Session 12

main arguments & format ( 3 explanations why federal structure have yet to take place in Nepal
a)consensus on federalism hides a reluctance by key actors to build a federalist system b)some political
forces wants a federal structure based on ethnic identity ;two of the tree parties have little appetite for,
“identity based federalism”. c) Political actors have antagonistic views about federalism and what it will
achieve.

-May 28, 2012, PM baburam bhattari addressed that constituent assembly to draft federal constitution
is dissolved. four years after election were contested for its formation( four extensions were given to
this assembly when the original mandate was only for 2 years)

-elections will again be held whether people want federalism or not.

-political parties are unable to reach a consensus on no. of constituent units a federal Nepal would have.
they are unable to agree on federal map. Federalism is the most controversial issue in constitution
making in Nepal. (the CA was mandated to choose a system of govt.in Nepal, a right regime and a
judicial system).

1. Historical institutionalism accounts for paradox of the difficulty of agreeing on federalism in nepal
despity unanimity on the fact major political parties want federalism.

-federalism enjoys luke war support if not reluctance on part of major key actors.(federalism was
entered into 2007 constitution when an uprising in south (madhees) occurred demanding territorial
autonomy)

-madheesi party wants federal structure based on ethnic identities but two other PP (NEPALI CONRESS
and Nepali unified Marxist-leninist) does not want ethnic based federalism and have no history of
opposing state on ethnic issues.

-unified communist party of nepal-moist supports federalism because of its connection with indigenous
nationalities (within thye party there is disagreement how ethnicity can be incorporated through
federalism). E.g. disagreement on how historically marginalized groups should be represented in a
federal structure.

-lastly, political actors have antagonistic views about federalism and what it will achieve.(for instance ,
the madheesi party supporting idea of self determination within federalsm contradicts the idea of
national unity, sovereignty and development etc.

How federalism became part of constitution making process? How different parties support different
federal maps combined with the key issue (to which extent constituent units will represent historically
marginalized groups)?

Origins of federalism in nepal:

The debate of federalism will stun observers a decade ago because the country had an autocratic rule
Kingdom of ghorka conquest of neighbouring principalities laid the foundation of shah dynasty, an
absolute monarchy. Middle 18th century.

-in mid-19th century an official of royal govt. wrestled power away from king and established a system of
hereditary Prime minister ship under rana family. Took away powers from the king, now he was just a
figurehead.

Rana rule came to end in 1951 due t revolt by nepali congress party. Despite early multipartyism
monarchy did not do democratic refoem untl 1990 (when a rebellion by people movement forced king
birendra to accept a multiparty environment and govt drawn through elected parliaments. After
murder of king birendra in 2002 a new king gayanendra begun appointing govt and assumed all
executive powers in 2005. Because there was emergency due to moist insurgency in the country. In
short democratic practices to facilitate federalism have been absent from nepal politics

-secondly, autocratic rule was heavily centralized,

for instance a pinchayat system ( a system of bottom representation(nepali village councils)) enforced
by king mahendra to legitimize his absolutist rule, served to re enforce centralization.

- finally nepal history of political exclusion of population and state control by minority elite.

Element of diversity in Nepal are ethnicity, language, territory, caste aqnd religion.

Crucial political implication of socio cuture diversity is that the hindus from the hislls composed of
(brahmans and chetris) are 31 percent of the population but dominate extensively the state politics,
economy etc.in post rana period this group strangehold resulted in nepalization. Example, declaring
hindu as state religion, promoting nepali language at expense of others.

Now how federalism debate started;

In 2007 in the interim constitution the 1st amendment stated that country would be federal. The moist
insurgency of a decade resulted in holding election for a constituent assembly mandated to restructure
the state.

In this context, federalism was the only, viable option to govern democratically and peacefully.
Interestingly, monarchy and the relationship of religion and state doesnot appear as they were the two
pillars of the state and national identity.

The major block o federalism is the QUESTION ABOUT no of constituent units Nepal should have under
the constitution.

Various federal maps have been put forward ranging from 3 to 285 constituent units by poluitical
parties, experts etc. at the most basic levels these map differ about how territory and ethnicity will be
articulated in federalism. But still there is no consensus yet.

THEORIZING THE ORIGINS OF FEDERALISM:

There is little literature which suggest why countries resort to federalism but why new states formed
incorporated federalism. It is basically to insulate against the security threats and modernizing the
market and creation of larger market.

But this argument doesnot apply to nepla as the country is better insulated under unitary system from
indian influence and has already have a common market.

We can extract from literature two explanations why nepal needs fedralsim.

1. Federalism process is driven by a group looking for autonomy.*(for instance the demand has
come from madeesh which is south of the country triggered by the idea of self-determination
asking for one constituent unit for the regin)
2. Ethno cultural and national diversity is the cause of demand of federalism.

Moreover, Nepal indigenous nationalities also seek federalism. Second explanation comes from riker
theory, in which he described federalism as a bargain. So the palyers are looking to secure there
interests. When federalism answers that they will resort to it. The basic assumption is that the masses
follow their leaders but in Nepal leaders doesnot command loyalty from there subordinates and are
divided inherently on perspectives.

