man Singh and Bimalendra Nidhi have already thrown their lot with Deuba, Shekhar Koirala is the only leader who can take on Deuba. 

Over the past five years, Thapa has continuously lobbied for Deuba’s removal as party president. But after his election as general secretary, Thapa is in no mood to confront Deuba. Instead, he wants to move ahead by closely working with Deuba. 

Says NC leader Gurung: “Deuba, the five-time PM, is a towering personality who has won his parliamentary constituency every time since 1990. His personality will dominate other office-bearers and CWC members.”

Adds Nainsingh Mahar, another Congress CWC member, “Deuba has all the attributes you need to win elections. His first priority will be to keep the party united heading into national elections. He knows a divided party doesn’t win.” 

It is official. The Election Commission (EC), the constitutional body mandated for holding elections, has categorically told the government that the term of local governments expires on 19 May 2022. But there are legal ambiguities on the elections’ timing. According to the Local Level Election Act 2017, elections for the heads of local governments must be held two months before the expiry of their tenure.  

But Article 225 of the constitution states, ‘the term of a village assembly and of a municipal assembly shall be five years from the date of election and another leadership shall be elected not later than six months of the expiration of such a term.’

Even though the constitution has given an additional six months in which to hold local elections after the term of the local bodies ends, the EC and observers cite a loophole in the constitution—the national charter is mum on the political vacuum that could emerge thereafter.

President of Municipal Association Ashok Kumar Byanju (Shrestha) rules out the possibility of a political vacuum, as the current leadership will continue until new office-bearers are elected. The commission has suggested that the federal government hold local elections two months prior to the expiry of the term to ensure there is no political vacuum after May 19. The EC has proposed single-phase local elections on April 27. But if there are logistical challenges, the commission says the elections could also be held in multiple phases.

Former Election Commissioner Birendra Mishra says the six-month grace period provided by the constitution will be applicable only in emergency-like situations when elections will have to be put off. “It does not mean parties can hold elections six months after the expiry of local bodies’ terms. It rather means the tenure of incumbent heads could be extended by a maximum of six months,” says Mishra.

To complete preparations, election dates must be announced at least 100 days in advance. That means now is the time to announce elections if the political parties are to honor the EC proposal. However, given their lack of readiness, chances of such a timely announcement are bleak.

AP

Komal Prasad Dhamala, Assistant Spokesperson at the EC, says elections should be completed before May 19 to ensure timely replacement of old representatives by new ones. He says the commission has conveyed to Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba that elections must be held two months before the expiry of local bodies’ term.

Though the EC has been proactively, it cannot move ahead without a political consensus. As the constitution does not give the commission the rights to announce dates, the fate of local elections largely depends on the intent of the ruling coalition as well as opposition parties.

At the very least, consensus between the coalition and main opposition CPN-UML is a must. Parties on both sides of the aisle are likely to agree on proposed dates only if they reckon electoral outcomes will be in their favor. Nepali political parties have a tendency of putting off elections if they fear a loss.

Federal affairs expert and National Assembly member Khim Lal Devkota says contradictory provisions in the constitution and electoral laws are unhelpful. “Unlike the previous local bodies, this time around elections of local governments must be held with an urgency before the expiry of their current term,” says Devkota. The spirit of the constitution also envisages that local elections be held before elections for provincial and federal governments.

Analysts fear a vacuum in local bodies, as was the case from 1997 to 2018, following the failure to hold timely elections. “A repeat of such a failure shall have grave repercussions on the functioning of local bodies, which are sovereign entities according to the constitution,” says Devkota.

Others also reckon the no-election situation will be messy. Compared to previous local bodies, the new constitution has granted more autonomy to local governments including on budget-allocation. “In the absence of political leadership, local governments cannot function effectively,” says Mishra.

The major political parties are yet to consult among themselves on the three-tier elections. Perhaps they can now focus more on elections after completing their respective General Conventions (GCs). The commission is preparing to meet parties regarding the same.

Targeting local elections, the EC has updated voter rolls with the inclusion of around a million new voters. The local governments are completing their first tenure after the adoption of the new constitution in 2015 that provisioned a three-tier government structure. The first tenure seemed like an experiment and a period of learning-by-doing.

