Start with the country's unification in 1768. In contrast to its portrayal as a multi-national state by Prithvi Narayan Shah, unifier of modern Nepal, the nobility of pre-unification Gorkha palace continued to rule the roost in the new unified territories comprised of the old chiefdoms of Khasan, Magarat, Newa, Khambuwan, Limbuwan, Tirahut, Simranghad, etc. This nobility came from chhatharghar (Pandey, Panta, Aryal, Rana, Bohara, and Khanal, all Khas Arya except one Magar).
Some Chhetri families with sir names of Thapa, Basnet and Kunwar, and Thakuri (descendants of the rulers of small principalities known as Baise and Chaubise rajyas pre-unification) joined the royal palace post-unification. These old lords are still at the helm in republican Nepal's politics, bureaucracy, judiciary, security sectors, academia and media.
The promulgation of the old civil code in 1854 was the second attempt at making of an exclusionary state. By this code, the state sanctioned the Hindu polity in Vedic order which professes inequality of human beings vertically—Brahman/Chhetri at the top, Matwali (a derogative word used for Janajati as alcohol drinking group) at the middle and Dalit (untouchables) at the bottom. Horizontally, it placed the Hill Brahmin as superior to Madheshi Brahmin. Replacement of old civil code by new one in 1963 theoretically made all Nepalis equal. But practically, the old civil code still largely rules. For instance, Nepali Congress did not field a single Dalit candidate while contesting 240 seats in the second Constituent Assembly election of 2013.
Aishwarya Rai Bachchan's death hoax goes viral
Division of Nepal into 75 districts in 1961 could be called the third concerted effort to discourage excluded groups from getting their due share in state apparatus, elected bodies in particular. The ethnic groups who lived in contiguity were split into different administrative districts. A district is an entry point for delineation of electoral constituency and many districts of Nepal are largely formed to make them a mixed caste/ethnic settlement. The prospect of the dominant group in election is always high from constituencies of mixed settlement. The chance of marginalized groups is high in constituencies of their native lands, provided they continue to be the majority or the largest group.
The case of Chepang—a backward Janajati with population of 68,399 in a hill with geographical contiguity, located around 100 KM west of Kathmandu, could be taken as an example how formation of districts adversely affected Hill Janajati. Chepang settlement areas are now dispersed into five districts (Dhading, Gorkha, Tanahun, Makwanpur and Chitwan); hence their position is reduced to tiny minority in electoral constituencies of each of these districts. So no political party picks Chepang for candidacy in election.
So how is the constitutional provision of seven-province federal Nepal a continuum of inequality in distribution of political power, which has traditionally been dominated by the Khas Arya?
Let's begin with demography of each of seven provinces, as given in table 1. Except in Province 2, the Khas Arya constitute the majority in Province 6 and Province 7 and as the first largest group in other provinces, with big difference in population to the second largest group—the difference is 14 percent in Province 1 and Province 5; 17 percent in Province 3; and 25 percent in Province 4. Since population has direct bearing in caste/ethnic based distribution of seats allocated under Proportional Representation (PR) of mixed electoral system, the position of ascendency of the Khas Arya over other ethnic group in all provinces, except Province 2, is crystal clear.
Besides, the first-past-the-post (FPTP), another component of mixed electoral system, had always been in favour of the Khas Arya as evident by result of all seven general elections held in Nepal after introduction of 75 administrative districts in the country.
Then what will be the balance of power in terms of distribution of political power among social groups of Nepal in each of seven provinces? Table 3 shows a graph made in line with Article 176 of the new constitution which speaks about the number of members of provincial assembly: 330 members (60 percent) of the lower house of the national parliament will be elected through the FPTP while 40 percent seats will be filled from the PR component.
Despite putting all Janajatis together into one single category—though they, unlike the culturally cohesive Khas Arya, are heterogeneous groups in terms of language, culture and geography—Table 3 clearly indicates the dominant position of the Khas Arya in all provinces, except Province 2.
All know that national politics of Nepal is in the grip of the Khas Arya. This is largely true at local level also. For instance, among the Presidents of 75 District Development Committees elected in the last local election of 1997, the Hill Brahmin/Chhetri constituted 67 percent. Transformation of Nepal into a federal state obviously means creation of a political space at middle level between centre and local. This new political space under seven–province federal model will serve the interest of the same dominant group. Does not it mean that restructuring Nepal into a federal state will expand the political power of the Khas Arya?
Now some questions to the readers: Will the constitutional provision of seven provinces address (a) diversity of Nepali society, (b) the problem of exclusion in Nepal, and (c) potential ethnic conflict in the future?
The author is Professor at the Central Department of Political Science, Tribhuvan University
