In the past three weeks, Nepali journalists overlooked hundreds of other words while they ran behind two. Behold the two scintillating and hypnotic words that totally mesmerized the Nepali journalists - civilian supremacy!
Coined by the Maoists during their failed-drive to sack army chief General Rookmangud Katawal, these two words directed the journalistic focus of Nepal towards an issue which was ironically termed as a non-issue by 21 of the 24 parties in the Constituent Assembly (CA).
The past month was a crucial one in the six-decade-long constitutional history of Nepal. The month took off with thematic committees of the CA starting discussions on suitable terminologies to be used in the new constitution to guarantee people’s supremacy. Then, at around the same time, the Maoist-led government declared a verbal war against Katawal. Needless to say, the journalistic community was drawn to the issue like bugs to a bright light. They completely ignored the important debates going on in the thematic committees of the CA. Had the squabble between the Maoists and the army chief not occurred, the whole focus would have been on those debates.
So, what were the things that we missed out?
Bhutan confers highest civilian award on PM Modi
For starters, the members of the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles Committee have been engaged in an intense debate over the issue of citizenship — the issue that prepared grounds for Madhes movement and the one that eventually changed Nepal’s political landscape. The question of whether Nepali citizenship should be given to a man married to a Nepali woman was debated for hours by the committee but the whole thing got zero coverage in the media.
All the women lawmakers of the committee, including Uma Adhikari, are hell bent on the inclusion of phrases such as “a man married to a Nepali woman” in the citizenship-related article of the new constitution. The entire Madhesi lawmakers irrespective of their party affiliation are strongly opposed to it. Their argument – if foreign men married to a Nepali women are given Nepali citizenship, then Tarai will be a habitat of gharjwai’s (son in-law living in the house of the wife’s parents) and Nepalis in Tarai will be a minority in their own country.
This definitely is an issue that the media is supposed to bring to the public’s notice for further debates before the committee finalizes it. I personally believe it is more important than the Maoists’ ‘civilian supremacy’.
The other important debate that missed the media limelight was a crucial issue concerning whether a leader from one province be allowed to contest elections from another province after the federal divisions of the country. Take, for example, how important the issue is for Nepal’s future politics. Will the Maoist supremo Pushpa Kamal Dahal again contest elections from Rolpa-2, possibly a part of Magarat State in the future? Will Madhav Kumar Nepal enjoy the right to contest from Rautahat as well as from Kathmandu? And also, will the Maoists appoint a leader from Nuwakot as party in-charge of Janakpur?
It really seems that our conflict analysts have not paid enough attention to this issue though it is the most driving force behind Madhesi politicians’ demand for federal structure
Another interesting debate was the one regarding rights to land ownership. Some of the Nepali Congress (NC) lawmakers, including Gagan Thapa, were in favor of confiscating fallow land and distributing it to landless tillers. This weirdly resembled a Maoist agenda. Maybe, that was why other NC lawmakers from other committees chided Thapa.
Gagan’s chastisement was clearly a directive to the youngsters of the country’s oldest democratic political party to stay away from Maoist agendas. But Gagan’s audacious support to a socialist policy signals the party’s future direction might be towards revival of BP Koirala’s socialist ideas. This is a gem of a development that was overlooked by the journalists.
Several other debates took place in most of the committees during preparation of the preliminary drafts. For instance, some radical communists demanded the compulsory requirement of showing passport while traveling from Nepal to India and vice-versa along the 1,800 kilometer long border in the south. This left me wondering whether the issue of civilian supremacy was more important or the fate of the 10 million Nepalis living along the Nepal-India border who put a kettle of water on the stove for tea and then dash off to India to fetch sugar.
Ah, the power of words! The two words coined by Unified CPN (Maoist) has definitely been successful in hypnotizing the media.