Still, dozens of local governments continue to face multiple hurdles, and many have failed to bring their budget on time. Observers say local elections should not be deferred, if only to ensure a level of maturity in the functioning of local governments.

This time, as compared to the last local elections in 2017, the atmosphere is also more conducive. In 2017, mainly Madhes-based parties were reluctant to head into elections until their demands were fulfilled, which is why local elections had to be held in multiple phases. The last phase was in Madhes. Now, the Madhes-based parties do not have any reservation about local elections. Even the Netra Bikram Chandra-led Maoists, which has since 2013 been sternly opposing all types of elections, has joined peaceful politics, even though the party itself is unlikely to participate in elections.

Similarly, CK Raut’s party, which had been campaigning for the secession of Madhes, has joined peaceful politics. Therefore, if major parties are committed to timely elections, the coast is clear for a single-phase local election. Smooth holding of local body elections, in turn, will also pave the way for elections of federal and provincial parliaments. 

On the other hand national politics could plunge into another bout of uncertainty if the elections can’t be held in line with the legal and constitutional obligations. There are 753 local governments: six metropolitan cities, 11 sub-metropolitan cities, 276 municipalities and 460 rural municipalities. In the last local body election held in 2017, CPN-UML emerged as the largest party followed by Nepali Congress, CPN (Maoist Center) and Madhes-based parties.

Also read: What if… the 2015 constitution had been delayed? 

Constitution has not envisaged vacuum in local bodies

Ashok Kumar Byanju (Shrestha)
President, Municipal Association of Nepal

The constitution is the supreme law of the land that defines how a government is formed and run, so we should move ahead as per its provisions. Our constitution states that elections of local governments shall take place within six months of the expiry of their term.

The Local Election Act has somehow narrowed that space. Heads of local governments have the mandate to rule in a full-fledged manner for five years, so they must be allowed to complete their tenure. Holding elections before five years amounts to a violation of the constitutional rights of local governments.

There would be no political vacuum after the expiry of terms as incumbent leaderships will continue to function until a new leadership replaces it. Our constitution has not envisaged a leadership vacuum in local governments. For instance, at the federal level, even after the resignation of the Prime Minister, he/she continues to serve until a new PM is elected; the same provision is applicable to local governments.

We should not create a vacuum as it may lead us to a state of uncertainty that we witnessed post-1997 when the tenure of the elected leaders expired and they left office. But there was no one to replace them. As a result, local bodies had to be run without elected representatives for nearly two decades. That undemocratic practice should not be repeated.

The constitution has not envisaged failure to conduct timely local elections. Parties should not see elections of local governments through the narrow prism of their win or loss. They should rather think about their larger public accountability. Failing to conduct timely elections will rightly be seen as a collective political failure.

“This is my last opportunity to serve the people and probably my ultimate challenge as well,” said CPN (Maoist Center)’s Pushpa Kamal Dahal soon after being re-elected party chair. In his political document endorsed by the Party's 8th General Convention, Dahal confessed that people these days struggle to differentiate the Maoists from other political parties.

This clearly indicates the mother Maoist party is facing an identity crisis. In the general convention that concluded in the first week of January, the party vowed to take reform measures. But that is a daunting task given the party’s ideological ambiguity, which is only compounded by its dysfunctional organization.

Dahal often claims republicanism, federalism, and secularism are original Maoist agendas that have now become national agendas, and he must get credit for that transition. But those agendas seem increasingly divorced from the Maoist party. “Obviously, the credit for establishing these agendas goes to the party,” says political analyst Sudarshan Khatiwada. But they are no longer exclusive Maoist agendas as other parties have also taken their ownership. When the Maoist party pushed those agendas ahead of the first Constituent Assembly (CA) elections in 2008, the public supported the breath of fresh air. No more.  

In order to regain party strength, Dahal is trying to placate Janajati, Madhesi, and other marginalized communities by raising the possibility of constitution amendment. But he has already lost the trust of these constituencies after merging his party with the CPN-UML led by KP Sharma Oli, who fiercely opposed those very agendas. These constituencies no longer consider Dahal their leader. But Vijaya Kanta Karna of the Center for Social Inclusion and Federalism, a think-tank, says there is still a remote possibility of Dahal retaining his strength if he can somehow again win the trust of marginalized communities, his previous source of strength and power. It was when Dahal abandoned progressive agendas, says Karna, that he and his party became weak.

