Quest for Identity: Re-Examining the Process of Federal Restructuring of the Nepali State
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ISSN: 2705-4853 | e-ISSN: 2705-4861 Social Inquiry: Journal of Social Science Research 2020, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 12-37 https://doi.org/10.3126/sijssr.v2i2.33043 Open Access Article History: Received: 10 July 2020 | Revised: 01 September | Accepted: 05 September 2020 Theoretical Paper Quest for Identity: Re-Examining the Process of Federal Restructuring of the Nepali State Asis Mistry Kazi Nazrul University, Asansol, West Bengal, India Email: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6933-1946 © 2020 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC-BY-NC-SA) International Public License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non- commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited and such creations are licensed under the identical terms. Quest for Identity | 13 Abstract The agenda of restructuring the state has been the most deliberated issue for all intellectuals, political leaders and civil society activists in Nepal. The restructuring of Nepali state became a central component of the 2006 peace deal. Federalism was, however, included in the interim constitution as a binding principle for the Constituent Assembly on the verge of violent protests in the Tarai in 2007. The fundamental question during the Maoist insurgency remained whether federalism based on ethnic affiliation will be materialized. But after the Madhesh mutiny, the question that dominated the public discourse was whether “ethnic federalism” can be materialized as a mean to achieve more inclusive, institutionalized and sustainable democratic polity in Nepal. This article re-examines the process of federal restructuring of Nepali State on the backdrop of contemporary politics of identity. Keywords: Identity Politics; Nepal; Ethnicity; Federalism Introduction to the subaltern ethnic groups came into public debate and discourse since the On the aftermath of the Janaandolan-II, restoration of multi-party democracy in the predominant public discourse 1990. In fact, the federal restructuring favoured federal restructuring the state of the state has been the core demand of and thereby transform feudal Nepal into ethnic groups in post-Madhesh uprising “naya Nepal” based upon secular and politics in Nepal. The urge for democratic federal principles. The federalism was not only for the articulation of federalism has caught decentralization of power but also for a much attention than other issues wider agenda of inclusion that because of the varied context of encompasses other institutional reforms ethnicization and regionalization (Baral, to ensure proportional representation of 2012, p. 266). Nonetheless, the all the ethnic groups and recognition of restructuring of Nepali state by the ethnic and cultural diversity by providing autonomy based on identity redefining Nepali nationalism. The Social Inquiry: Journal of Social Science Research, Volume 2, Issue 2, 2020 14 | A. Mistry ethnic groups also demanded the attention and priority over each other introduction of affirmative actions to (they need not always, since there may guarantee proportional representation of be no conflict between the demands of marginalized groups in government and different loyalties), the person has to administration. The Maoists‟ promoted decide on the relative importance to for ethnicity-based federalism or “ethnic attach to the respective identities” federalism” by renaming provinces after depending on a certain context (Sen, the most numerous ethnic and regional 2006, p. 19). However, two distinct groups. Few indigenous groups claimed issues are to be carefully addressed in preferential rights to natural resources this connection – one, “the recognition of the region they live and priority that identities are robustly plural, and entitlement to political leadership that the importance of one identity need positions in the future provinces. Many not obliterate the importance of others”; people from CHHE, conversely, two, “a person has to make choices – protested the introduction of ethnic explicitly or by implication about what quotas and federal restructuring relative importance to attach, in a although their resistance was mostly certain context, to the divergent unorganized and fragmented. Open loyalties and priorities that may opposition only came from a fringe of compete for precedence”.10 Identity the political left who feared Nepal‟s movements express two complementary unity. The Pro-monarchy groups and the types of collective demands – the Hindu rights, less concerned for protection of interests and the federalism than with the republic and promotion of rights of certain groups of secularism, opposed the redefinition of individuals who feel discriminated Nepali nationalism. against, and the search for symbolic recognition by a significant other. Making Sense of Politics Identity movements defend the of Identity interests, world visions, and values of groups of individuals or communities Making sense of identity is essential in defined by such characteristics as our day-to-day life. We simultaneously phenotype (or race) and ethnicity; sex; belong to divergence category of language; sexual orientation; mythical identities based on different contexts. origins and ancestral territory. When these identities “compete for Social Inquiry: Journal of Social Science Research, Volume 2, Issue 2, 2020 Quest for Identity | 15 Recitation of the Idea of mono-national federalists and multi- Federalism ethnic federalists. The former argue that the primary objective of federalism is to Federalism is a normative political “unite people living in different political philosophy that recommends the use of units, who nevertheless share a common federal principles – combining joint language and culture”. The latter, on action and self-government. “Federal contrary, advocate federalism to “unite political systems” are a democratic people who seek the advantages of catch – all terms for all political membership of a common political unit, organizations that combine “shared rule but differ markedly in descent, language and self-rule”. There are, however, three and culture”. A remarkable change was different perspectives dealing with the witnessed in 1990s both in established interrelationship between federalism as well as new democracies in the and nationalism. The first one holds that World commensurate with the ethno- federalism and nationalism are mutually cultural composition. The constitutions exclusive. French Jacobins, for instance, of many Third World countries believed that federalism was hostile to attempted to address the issue of multi- the necessity of linguistic ethnic nature of the polity. Furthermore, homogenization, a roadblock in the path the Latin American experiments with of authentic, indivisible, monistic “multi-cultural constitutionalism” have popular sovereignty. Federalism, successfully transformed many therefore, belongs to an entirely “divided” Latin American societies into different co-operative philosophy - a peaceful multicultural polities. The non-nationalist logic of legitimacy and/ salient features of this multi-cultural or the anti-dot of nationalism. The model were “formal recognition of the second perspective, by sharp contrast, multi-cultural nature of their societies holds that federalism and nationalism and of the existence of indigenous are synonymous. The third perspective, people as distinct, sub-state social however, unites the perspectives viz, collectivities”, “recognition of “federalism and nationalism can indigenous peoples‟ customary law as intersect and be compatible” and “not official public law”, “collective all federalisms are compatible with all property rights with restriction on the federalisms”. This agreement, although, alienation of division of communal marks an important difference between lands”, “official status for indigenous Social Inquiry: Journal of Social Science Research, Volume 2, Issue 2, 2020 16 | A. Mistry languages in territorial units”, “a kind of federation is in Belgium, guarantee of bilingual education” Australia, Brazil and Switzerland. The (Khanal, 2011, p. 167). federal form where works are divided level-wise between the centre and the In the federal system, there will be state is called cooperative federal generally two governments – the state system. In this duties and rights are and central governments. The foreign, distinctly divided between the centre monetary, defence are under the central and the state. The states also equally government whereas the local participate in formulating the policy of government is responsible for local the centre. In such countries the centre security, development and other local formulates policy and makes laws and issues. The constitution delineates the acts and the agencies lower than this duties and jurisdiction of the two implement the same. Cooperative governments. Federal system is called federal structure is in Germany, citizen oriented as it is likely to provide Ethiopia, South Africa, and Canada. At services promptly and embrace this point, the question remnants what diversity. If equal powers are given to kind of modular form of federalism is the constituent states, then such suited to Nepal considering the nature federations are called symmetric of prevailing identity politics. federation. Australia is an example of a symmetric federation. If distinction is Contextualizing made between states,