Historical institutionalism is most appropriate school explaining to answer why In Nepal creating basic
structure of federalism is so difficult. Two features are important

a) The sensitivity to the time and sequence( causality is deeply embedded in the sequence of
institutional development and socio political process) hence politics should be studied with
time)
b) It allows for blending of casual factors of different nature; institutional, power/ interest- based
and ideational. Hence the three I’s (institutions, interest and ideas)

From institutional point of view, for most part of history the country was govern by monarchy which
was constituted of small group of individuals.

Historical institutionalism explains, different interest maximizing groups. The opposition to Nepali
monarchy has very different positions. Each carrying its own agenda to for political, institutional and
socio-economic changes. Hence these groups contradicts about the definition of country federal
structure.

Time contingent federalism:

The theories of federalism suggest that it comes into being after the agreement among key actors
either as a b)bargain b)a moral concept c) condition for democracy etc. but In Nepal there is no core
agreement. Almost every party supports federalism accept one party rastriya prajatantra party
supporting old monarchy. The 2007 decision to specify federalism as a part of interim constitution was
because of the particular dynamics of democratic process rather than because of consensus.

Moist insurgency- seeking change in nepali state structure- challenging the dominance of high caste
hindus. They never asked specifically for federalism-

Mosit was seeking autonomy for terai plains in the south under federalist sceheme

Why mosit was successful

Concluding, the process resulted because of the timing of a violent uprising of a group was perfect who
wanted federalism.

Historical legacies and contemporary articulation

Institutions and its legacies structure politics.(territorial restructuring of the state will be influenced by
historical practices of both states power and resistance to it)

Restructuring will be problematic and a threat to preexisting dominant class.

-nepali congress propose federalism which doesnot reflect ethnicity and historically marginalized
groups. It is the party dominated by high caste hindus. Give little attention to minority issues.

In the first proposition regarding constituent units it suggested to use already existing development
regions whose basis are purely geographical. Thyat is why it has lost support from maadheesh due to its
anti-ethnicity stance.

-communist party of Nepal is more divided on the question of federalism. In start they were
sympathetic to ethnic demands. But the Marxist class basd politics eventually trumped as a stance aginst
the opposition to the state.

They got on the bandwagon of federalism following moist. And also created some room for ethnic based
politics. They presented the federal map containing 15 units, many of which will be associated with
indigenous nationalities. (also the two members linked with cpn-uml were split on what type of map to
recommend. One of them bhogendra endorsed 11 provice ethnic model while the sarbaraj khadka
endorsed 6 province proposal . in this way many madheesi menmbers left the party and created a new
federal socialist party.

-moist party is committed to federalism before other parties. It supports identity based federalism. But
in it there is division. Because the root of the party is in the communist party of Nepal that stressed class
struggle over ethnic discrimination politics.

Armed insurgency of moist regime was successful because it was able to mobilize indigenous
nationalities. In 2004 they proposed formation of 9 regional autonomous units, 7 were named after
ethnic lines. As a result of it representing indigenous nationalities there stance became pro ethnic
federalism.

Two member of moist party endorsed 11 provinces based model. But in contemporary times there has
been debate that they are deviating from their stance as some parts of moistr party has shown lenience
from ethnic stance and are ready to accept 6 unit model. It will affect there nationalist indigenous
constituencies and support.

Madeeshi parties do support ethnic fedralsim but one of their demand is to make madheesh into a one
constituent unit. But within madheesh this notion is challenged. The three main parties oppose one unit
model for terrai region. 3 main parties leadership is high caste hindus hence they are opponent to the
schem of terai as one constituent unit. The madheeshi parties leadership is shows opposition to 5 unit
model for terrain(south Nepal) but are ready to make a compromise on 2 unit model scheme.

why the constituent assembly failed?

It was alfeady known that CA work will be a product of compromise as it included members from
different parties.
The SRC’s work was compromised when 9 experts weren’t willing to agree on one theme. With
monarchy gone the leaders of the parties are center of attention and decision making. Lack of consensus
btw them resulted in failure of CA.

Self-determination and its ideational competitors:

-ideas as imp structures as enabling and constraining agency. There resilience and socio-political
embedneness make them powerful forces either causing change or continuity.

4 distinct and hard to reconcile ideas are beign debated for federalism.

1. The idea of federalism initiated from self-determination rights demand by marginalized

communities or ethnicities demanding territorial autonomy.( identity based federalism from
nationalist actors.
2. High caste hindu nationalist dominate leadership of 3 major parties. NC and CPN bring up the
idea of national unity.
3. The idea of self-determination conflicts with sovereignty of the state forwarded by key actors
like CPN-moist. They are concerned of influence of India and there strategic interests in Nepal.
They are of the view that one single constituent unit for Mahesh will compromise Nepal
sovereignty. There reason is that madheesh people are more culturally tied to india and are not
enthusiastic to Nepal.
4. For NC they are of the view that development will occur if Nepal detaches from ethnic
differences and promote national unity.
\