Dahal’s party has been in power in all governments formed after the promulgation of the new constitution in 2015. In 2015, he supported CPN-UML Chairman Oli. Then he broke the ruling alliance with Oli and formed a coalition government with Nepali Congress, becoming prime minister in 2016. In 2018, his party joined another Oli-led government, ultimately merging the Maoist and UML parties. Now, his party is a key coalition partner of Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. Analysts say this tendency to stick to power is an example of Dahal’s deviation from his ideological core.

The party’s revival demands a clear ideological positioning, says analyst Khatiwada, but Dahal is these days characterized by ideological confusion and ambiguity. “Dahal has talked about embracing socialism with Nepali characteristics but he is short on details,” adds Khatiwada. “And he cannot draw public support only by committing to socialism”.

Maoist party leaders, however, are hopeful as the party’s CC has been mandated to sketch a plan on how the party commits itself to socialism.

Says newly-elected CC member Hemraj Bhandari, the convention has provided a clear guidance on how to move ahead and details of the roadmap will be finalized through the CC meeting. “We will tell the people that in order to guard secularism, federalism, and inclusion, the Maoist party needs to come back to power,” he says.

Ideological deviation is not the only cause for the Maoist party’s decline. After joining peaceful politics, the party didn’t bother with adapting its war-oriented organization to peaceful politics. Additionally, its organization began to crack after the party faced a vertical split on the issue of peace and constitution. Over the decades the party has suffered multiple splits.

In 2012, a large chunk of party leaders and cadres led by Mohan Baidya left, which significantly eroded the party’s strength. The party was duly relegated to third position in second Constituent Assembly (CA) elections in 2013.

In 2015, Dahal’s ideological backbone Baburam Bhattarai left the party. With the realization that he could not revive the party, Dahal then decided to merge with UML in 2018, completely sidelining ideological issues and party’s core agendas.

Also read: 2021: A year of politicization of democracy 

The electoral alliance with UML in 2017 helped the Maoist party maintain a strong presence in national politics. But with the Supreme Court order last year, the Maoist party was revived yet many of its senior leaders and cadres decided to stay with the UML, further weakening the party. Last year, some leaders also proposed the idea of renaming the party, removing the Maoist tag. Maoist leaders such as Devendra Poudel and Phampa Bhusal even proposed a name-change, to which Dahal reacted positively. But then nothing came of it.

In the document presented at the general convention, Dahal has confessed to mistakes which contributed to the party’s erosion. Dahal is perhaps not very hopeful, which is why he says this is his last chance.

Dahal’s document, too, is old wine in a new bottle. For instance, the party aims to engage its cadres on production, an old proposal that never saw light of the day. Similarly, the document talks about maintaining fiscal discipline and transparency and curbing corruption, and strengthening and purifying party organizations. This too is something that has been endlessly discussed.

Says a senior Maoist leader, Dahal has confessed to the mistakes which damaged the party but there is no guarantee that he won’t repeat the same mistakes. The leader is not hopeful of the document’s implementation as Dahal remains completely focused on winning elections, come what may.

Says analyst Khatiwada, the Maoists do not have any distinct agenda with which to woo the public. So, for the Maoist party, the upcoming elections will be a survival issue. Without an electoral alliance, the party fears a humiliating defeat

So despite numerous differences with PM Deuba, Dahal is in favor of retaining the current coalition. Dahal has himself confessed that the Maoists cannot become the first party in the upcoming elections. At best, his goal will be to lock in the Maoists’ third-strongest position after NC and CPN-UML.

The Maoists are likely to forge an electoral alliance with CPN (Unified Socialist) but even their joint strength may be insufficient to defeat stronger parties like Nepali Congress UML. So, again, Dahal is pinning a lot of hope on a possible alliance with Congress.

