Submit your Article

The parliamentary and provincial assembly elections have concluded in a free and fair environment.  This is the second periodic election held under the 2015 constitution. So, it is a milestone development in terms of the implementation of the constitution, which was opposed by Madhes-based parties and Janajatis. But the poll outcome has diminished the hope of government stability. The Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN- UML have emerged as the first and second largest parties. Still, the seat numbers of either of these parties are very low. If either one were to form the next government, it would need the support of four-five fringe parties. Such a coalition government is bound to be a fragile one. It could collapse anytime, triggering instability. The newly emerged parties and some old parties like Rastriya Prajatantra Party, meanwhile, have some reservations on the constitution and the federal set up. This does not augur well for the stability of the country. One way to prevent this impending volatility can be an NC-UML coalition. UML seems ready to go for this option. Senior UML leaders including Bishnu Rimal have publicly stated that the party is ready to sit down for power-sharing talks with the NC. At this point, the NC should seriously consider this option. The UML leaders have rightly said that the two big parties should shoulder the responsibility of ensuring a stable government. The NC-UML coalition government will be a strong one in terms of their parliamentary strength. Their numbers will allow the parliament to enact laws required to run the government. We have seen in the past how the involvement of many parties in government can paralyze both government and parliament functioning. Compared to other parties, we believe that the NC and UML can formulate an implementable common minimum program. They are also more mature when it comes to dealing with internal and external challenges. Barring a few issues, the two parties have almost similar positions on Nepal’s relation with big powers. Only a stable and strong government can revive people’s trust on major political parties and thereby to the current political system. If public frustration continues to rise, the system could collapse. For the greater good of the country, the NC and UML should put their differences aside and come together.

Nepal has successfully conducted its parliamentary and provincial assembly elections. Except for some incidents of violence and one death in Bajura district, the November 20 polls were held in a free and fair manner. And as the election results are trickling in, there is some information that can be gleaned from there. Through their ballots, voters are trying to give a loud and clear message to the traditional political parties that their three-decade of dominance could be over. Surely, the old established parties have realized this. That there was just 61 percent turnout in this election—the lowest since 2008—itself suggests that the people are gradually losing their faith in the power of the ballot. Low voter participation does not bode well for democracy’s future, but one can still see hope in the fact that new parties and independent candidates are becoming increasingly popular. They have posed an immense challenge to the so-called heavyweights candidates of old political parties. At the time of writing, several independent and new party candidates are ahead of the old-timers in vote count. In some cases, they have already clinched victory. The takeaway here is that people, mostly urban youths, are frustrated with old faces. They want to see a new set of leaders at the helm of politics. True, the two oldest parties, Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, are unlikely to face a major loss in this election, but they can no longer remain complacent. They must either mend their ways or move aside. This is the message voters have conveyed to the big parties this election. A growing number of voters are unwilling to tolerate the non-performance of traditional parties. The election will most likely produce a hung parliament and a coalition government will be formed. So it is important for the incoming government, its partners and elected representatives to come to a consensus to form a stable government for the next five years. They should also commit to allow the parliament to complete its full five-year term. The new parties and independent candidates also have an important role to play. They have been placed in the position from where they can make a real change. They should honor the will of voters and not let them down.

Nearly 18m Nepalis will head to the polling stations this Sunday to elect their representatives to the federal parliament and provincial assemblies. These legislatures will then elect new prime ministers, president and chief ministers for the next five years. Political parties and candidates are in the final leg of electioneering before the election silence takes effect, when campaigning in all forms is prohibited. Over the past few weeks, voters received a flood of candidates in their houses. It is up to the voters to decide the fate of the candidates, and, by extension, the fate of the country for the next five years. The election silence is the period afforded to voters to think and decide, so that they can vote according to their own personal conscience, without any fear, influence or pressures. But, if the past elections are anything to go by, our political parties do not seem to be committed to abide by the rule of election silence. They want to influence the voters through money, muscles and other means. During the local elections held in May, some party candidates were caught red-handed distributing cash to voters. Poor and marginalized communities are often targeted by unscrupulous candidates. The phenomenon of vote buying is not just limited to far-flung areas. There have been reports of candidates distributing money to urban voters as well. So, the next three days are a critical period when conscientious voters must remain on guard. Election observation organizations can also play a vital role in this silent period. So far, their primary focus has only been on Election Day. But, they should also be closely monitoring the activities of political parties, particularly when the voting day is just a few days ahead. They should report the malpractices of parties and candidates. But this has not been happening. Mainstream media too has a vital role to play to ensure free and fair elections. They must hold parties and candidates to account if they are found trying to influence the voters during the election silence period. But above all, the onus rests on political parties and candidates themselves. They should uphold the election laws and act responsibly. They get enough time to campaign. It’s only fair that they allow people to vote without any pressure.  

The Election Commission has come under public scrutiny for some of its questionable actions ahead of the November 20 vote.   First, the polling body issued a direction to shut down the ‘No, Not Again’ Facebook page, arguing that it was spreading misinformation and hate speech against political parties and their leaders. And then, it directed a news site to take down a news article. In both these instances, the commission was trying to curb freedom of speech and expression, the most valuable right in a democratic state, in the name of maintaining election ethics and conduct.   That the election governing body backed down—at Supreme Court’s intervention in the first incident and admission of error in the second—does not absolve it from its transgressions. Nor does Chief Election Commissioner Dinesh Thapaliya’s show of contrition for those “flawed decisions” at a public event this past week.  These incidents reinforce the public suspicion that the EC and its officials are easily cajoled and influenced by political parties and their leaders. In the past, too, there have been cases of some election officials acting at the behest of political parties.   Voters cannot be assured of fair elections when the inviolability of the polling body comes into question. But the commission has time and again failed to prove that it is free of political allegiance.   In order to hold a successful vote, the commission also deploys thousands of temporary staff. And if EC’s actions are anything to go by, there is basis for voters to rest assured that those staff too are affiliated to parties and their candidates.   It is time the Election Commission got its act together. Senior officials at the commission should not be influenced by political parties. There is a doubt in the public sphere that they do the bidding of the parties. This is a valid observation since they are appointed on the basis of their political persuasions.  At a time when other key state institutions are becoming weak due to heavy politicization, the election body should be extra careful to safeguard its autonomy. If it loses its credibility, democracy will be in peril. The commission is there to protect our sacred right to vote in a free and fair manner. It should be bold and fearless in exercising its constitutional duties.