Election, election, election! After the Regmi government announced the November 19 poll date, there have been many discussions about its (un)certainty, the (reluctant) participation of voters, and the mandate of the new Constituent Assembly.
Uncertainty because we have built a political culture of agreeing to disagree. Regarding voter reluctance, with the same incompetent faces of the previous CA as probable candidates again, it is natural that voters have lost their zeal. And finally, since we have already witnessed the disastrous aftermath of 2008 CA polls, it leaves us with little ground to trust the new CA. Only time will tell how these issues will play out. [break]
Geetanjali Upadhyaya
But despite such heated discussions about various aspects of the election, one thing we rarely discuss is the way election campaigning takes place in our country. Sadly, we are poor performers in terms of political financing, according to the Global Integrity Report 2009, and political accountability is found only in the manifestoes of political parties.
This is apparent in the many irregularities in election campaigning, but here I would like to touch upon two unhealthy practices that are rampant.
Once election environment gains momentum, first of all we see almost every inch of cities and villages plastered over ruthlessly with posters and pamphlets of competing parties and their candidates. Ironically, the same political parties do not forget to celebrate Environment Day every year, but they seldom do anything to maintain the beauty of our environs, let alone improve it. Second, the mass addresses of candidates at public places are organized in such a way as to obstruct public transportation.
Again, this is paradoxical, since our parties never cease to assure us of our human rights, and that too at the top of their voice, during elections. But our rights are being massacred when they succeed in bringing the whole traffic system to a standstill. Such a campaigning culture has unfortunately become institutionalized in our country, even though there are laws in place to prohibit such acts.
Here I would like to share some personal experiences which are relevant to this context. Living in Japan is not easy if you don’t know Japanese. Almost everywhere you go, everyone you see will speak only and only in Japanese. For that reason, at first it is really difficult to decode and comprehend life in Japan. Nevertheless, for someone like me who hails from a developing country, I believe there are a plethora of things to learn from the progress and culture of other countries. Many things have astonished me in Japan, but one thing has left me quite stunned.
Recently when I was walking around, I saw temporary boards full of photos of smiling people in square boxes. Later, I discovered that those were campaigning boards for electoral candidates. Shinzo Abe’s government had announced the election of upper house for July 21, and the entire campaigning was happening on temporary boards.
here were also occasional microphone announcements about the candidates. Please note, those boards were temporary—meaning they were installed for the election and would be dismantled after election by local bodies. Second, the microphone announcements were done in a corner of public places so as not to obstruct public transportation. In Japan, campaigning cannot be done at others’ inconvenience.
Why is election campaigning so restricted in Japan? The obvious reasons might be that haphazardly distributed pamphlets can have detrimental effects on the environment, making it look filthy. It is unwise to destroy the beauty of surroundings in the name of election. Second, the cost of cleaning up unrestricted campaigning will be high, meaning additional burden on the national coffers.
Alice Gordenker, columnist of The Japan Times, points out that limited campaigning allocates equal space to each candidate to put up their posters, which means that it gives the same opportunities to candidates with different financial status. Moreover, the restricted campaigning in public places is believed to reduce the opportunities to buy votes. This keeps the campaign cost low for candidates and provides fewer opportunities for illegal financing of election campaigns.
Election is now at our doorstep.
I wonder if we can immediately reform our campaigning methods to make them more convenient, cost-effective and environment friendly. I wonder if we can do it right away, before the upcoming CA polls. When I shared my opinion with a friend over a cup of coffee, he retorted, “That’s utopian. Don’t you know, the system does not function in Nepal, and it is next to impossible to implement even a simple thing!” Yes, I am aware of the ground reality, but I do have faith that our lawmakers and implementers are still capable of heeding to reason.
The author has worked as Program Officer at the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Division, University Grants
Commission, Nepal
g.upadhyaya@ugcnepal.edu.np
Related story
A doorstep solution to clean your decors
_20230513123701.JPG)