But there are strong sentiments inside the NC that the party should not ally with the Maoists, even though there could be a tacit understanding to ensure the victory of some Maoist leaders. So, if NC remains rigid, Dahal could explore other alternatives, including an alliance with UML.

“This is our last chance to win the public’s hearts and minds by implementing the pledges we have made in the general convention,” says Maoist Central Committee member Bhandari. But even he is unsure of the continuity of the current ruling coalition.

When 15-year-old Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg protested outside the Swedish Parliament in 2018, holding a sign saying ‘School Strike for Climate’, few took her campaign seriously. But she continued to bunk school to raise climate change issues.

Three years on, 18-year-old Greta is now at the center of a global climate change campaign, which in turn is an inspiration for adolescents across the world. Only now have global political leaders started to heed the issues she raised and she has become a beacon of hope for the younger generations, hammering home the message that world leaders need to act to preserve the earth from the menace of climate change.

Back in 2019, United Nations Secretary-General, António Guterres, in a meeting with Greta, said, “My generation has largely failed until now to preserve both justices in the world and to preserve the planet. It is your generation that must make us accountable to make sure that we don't betray the future of humankind.”

The COP26 conference held in November 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland, recognized the youth as critical agents of change. Additionally, the conference encouraged governments around the world to include youths as a part of national delegations in climate conferences.

Some policy documents of the Nepal government have also recognized the youth’s role on climate change issues. Nepal’s climate change policy introduced in 2019 states that “youth human resources will be mobilized by developing their capacity for raising awareness about climate change.” The policy further says youth researchers will be encouraged in climate change-related research and studies. Moreover, it talks about forming and mobilizing youth volunteer committees for climate-induced disaster management.  

Also read: ‘ApEx for climate’ Series | Nepal makes its case. But to what effect? 

The Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) presented by Nepal government in 2020 pledges to promote the leadership, participation, and negotiation capacity of women, indigenous peoples, and youth in climate change forums. The document talks about implementing the NDC through federal, provincial, and local governments, in collaboration with other relevant stakeholders including youth, women, and indigenous people.

International and national documents and frameworks have recognized the youth as an integral part of climate action. But what is the state of implementation? Are Nepali youths ready to contribute? What is the status of our youth’s participation in climate action?

According Radha Wagle, Joint secretary and head of Climate Division at the Ministry of Forest and Environment, youth involvement in climate-related policies and platforms is increasing but that is not enough. Wagle informs that four youths were inducted as members of the national delegation in the COP26 Summit.  “We are also working on increasing the presence and contribution of youths in climate-related policy and implementation programs,” she adds.  

Observers say young generations are not only at the receiving end of climate change but they can also play a vital role in addressing the issue. They can serve as agents of change and innovators in the action against climate. Over the past few decades, more and more youths are coming out to flag the issues of climate change.

Sagar Koirala, a youth climate activist, says the representation of Nepali youths in the climate change sector is low compared to other countries. “Only a few youths get to have their say in decision-making,” says Koirala. “No youth is consulted in major decision-making.”  He says, as a youth climate activist, he wants to change this system and empower the youth. He stresses on the need for institutional mechanisms to empower a growing number of young people in climate action.

Also read: ‘ApEx for climate’ Series | Nepal in the middle of a climate crisis 

At COP26, countries agreed to a new 10-year program of action on climate empowerment in order to promote youth engagement, climate education, and public participation. At the national level as well, the government should have policies to engage youths in all climate-related activities.

A few weeks back, ApEx had surveyed a random group of youths to gauge the level of their awareness about climate change. They had only a basic understanding of the issue.  

In Nepal, youths began a systematic campaign on climate change only after 2008. There are now organizations advocating youth’s participation in climate action. For instance, the Nepalese Youth for Climate Action (NYCA), a youth-led coalition of the Nepali youths tackling climate change, was established in 2008 with a motto of ‘caring for climate change, caring for ourselves’. It has networks in various parts of the country.

Program Coordinator at Clean Energy Nepal, Lal Mani Wagle, who has worked as a youth climate activist, says there is much awareness on climate change among youths, at least in urban areas, compared to other areas of the environment. He says the government has recognized the youths who are working on climate change. “We can say youths have been contributing to climate action over the past decade,” says Wagle. “However, we are yet to systematize youth contributions in policy- and decision-making levels. It is a matter of satisfaction that government agencies are heeding youth suggestions.”

