Problems of Democracy in South Asia
A Case Study of Nepal
Democracy in South Asia is facing innumerable hurdles such as the problems of free and fair elections and of corrupt politicians whose immoral behaviour constantly undermines the stability of the government. For instance, corruption charges levelled against the former prime minister, Narasimha Rao (Congress I), Tamil Nadu chief minister, Jayalalita, Bihar chief minister, Lalu Prasad Yadav, the former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, of Pakistan, the boycott of the previous parliament by the opposition parties on charges of electoral fraud in Bangladesh, and ethnic as well as electoral violence are genuine examples of the problems of democracy in South Asia.
Pancha N. Maharjan
Nepal once again restored parliamentary democracy in 1990 through a people's movement, ending thirty years of autocratic rule (previously, it had enjoyed democracy for 18 months in 1959). The restoration of a parliamentary system marked a new beginning in Nepalese politics. Over the last eight years, Nepal's experience with democracy has witnessed some major events, trends, and developments. Some of these were the promulgation of a new constitution in 1990, which provided a polity based on a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy; general elections and the formation of a majority government in the Nepali Congress (NC) in 1991; the dissolution of the House of Representatives in 1994, leading to a mid-term poll which produced a hung parliament.The formation of the subsequent minority and coalition governments which have succeeded eachother since 1994, has been the outcome of that hung parliament. In the power equation, most of the political parties in parliament have not shunned 'dirty games' (offering bribes, 'kidnapping' and sending MPs abroad at the time of a no-confidence motion) simply to acquire power. In fact, the hung parliament has proved an unfortunate state of affairs for the democratic process in Nepal because unscrupulous politicians have thereby obtained sufficient space to play their dirty games in parliament. These developments have not only made politicians more corrupt, they have indisputably polluted the democratic process. Undeniably, they have stimulated public debate on the quality of leadership, the role of political parties, and the performance of the government. However, because the new hopes and aspirations raised in the people by the People's Movement in 1990 have been shattered by these developments, people have started to question whether democracy can survive in this situation.
The dirty politics played out in parliament to acquire power have been guided by inter-party and intra-party conflicts which overshadowed the main national problems: price rises, corruption, unemployment, insecurity, politicization, ethnic problems, and a Maoist insurgency. These problems have emerged as serious impediments to consolidating democracy in Nepal, because of the ignorance of politicians in matters other than their own power game.
If these problems continue to be underestimated by the politicians, and if the democratic system fails to deal with the welfare of the people ingeneraly this will surely prove unfortunate for the consolidation of democracy in the future. The majority of the people are living below the poverty line and concerned with their own hand-to-mouth existence rather than with democracy. As history has shown once before, by manipulating the attitude of the leaders, the king could postpone democratic elections until 1958 and could dismiss the democratic system after 18 months in power. Hopefully, it will not happen again. But, the Brahmin-controlled bureaucracy and the political parties exacerbate the situation by their arrogant attitude towards ethnic groups and stir up demands like: language rights, local autonomy on the basis of ethnicity, an upper house of parliament as a house of nationalities, a federal state, and so on and so forth. As a result of the Maoist insurgency, more than 600 people have already been killed. In a reaction to this, some of the old guard of the previous autocratic regime have begun to ask the king to involve himself directly in politics. As matters stand, the outlook is bleak, but this does not spell the end of all hope. The ordinary people, including intellectuals, have begun to express the idea that only Maoism has the clout to control corrupt politicians. People have grown weary of these politicians and have started to express their disillusionment with democracy, stating that all it means is 'for the parties, by the parties, and of the parties'. Therefore, the main problem of democracy in Nepal is the undemocratic culture pursued by the politicians themselves. Democracy can only be consolidated if politicians are prepared to pull up their socks and confront their own immorality.
This article is an abstract of a lecture delivered by Pancha N. Maharjan at IIAS on February 5, 1999. Dr Pancha N. Maharjan was an IIAS senior visiting fellow from 1 January to 15 February 1999. He can be reached at cnastu@htp.com.np.