E-Kantipur

All democracies in the world go by majority rule but our democracy runs, in essence, by minority imperative. It is evident from the way the Samyukta Loktantrik Madhesi Morcha (SLMM), the fourth largest force in the parliament, helped Baburam Bhattarai to become the new Prime Minister of Nepal. The Morcha had even held up the presentation of budget on the scheduled day a few months ago. The power play was obvious from the dynamics in the run-up to the second extension of the Constituent Assembly by three months on May 28, 2011. The constitutional amendment to prolong the life of the constituent body was passed by a majority vote of 504 against 4 dissenting members, but the intense negotiations leading to the 5-point political truce among the four leading political groups carried more of the minority views than those of the bigger parties.

By far the most glaring proof of this phenomenon was the way SLMM, with a total strength of 71 seats in the Constituent Assembly, could bulldoze the three leading parties commanding 461 seats at the Assembly — a comfortable position far exceeding the necessary two-third majority of about 394. SLMM succeeded in getting its three demands ushered in the 5-point agreement signed by the top leaders of the three leading parties. The biggest parties, among other things, agreed to fulfil the commitments made earlier regarding the Madhes, recruit Madhesi youth in the Nepal Army and force Prime Minister Jhala Nath Khanal to tender resignation to pave the way for a national government. It was all the more spectacular to observe that the Madhesi groups — that had been left on the sideline throughout the inter-party negotiations among Nepali Congress, UML and Maoists — made their presence felt at the eleventh hour of negotiations to save the Assembly. The same strategy prevailed on the eve of the budget presentation. In these instances, we witnessed how a minority voice prevailed over the majority voice in the final reckoning of power dynamics of our democracy.

Even among the three leading parties it was Nepali Congress, which commands only 114 seats in the Assembly, that was on the offensive on the 238-seat strong Maoist party in debates private as well as public. The Maoist party, irrespective of being in the government and holding a majority vote in the Assembly, could not help being in a defensive position even though the extension was a common cause. The Maoist-backed government of Prime Minister Jhala Nath Khanal wanted to get the Assembly term extended by one year but it had to abide by the minority voice of the Nepali Congress, which conceded only a three months extension. With this, we saw how the 109-strong party could triumph over a party with more than its double strength (238). If this is the rule of the game, a natural question arises: is it not desirable to remain in a minority position to get one’s voice heard?

With regard to the peace process, the Maoists, had to listen to a smaller party, the Nepali Congress, instead of the other way round. It is seen as a graceful concession on the part of the Nepali Congress to relax its condition of handing over the keys of the Maoist arms containers to the government before agreeing to the extension of the assembly term. Whether the peace process will be concluded within the stipulated time is a different matter but the fact that a minority voice has an edge over the majority voice is beyond doubt.

The rule of the minority is increasingly accepted under the republican dispensation. Pushpa Kamal Dahal did not resign from the prime ministership because he had lost the support of majority in the parliament. Similarly, Prime Minister Madhav Nepal did not resign from his post because he was outvoted in the legislature. In the latest instance, Prime Minister Jhala Nath Khanal resigned, not because he lost majority support from the lawmakers, but under the pressure of minority parties in the parliament.

We can blame the critical and transitional period for adherence to this kind of undemocratic democracy. Nonetheless, it is an undeniable truth that all three communist prime ministers had to quit despite majority votes in the parliament — a great irony considering the perceived fear of ‘power capture’ by a communist force.

The rule appears equally applicable in the inner dynamics of political parties. Take, for example, the UML. Jhala Nath Khanal became the elected President of the party by defeating KP Oli. But it is Oli who has a greater say in the decisions of the party. During the tenure of Prime Minister Madhav Nepal it was Oli who played the most prominent role in selecting ministers from his party, formulating policies of the government and deciding inter-party relationships. Thus, though the verdict of the party was with Khanal as the party’s elected president, it is Oli, a minority leader, who looked dominant during Khanal’s premiership.

The Maoists, too, are no different in this respect. Mohan Baidya is believed to have the support of the majority of party cadres and leaders but it is comparatively less powerful leader, Baburam Bhattarai, who is victorious in deciding the party strategy. Despite commanding a majority view in the party, Mohan Baidya has to put his people’s uprising theory into cold storage under the obvious pressure from a minority opinion of reconciliation to complete the agenda of constitution writing and peace process. Similarly, Dahal, despite being the party leader in parliament, had to let Baburam ascend to premiership. These examples suggest that the rule of democratic game — the prevalence of a majority view — has gone awry in Nepal.

Anomalous as it might look in broad perspective of democratic functioning, there is, however, a silver lining to this minority-ruled game. The minority groups in our country can hold high hopes to get their demands met in the new constitution if they can keep up their pressure and extract as much as they can from the bigger, more powerful parties.

Shrestha is affiliated with Nepal Studies and Research Center

Post Your Comment

Please note that all the fields marked * are mandatory.
* Full Name
* Address
* Email Address
* Comment
* Captcha	Get another CAPTCHA code
Note:	Comments containing abusive words or slander shall not be published.