COP26 was not youth-inclusive

Prakriti Koirala

It had always been an ambition of mine to attend the Conference of Parties (COP) summit. Since elementary school, I had heard of the conference, procedures, and agreements. This year I got a chance to attend the COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland. I was lucky to have a party badge that allowed me access to all secret meetings.

From the perspective of a young person, the conference was not as youth-inclusive as we had expected. Fortunately, the participants representing the Nepali Ministry, CSOs, INGOs, NGOs, and youths as a whole worked well together. Nepali youths with party badges had the opportunity to participate in negotiations, while those with observer badges took part in various side events, sharing sessions, and the climate strike.

In my observation, youths from other countries, particularly in Africa, were leading their teams. They were in charge of preparing the drafts, negotiating with foreign governments, and attending various bilateral meetings. This impressed me and encouraged me to be well prepared, and made me realize that we as youths still have a lot of work. At the national level, many policies have addressed the voice of youths. However, we still have a long way to go in terms of involving youngsters in all aspects of climate change discussions and decision-making.

Koirala is a young climate activist

Youths are the most vulnerable group

Umesh Balal Magar

Climate change is an intergenerational problem caused by humans, mainly from the developed countries, and there is no silver bullet. Experts also say there is no science to cure the climate change problem but what we can certainly do is guide human behavior towards a more sustainable lifestyle.

Lack of political will is the main cause of climate change. Countries around the world are reluctant to implement solutions to combat the effects of climate change as they are too occupied with the goal of economic development, thereby increasing the emission of greenhouse gasses. That is exactly why we have failed for the 26th time to agree on a global solution at COP.

Also read: ‘ApEx for climate’ Series | How does Nepal get help in tackling climate change? 

Nepal is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change despite its small contribution to global CO2 emission. It has done some remarkable work on climate change mitigation policies. At COP26 in Glasgow, we stood firm in our commitment to net-zero emission and have prepared an exemplary NDC to remain steadfast towards that end.

Youths are the most vulnerable to climate change. In Nepal, we face all kinds of disaster threats like glacier lake outbursts, landslides and floods. Though youths are on the frontline of disasters, they are unlikely to make it to the policy-making table.

The Nepalese Youth for Climate Action (NYCA), a group of youth from all over the country, is working to protect Nepal and the Nepali people from adverse impacts of climate change by spreading awareness, advocating policies and taking action. We have been playing a key role in making Nepal more climate-resilient by leading adaptation efforts and through mitigation of GHGs since 2008. We work from local, national and international platforms for youth climate justice.

Magar is network coordinator, Nepalese Youth for Climate Action (NYCA)

A year of political turmoil and ‘politicization of democracy’, 2021 witnessed political parties and their custodians exploit democracy to weaken its basic tenets. Then-Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli dissolved the House of Representatives twice and each time defended his unconstitutional decision, saying fresh elections would buttress Nepali democracy.

Opposition parties dubbed Oli’s move “regressive” yet they too tried to influence the judiciary from the streets in the name of defending democracy. In fact, in 2021, all major political forces tried to use democracy to serve their personal or party interests.

Political analysts thus reckon there was an extreme politicization of democracy in 2021. PM Oli dissolved Parliament on 20 December 2020, and its repercussions were evident throughout 2021. The Supreme Court (SC) invalidated Oli’s move but that didn’t deter him from dissolving the House, again, in May 2021.

Political analyst Chandra Dev Bhatta says 2021 was “the year of politicization of democracy” as power-struggles among political leaders manifested in such a way that they started blaming each other for undermining democracy.

Each labeled the other ‘a threat to democracy’ and went to the extent of splitting their own party, says Bhatta. “In reality, they were only trying to hide their weaknesses.” Not only that, they went a step further and dragged the country’s neighbors into their mess, again all in the name of protecting democracy, adds Bhatta.

The year also saw a hollowing of democratic institutions. For instance, the Election Commission, an independent constitutional body mandated to hold elections and regulate political parties, was hamstrung due to political pressure.

