One such salient statement in the CPA was the aim for peace, progress and democracy. In the document the word democracy appears several times in varied forms—democratically establish, democracy, and democratic.
All (major) parties in Nepal then, whether democrats or communists or anything in between, have agreed that Nepal function as a democracy. Over the years democracy has acquired myriad meanings and several sub-types. However, be it procedural democracy or substantive or liberal democracy, they all share a common foundational principle – that the supreme power is vested in the people and is exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
Representation of the people then seems to be the most salient feature of a democracy. According to Professor Deborah Stone who wrote the seminal book on policy – Policy Paradox: the Art of Political Decision Making, representation has four elements (a) the ability of citizens to express their needs, interests and problems, (b) the ability to transmit those expression of needs to the government, (c)somebody there to listen - an institutional ear, somebody inside the government - that actually receives the transmission of these expressed needs and (d) legislative institutions which translate these needs into policy solutions.
If we use this definition of representation as a check list of democracy in Nepal the fact that there is a crisis of representation becomes quite apparent. Representation seems to have been, instead, distorted by our political parties to mean; (a) the ability of parties to garner votes from the people for the sole purpose of winning elections, (b) the ability of parties and its leaders to feed their constituencies the former´s own formulation of needs, interests and problems, (c) somebody – an institutional body, somebody within the government to filter the demands and interests expressed by the people and to receive and address only those made by, and beneficial to, the members of their alliance and (d) legislative institutions which, either voluntarily or under the pressure of political leaders, formulate policies that simply serve their own interests.
Representation in Nepal has regretfully been limited to the mere event of voting, where the public votes for the parties thereby giving them a veil of democratic legitimacy. And woeful as the situation is, it seems only to have gotten worse, as even elections have been postponed with the extended deadline of the constitution. Voting and election is a process by which people can assert their power by selecting their representatives, who are then relied upon to articulate and work for the needs and interests of those who voted for them. Merely holding elections does not necessarily ensure representation. For instance, a quota system and reservation of seats within the Constituent Assembly for women has not necessarily guaranteed that women´s issues are thoroughly represented. Despite the number of women CA members meeting the required 33 percent quota, several of these CA members still have to bend to the will of their male counterparts and have to prioritize party issues over women´s issues. Reservations and affirmative actions go a long way in ensuring all groups of people are well represented (in numbers) but is not a guarantee of true representation (of issues).
In much the same way, the fact that we elect or vote someone into office cannot be considered true representation if, once in office, the representatives forget or disregard the mandate that the people have given to them. However, the tragedy is such that even the result of elections is being disregarded as political leaders who have clearly lost the elections continue to appear in ministerial positions. If election is the means for the people to elect whom they want, which it is, then it is safe to say that those who lose are the ones that the people, for whatever reasons, did not deem worthy of representing them. Then the fact that Nepalis have to witness the same unelected people running the government through various offices is a blatant flouting of our right to choose representatives.
Another feature of representation is expressing one´s views and having one´s needs and interests expressed. What we see here is that political parties are not asking but telling people what they are supposed to need – a sort of reverse representation. Granted that after years of subjugation and feudal social structure, the people are often not even aware of their rights and need, they do need help in articulating them. But helping the people to voice their needs and feeding them what parties tell them are their interests and needs are two very distinct things.
Another feature of democracy, at least modern day democracy where each citizen irrespective of caste, gender or otherwise is considered equal, each vote carries equal weight. This means the interests of each citizen no matter what their status or (especially lack thereof) connection to the political leaders and those in power deserve equal attention. Then why is it that time and again we see parties catering to the interests of few groups and individuals exclusively. Instating political allies and party members to positions within non-political organizations like universities and public corporations is a common phenomenon. Creating lax laws to facilitate the functioning of those who serve as your power base – be it the group of businessmen or NGOs – is another. It has been ages since the last elections at the local level. In its stead, parties have made appointments which again reflect the strength of connections rather than the merit of those appointed.
We have made great strides in representation when it comes to ethnic and gender representation, although we still have to go a long way in that journey. What must be addressed now is the representation of each citizen´s needs and interests. Faced with this crisis it won´t be long when it all snowballs into a state where we lose the very essence of being a democratic state. With increased awareness and education amongst the public, people are beginning to understand this and frustration and anger is simmering just below the surface which is surfacing in several forms – like the physical assault on political party leaders, case in point being the two incidents of politicians being slapped, and the increasing loss of faith on politicians. Perhaps political parties too have felt this as in the recent weeks some of them have made efforts to go back to the various constituencies to reconnect themselves with the public. Let us hope that they do not repeat their mistakes. Let us hope they will ‘listen’ to, not, ‘tell’ the people.
Writer is Executive Director of Niti Foundation, a policy research funding institute
Related story
Call for ensuring representation of women in politics
