Who will benefit the most? The biggest benefit will go to the village elite. Just like democratization at the national level increased involvement of the literate urban class in governance, transfer of power to mini-governments in the Village Development Committees (VDCs), towns and cities will benefit the local elite. So those with leadership skills and passion for development of their locality will support this agenda. The general public would be supportive of this agenda as well because it will give them more control over decision making in their locality. This will also make the general public able to hold decision-makers accountable for poor performance more easily.
Who will be hurt the most? The losers will be a small but powerful group. National players such as Girija Prasad Koirala, Sujata Koirala, Madhav Nepal, Jhalanath Khanal, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, and Baburam Bhattarai are all likely to oppose such views. Transfer of power to the local level would mean that one day when they are in the important positions as prime minister or important members of cabinet, their influence on policy making will be lowered. Also, those likely to oppose transfer of power to the local level are the powerful secretaries at the ministries of education, health and local development. They will no longer have the power to appoint or transfer teachers and healthcare workers and as a result have fewer opportunities to make extra cash on the side.
Of course, the opposition will not come in a straight-forward language. The language against the transfer of power is going to sound something like this: Nepal (read people living outside Kathamandu) is not yet ready for transfer of power to villages as that would only benefit the “elite” while harming law and order. It will help to recall that the same logic was used by the Panchayati regime to continue the one-party oligarchy. The justification of a non-democratic form of government was that Nepalis were illiterate and democracy was not the best mode of governance.
Whether transfer of power will actually be achieved or not will depend upon the influence of these groups. The group that benefits, although significantly larger in numbers, will have a difficult time organizing and sending a uniform message because their population is dispersed. In contrast, the groups that would loose reside in Kathmandu and have easier ways to organize because their population is concentrated and their size small. Unfortunately, the way matters of governance stand right now, it is this very small group of people that are the most powerful and can obstruct real transfer of power.
So, how can we succeed in transferring power to the local level? The first step would be to spread the message, explaining the value of local governance to the general public. One of the best ways to do this would be via FM radios because this mode of communication does not exclude people who cannot read. This will generate support among the general public.
The second strategy, and perhaps a more effective one, would be to organize an association of the current and former VDC chairmen and mayors of towns and cities irrespective of their parties. This group of leaders is the biggest beneficiary of transfer of power and is likely to emphatically support the agenda. Organizing this group and explaining to them the benefit of strong local governance might just bring the idea of a powerful mini-government at the local level to fruition.
(Writer is an Assistant Professor of Economics and Finance at Texas A&M International University in Texas, US)
Related story
Agreement between City Express Money Transfer and Ria Money Tra...