The commission could not take a timely decision on the split of Nepal Communist Party owing to the due influence of political parties, an issue that was later settled in court. This clearly demonstrated compromising of the autonomy of constitutional bodies like the EC, undercutting their credibility.

Appointments in constitutional bodies sans parliamentary hearings came under national and international scrutiny. Appointments in the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), for instance, drew national and international criticism and there were concerns about its independence. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in an unprecedented move, even sought clarification from the commission over its autonomy and independence.

Also read: Will Deuba ditch the coalition for MCC? 

Similarly, questions were raised over the appointment process and autonomy of other constitutional bodies.

Moreover, Nepal’s judiciary faced an unprecedented crisis this year. Probably for the first time in the country’s judicial history, SC judges launched a revolt against a sitting Chief Justice, bringing the judicial process to a grinding halt. CJ Cholendra Shumsher Rana was accused of trading court verdicts for political appointments. Similarly, there were accusations of corruption against other judges.

“The judiciary is the guardian of democracy. But then Nepal’s judiciary is in crisis, which means its democracy is also imperiled,” says advocate and another political analyst Dinesh Tripathi. He adds that the judiciary is on the verge of a collapse, and bad governance characterizes all state institutions.

The nexus between politicians and judges also deepened.  

Political parties, on the one hand, tried to influence the judiciary to issue verdicts in their favor through street protests and other propaganda machineries. Supreme Court justices, on the other hand, hobnobbed with the politicians, to bargain for favors in exchange.

Similarly, the Parliament came under increasing executive pressure. The Parliament was dissolved twice, only to be revived each time by the judiciary’s help.

In another important development, there was a lot of bad blood between then Prime Minister Oli and Speaker Agni Prasad Sapkota. Several times, the government would close House sessions without consulting the speaker. The war of words between PM Oli and the Speaker affected the principle of separation of powers.

Even after the Parliament’s reinstatement, it was never allowed to function smoothly. The main opposition CPN-UML has been disturbing the House, raising questions over the Speaker’s role.

In fact, due to the executive’s constant inference, the Parliament’s role has been severely constrained. Both KP Sharma Oli- and Sher Bahadur Deuba-led governments showed their lack of commitment to parliamentary supremacy, for instance through the issuance of ordinances by skipping the House of Representatives.

Also read: Does Deuba’s victory mean early elections? 

Most ordinances were issued to fulfill petty interests such as splitting parties or making political appointments.

Tripathi says there were attempts to cause massive damage to democracy. There were repeated attacks on the Parliament, the temple of democracy. “There were attempts at no less than to dismantle democracy but fortunately, it survived,” says Tripathi.

The office of the president was also dragged into controversy. President Bidya Devi Bhandari was accused of siding with then Prime Minister Oli instead of playing a neutral arbiter. 

Along with the backsliding of democracy, the general public’s hopes for political stability—rekindled with the formation of a two-thirds majority government in 2018—were dashed. The window of stability had closed and 2021 had sowed seeds for another bout of political instability.

The powerful Nepal Communist Party (NCP) suffered a three-way split, which now means the chances of a single-party majority government is slim in the near future. NCP missed a historic chance of steering the country on the path of political stability and economic development.

Now, there is a fragile five-party coalition government that could crash any time, plunging the country into uncertainty.  

Analyst Bhatta points out that the intra- and inter-party tensions that were the result of the leaders’ unchecked political ambitions have marred Nepali democracy. Over time, everything ended up in court and Nepal’s democracy became a “legal issue” and not a “popular one” based on people’s sovereignty.

If things go as planned, 2022 will see the start of three-tier elections. Timely elections could heal the damages inflicted upon democracy in 2021.

But advocate Tripathi isn’t optimistic as Nepali democracy is already on a shaky ground. “We can say democracy is on the verge of a collapse due to our weak state institutions. Even though the Parliament was reinstated, it is defunct. Moreover, it is no more a place to champion people’s voices and aspirations, which is not a healthy sign for our democracy,” says Tripathi.

This year the major political parties held their General Conventions electing new leaderships yet serious lapses were seen in their practice of internal democracy. Tripathi says almost all parties once again failed to ensure internal democracy, their long-standing vice. “There can be no democracy without internal party democracy,” says Tripathi.

