There is a lot of buzz surrounding the candidate selection process for the November 19 vote. Loyal cadres are seen thronging the homes of their chief patrons for a ticket. With pressure mounting from all sides, the top leaderships are in a fix.
There is a lot of unhealthy competition: the latent dispute in NC between Koirala and Deuba factions has again spilled out in the open owing to differences over candidate selection. [break]
The Oli-Khanal rivalry in UML has also seen a strong resurgence for the same reason. The fight for tickets is just as intense in UCPN (Maoist) and Madhesi parties. Then there are the inter-party tug-of-wars to lure the high and mighty of the society. Industrialist Binod Chaudhary is likely to run on UML platform; noted economist Rameshwor Khanal on NC’s. Yes, some elements of this competition might be undesirable, but it is to be expected on the eve of possibly the biggest electoral exercise in the country’s history, one that will hopefully give it a permanent constitution solely through people’s representatives.
What we would like to see is proportionate representation of people from all social and economic strata in the candidate lists. The Ordinance on the Election of Members to the Constituent Assembly (2013) is a step in the right direction.
According to the ordinance, under the proportional representation component, political parties will have to select their candidates on the basis of the latest population parameters, with proportionate gender and ethnic group representation.
There is also a provision to ensure at least 30 percent women representation in the whole CA (there will have to be at least 50 percent women candidates in the PR list). There are some mitigating provisions too. For instance, the provision whereby the political parties contesting under 30 percent of FPTP seats will not have to be representative in terms of marginalized communities is hard to justify. But since these are smaller parties, the impact on overall representation should not be that big.
There are other ways the traditionally dominant groups might look to safeguard their privileges. Women and candidates from marginalized communities might be given difficult seats to defend where they have very little chance of winning. Moreover, influential political leaders will invariably look to pack the new assembly with their near and dear ones.
Blatant cases of nepotism like CPN-UML Secretary Shankar Pokharel getting nine members from his family on UML’s proposed tickets from Dang district suggest there is likely to be a lot of hanky-panky on candidate selection.
Despite these shortcomings, the overall trend is healthy. In the first CA, Nepal proudly boasted one of the most representative legislatures in the world. The next CA is likely to be as inclusive.
Although the actual composition of the new CA might not be flawless, the agenda of inclusion is so well established that it will be hard for any political party to go back on it without losing face. We hope the agenda gets an even greater traction in the days ahead and Nepal’s reputation as an inclusive, progressive society can be firmly established around the world.
Related story
'Security lapse in Tinkune is the result of punishing field com...
