Top Stories»
Civil society on fence: Analysts
KATHMANDU, AUG 15 -
Nepal’s aggravating political crisis has hyped concern among its neighbours, but that hasn’t galvanised the country’s civil society into action.
Though they played an active role in the early days of the peace process, civil society organisations (CSOs) now seem aloof from the aspirations of the public, critics allege. Yet, with prospects of agreement among political parties appearing remote, attention is again turning towards CSOs.
“Political parties have failed to balance two things: power sharing and constitution writing,” said Nilambar Acharya, Chairman of the Constitutional Committee. “There is definitely room for civil society leaders to play a proactive role.” But some remain wary of their approach and fractious nature.
Referring to the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry and Nepal Media Society initiative to hold a ‘decisive debate,’ in the run-up to the term extension of the Constituent Assembly on May 28, UCPN (Maoist) Politburo member Ram Karki argued that the presence of media or an audience undermines the very idea of facilitation. The environment gets consigned to only knee-jerk reactions and prolific displays of a holier-thou attitude — rather than sincere soul-searching.
Karki may be right about the need to do away with amphitheatre-style politics. Others too are less optimistic about the prospect of civil society playing the role of an honest broker. “Civil society has become increasingly partisan. It either propagates donor agenda or vested interests,” said Chandra Dev Bhatta, an expert on Nepali civil society. Bhatta reasoned that Nepal’s civil society, at least the core that matters in Kathmandu, is class-centric. Bhatta’s comments may sound harsh, but they are not without merit. A senior civil society leader refused to go on record, citing his disillusionment with the movement. It was clear from his remarks that there are deep disagreements within the social leadership.
Since the resignation of the Maoist-led government in May 2007, civil society has become extremely polarised, and those sections that are not, remain mired in donors’ pet projects.
Shyam Shrestha, a civil society leader said the outer layers of society have melted following the defeat of the ‘common enemy’ — after the 2006 movement. “It is not unnatural that professional groups and party-affiliated organisations have gone back to business. Yet, the core group of civil society activists and leaders remains steadfast,” he said, refuting implications that civil society has been co-opted by either the parties or the donors.
Posted on: 2010-08-16 07:41
Headlines
Advertisements