It was a watershed moment for the landlocked country precariously sandwiched between two ancient civilizations. Almost a century after the infamous Treaty of Sugauli (1816), Nepal and Great Britain had signed a new one in 1923 as its replacement. It was this new treaty that re-stated Nepal’s sovereignty in the international arena: it showed to the world that the UK, which effectively ran more than half of the world at the time, treated Nepal on an equal footing as a sovereign state.

Say observers, the treaty, now dead, deserves to be more widely discussed. Although the Treaty of Sugauli (1816) and the 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty with India are endlessly discussed, historians and diplomats alike have only briefly taken up the 1923 treaty, often without highlighting its importance. 

The treaty is important as, based on the same, Nepal restated its status as an independent and sovereign country in the international arena. Subsequently, in 1925, the treaty was documented in the League of Nations, the forerunner to the United Nations. It annulled the Sugauli and all previous treaties and allowed Nepal to conduct its foreign policy independently.

More importantly, Nepal used this treaty as a vital document while applying for UN membership in 1949, a year before it signed a peace treaty with independent India. In the application, it was stated that ‘Nepal has for centuries been an independent sovereign state and it has never been conquered, no foreign power has ever occupied the country nor intervened in its internal and external affairs’.

While applying for UN membership, Nepal also presented details of its diplomatic relations with Tibet, France, the US, India, and Burma.

Nepal informed the UN that the 1923 treaty explicitly ‘restated’ the country’s independence and sovereignty. But the application also maintained that, ‘the Government of Nepal has never considered that either the Treaty of Sugauli or any other treaties, agreements or engagements impaired its independence and sovereignty.’

The signing of the India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1950 by Prime Minister Mohan Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana and Indian Ambassador Chandreshwar Prasad Narayan Singh.

The treaty upgraded Nepal’s diplomatic status. With its signing, the status of the British representative in Kathmandu was upgraded to the level of Ambassador, which helped lift Nepal’s profile in the international arena.

Professor Rajkumar Pokhrel, head of Department of History, Tribhuvan University, says had the 1923 treaty not been signed, the tripartite agreement between India, Nepal, and the UK in 1947 may not have been possible. Similarly, there would have been no 1950 treaty between Nepal and independent India.

Nepal certainly has many reservations about the 1950 treaty and has been pushing for its amendment. But it was 1923 that laid the foundation for the 1950 treaty. The provisions of the two treaties are almost identical.

Historian Sagar SJB Rana says the similar provisions of the two treaties surprised him. Except for a provision which mentions equal treatment of each others’ citizens, other points are the same. So the basis of the 1950 treaty is clearly the 1923 treaty, Rana says.

According to historians, then Prime Minister Chandra Shumsher worked hard to get the British government to sign the treaty. Within a few days of becoming prime minister in 1901, Chandra Shumsher had dispatched a letter to British India seeking closer ties, giving a clear message that Nepal and Britain India are two sovereign nations and should be treated accordingly, says historian Rana. After becoming prime minister, Chandra Shumsher started to assert his position as the head of the government of an independent country while dealing with British India.

Chandra Shumsher JBR, Prime Minister (1901-1929).

In a recently published book titled Gaida’s Dance with Tiger and Dragon, political analyst Achyut Wagle writes of how the British government in 1920 accorded Chandra Shumsher with the honor of ‘His Highness’, which was “an implicit recognition of him as a prime minister of sovereign Nepal.”

Historian Rana says a Nepali ruler had never before gained such respect, and this translated into respect for his country’s status. Chandra Shumsher was later decorated with different British titles and honors. Soon after the treaty, the UK started addressing Nepal’s King as ‘His Majesty’, a title comparable to the one accorded to the British monarch. After that, other countries also started treating and respecting Nepal as an independent country.

At the same time, the British were thinking of rewarding Nepal for its contribution to the First World War. Nepal had contributed hundreds of thousands of troops and resources for the British war efforts, and the subservience to the British Empire helped Nepal be recognized as an independent state.

