Oped»
Politics, rights and justice
MAY 17 -
It was the early summer of 1980. I was working underground from a thatched hut in a village six kilometre away from the town of Hetauda, south of Kathmandu. Amidst great risk and challenges, Nepali youth were gradually shaping the movement for political freedom. The movement started spreading its roots in spite of escalation of oppression by the state.
Back then, the BBC World Service was the only reliable source of news in Nepal. I recall like it was yesterday the BBC news bulletin reporting, amidst the crackle of shortwave, the brutal massacre in Gwangju. That was how I first learnt about the uprising of the Korean people against military oppression.
Young people of Nepal though saddened by the immense loss of life, became energised and motivated by the news of the Gwangju revolt. We took in heart that we were not alone in the struggle against dictatorship. Inspired by the heroic warriors of Gwangju, we saluted them from afar. Thereafter, time and again during our fight for a stable, peaceful, democratic Nepal, we have been remembering the heroic deeds of the people of Gwangju and their success.
Patience and emancipation
In the course of thirty years of continuous struggle for human rights, social justice and democracy, I have experienced many periods of hopes and despair. I have worked closely with political leaders who suffered and sacrificed in order to end royal dictatorship, who never lost their sense of
service to the people. But I have also seen leaders who have lost their way while attempting to cling to power. I have witnessed leaders losing patience during critical moments of the struggle, even succumbing to the lure of armed rebellion.
All this has taught me that social revolution requires patience and perseverance to overcome the obstacles on the way to transformation. It is so easy to get disheartened and give up the fight, but it is the thought of the people’s emancipation that keeps us going, through times of dictatorship as well as demagoguery.
Even the so-called advanced countries are constantly in political flux, but in most places social and economic transformation proceeds regardless. But the extreme and continuous political instability in my country over the last half century has retarded the progress of the nation as a whole. Nepal is a country endowed with
great natural resources and rich diversity of population. And yet, we have
not been able to convert this potential into wellbeing for the people, who
have been waiting a long time for socio-economic emancipation, freedom, justice and peace.
During the decade-long armed conflict which ended in 2006, pluralism and democracy got weakened, accountability and rule of law disappeared, development work almost ceased to exist, and state institutions withered. More than 16,000 citizens died in the conflict, and a culture of violence entered the pores of society.
This turn of events provided the opportunity for an ambitious and short-sighted king to seize power and re-establish autocracy. But then a swirling, energising People’s Movement overtook the country in April 2006, destroying the royal ambitions and paving the way for the Maoists to join the mainstream political system. The subsequent adoption of a federal, democratic republican system was meant to make government accountable, and politics stable for
the attainment of lasting peace and human rights. It was also to signify a farewell to arms.
The people expected that henceforth political transformation would no longer be based on arms, violence, threats and intimidation. However, the peace process has not yet been concluded. We have entered the republican era, but we are still a country where there is one state with two ‘armies’ — the national army and the combatant force of the Maoist party.
For all the challenges, I hold an optimistic outlook for the days ahead. Nepal is a country which knows how to pull back from the brink. Our peace process may be faulty but we are moving faster than many other societies which have experienced armed insurgency. The fact is that an internal conflict has ended, and the United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) will eventually convert into a democratic party.
We harbour the hope that the
elected Constituent Assembly will provide a new constitution without much delay, ensuring stability, peace and responsive government. What we need is a democratic peace to bring social transformation and economic growth with equity. Sooner than later, we will succeed in institutionalising the achievements so far, and gift the next generation a polity that is democratic and home-grown.
Withdrawal of state
The South Asian region where my country is located is a vast territory inhabited by nearly a fourth of the world population. It is diverse and rich in culture and geography, a region of enormous natural resources and historical unity. Yet, why has it become a region with some of the worst human development indicators, and geopolitical instability that shakes the global equilibrium? Why have conflicts festered here for so long?
As an activist and grassroots workers rather than a scholar, I do not have the answers to these challenges faced by people of South Asia. But based on my experience in Nepal, I firmly believe that the answer to most of
our problems is the absence of good governance, of a system that is pro-people and respects human rights
and social justice. There are no magic solutions or quick fixes.
In our continuous battle for political freedom, we seem to have tended to ignore equity in access to services and distribution of wealth. We have, knowingly or unknowingly, accepted the evolving norm of “the state at the service of the market rather than the people”. As a result, the state has started withdrawing from public health, public education and public transport services, and from agriculture. A large section of the population has fallen outside the realm of the state. We cannot have a system where a democratic government exists but democracy itself is inoperative or dysfunctional.
My own involvement in social movements has its origin in political ideology, founded on the foundation of Marxist philosophy in experience gleaned from formal, informal, mass-based and professional organisations. The movement for human rights is an integral part of the political process, which cannot be confined within the ambit of political parties. The human rights movement extends beyond the ideologies of the political parties.
There is a growing tendency among activists to detach themselves from political streams for the sake of becoming “pure human rights activists”. This road is full of pitfalls, because it tends to lead the activists towards formal organisations, ‘project work’ and careerism. To use an expression from the Nepali language, there is a relationship between human rights and democracy as there is between “nail and flesh”, meaning inseparable. This relationship is nurtured when the activist believes in politics as a tool for positive change and does not shy away from engaging with political parties to influence their policies and practices.
I would like to call my fellow human rights activists to be fully committed to social justice, only then will they be able to protect the weak and vulnerable. Let’s protect ourselves from the scourge of political indifference. Democracy cannot be strengthened without strong participation of civil society in the pro-people politics.
(This is an abridged version of the address human rights activist Sushil Pyakurel is scheduled to deliver
today while accepting Gwangju Human Rights Award for 2010
in South Korea)
Posted on: 2010-05-18 07:59
Headlines
Advertisements