As a mark of gratitude for the Rana regime’s war-support, writes Wagle in the book, the British government in India, in March 1920, announced a support package of a million Indian rupees grant an annum and a one-time purse of Rs 2.1 million for Nepal.

All these developments show that the British government was gradually starting to recognize Nepal as an independent and sovereign country.  As Chandra Shumsher was determined to sign a new treaty, preparations were taking place at the government level. When the Prince of Wales visited Kathmandu in 1921, Chandra Shumsher renewed his proposal for a new treaty.  In his book, ‘Nepal Strategy for Survival’, Leo E. Rose writes of how the proposal met with a sympathetic response, and negotiations began in Kathmandu shortly thereafter.

Also read: What if… there was a referendum on Hindu state? 

“Nevertheless, it took nearly two years of leisurely negotiations to produce a draft agreement for, as the British envoy noted, ‘there were… certain points both of principle and detail involved which required very careful consideration, and the weighing of literally every single word,’” Rose writes.

The treaty was finalized in 1923 after much consideration and signed in Singha Durbar the same year, ensuring that ‘Nepal and Britain will forever maintain peace and mutual friendship and respect each other's internal and external independence,’ among other provisions.

Following its signing, peace and tranquility prevailed at the border, says Dr Pokhrel, the historian, as the British were honest about its implementation.

Yet the 1923 treaty has its critics too. Writes Retd Major General of Nepal Army Purna Chandra Silwal Silwal in his book Nepal’s Instability Conundrum, “Although the treaty recognized Nepal’s independence for the first time in its history, the sovereign rights to import arms and ammunition from other countries were not fully respected. If the British government so desired, the provision would have been revoked. Hence, the British intention was to make Nepal submit.”

Historians say whatever the motivations for the 1923 treaty, on either side, Nepal probably would not be an independent state today without it. And Chandra Shumsher will forever get the credit for it.

Tika Dhakal

The 1923 treaty gave Nepal a unique identity

Named the “Treaty between the United Kingdom and Nepal”, its significance remains in its unequivocal recognition of Nepal’s external and internal sovereignty and independence by the United Kingdom, the world’s greatest power of the time. This treaty may be called foundational in that it gave Nepal the ability and basis to conduct independent foreign policy and bilateral relations with other countries. It was the only treaty of Nepal to be recorded in the League of Nations.

In the academic discourse predominantly focusing on the Treaty of Sugauli (1816) and the Nepal-India Treaty of Peace and Friendship (1950), it is worth remembering that several aspects of the 1923 treaty retain their importance. Today, the legacy of this treaty has been carried forward by the two treaties Nepal signed in 1950, with India and the United Kingdom respectively.

The substance of this treaty may be further interpreted in terms of the evolution of the concept of state in Nepal, which in the pre-treaty political context used to be associated with land being under the ruler’s possession. This notion of ownership based on Hindu traditions provided the ruler with inherent powers to collect taxes, exercise control and maintain order within the land possessed. The duality and interplay between the ruler and the people living in the land formed the essence of the concept of state, not only in Nepal but in the entirety of South Asia. This was so until the Westphalian concept of sovereignty arrived via imperial Britain.

Now enshrined in the UN Charter and universally accepted principle of the value-based international system, the idea of Westphalian state has transformed into the principle of equal sovereignty of states irrespective of the size of their geography, population and military. The modern state is therefore the reflection of human individuality. In addition to population, geography and legitimate government in internal contexts, sovereignty of a modern state is established externally on the basis of recognition it gets from the community of states. Although in veiled terminologies, literature on statecraft had formulated this element of sovereignty several centuries ago, as noted in Kautilya’s Arthashastra, which says that a state for its own protection would need friends, and friends may be gained or abandoned through treaties.

The 1923 treaty has also been criticized for perpetuating Nepal’s dependence and is termed unequal as the signatory on the Nepali side was Prime Minister Chandra Shumsher while signing it on the behalf of the UK was ambassador Willian Travers O’connor. But we have to see the larger picture leaving aside our ‘presentist’ biases. The treaty is certainly an important historical event that gave Nepal a unique identity as a modern state.

Dhakal is information and communication expert advising President Bidya Devi Bhandari and a PhD candidate in political science at TU