In search of cultural equilibrium

 

-Yam Bahadur Dura

The most visible timeline of Nepal's democratic movements can be traced back to 1950's democratic movement against Rana Regime. It was followed by two major political uprisings - People's Movement of 1990 and 2006 - which largely changed Nepal's socio-political landscape.

Along with this, Maoists-led Armed Conflict (1996-2006), Madesh Movement, and some other social movements helped Nepal turn itself into a secular state. Almost seven decades have been passed, and Nepal's journey toward an ideal democracy continues further and further.

Secularism has become one of the major issues in this journey. Political opinions remain divided over the issue of secularism. The political elites are saying that once the new constitution is promulgated, the agenda of secularism has come to an end, and it is time to move ahead with the agenda of socio-economic development.

Conversely, the ethnic/indigenous communities are expressing their resentments in the political elites' statements. Their version is that the agenda of secularism is yet to be addressed along with the agenda of socio-economic agenda.

This is what has become the point of debate in the present day Nepal. However, the issue of secularism is nothing new in Nepal, and is a long-standing issue. There is a long history of discrimination and repression. The modern history of caste-based discrimination begins with the introduction of the Muluki Ain (Civil Code) in 1854 Civil Code, which created a strong ground for caste-based discrimination underestimating Nepal's cultural diversity and people's dignities.

More than a century long oligarchic rule of Ranas (1846- 1951) propelled caste-based discrimination in the country. In 1951, 'Rana rule' was toppled. After short period of democratic atmosphere, King Mahedra introduced the party-less autocratic political system, called Panchayat system, in 1960.

Panchayat continued nurturing the legacy of Rana rulers by suppressing the sentiments of cultural diverse communities. It tried to homogenize cultural diversity in the name of ‘national unity’. Ethic/indigenous communities were expected to assimilate into the socio-political mainstream. They were also expected to internalize the culture, religion, language and values of dominant Hindu groups in order to become real Nepalis.

After the fall of Panchayat system in 1990, a new constitution was introduced portraying Nepal as a multiethnic, multilingual, democratic, independent, indivisible, sovereign, Hindu and constitutional monarchical kingdom. It was a progressive constitution compared to the previous ones. But, it gave prime importance to the dominant Hindu culture, which was the point of displeasure for ethnic/indigenous communities. They had already complaining about negative influences of  Hinduization.

Even after the restoration of democracy in 1990, the state blatantly violated the values of cultural diversity. In 1997, Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Dhanusha District Development Committee, and Rajbiraj Municipality decided to use Nepal Bhasa, and Maithili as their official languages respectively in addition to Nepali. These decisions were challenged at the Supreme Court, and the Court prohibited implementing the decisions.

In this way, the ethnic/indigenous communities were systematically ignored and discriminated by the state mechanisms depriving them of their cultural practices over the years.

Now, the legal and political environments have changed a lot. Nepal has turned into federal system from unitary system of governance. The Constitution of Nepal 2015 has come into existence, which is, seemingly, more progressive and democratic. It has largely respected cultural diversity at least in words.

In addition, Nepal has also signed various international legal instruments viz. the ILO Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, 1989 (ILO 169), the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CEDAW), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). All these instruments intend to end all sorts of discrimination and promote multiculturalism.

Legally speaking, the situation seems to be improved tremendously. Even so, there are conflicts between theory and practice. Many questions related to cultural diversity, especially Maoists-induced ones, remain sorrowfully unanswered.

Before the Maoists entered the armed conflict, they had submitted a memorandum to then-Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. One of the points of the memorandum was that autonomy should be given to those ethnic groups who have majority in their respective areas. Based on this idea of ethnicity based federalism, Maoists formed what they call 'People Governments' in the name of indigenous people like Tamuwan, Magarat, Tharuwan, and so on during the armed conflict period.

On contrary to this, Maoists left this agenda unaddressed once they rose to power. They came to power from time to time after 2006. This time too, ex-Maoists affiliated majority government is in power. But, they are mysteriously silent on their own agenda without any clarifications.

There are a series of developments which have been hampering Nepal's cultural diversity. Indigenous people are feeling cheated and insulted for many reasons. The miscarriage of a long cherished dream of ethnicity based federalism was major shock for them.

This unpleasant situation continues even further. The present communist government cut down public holidays by 22 days in March 2018. Most of the holidays were the major festival of indigenous communities, which was insured by the interim constitution issued after 2006 spring movement.

Nepal's Constitution has made provision of 'special protected regions' or 'autonomous regions' for the overall development of minority groups. But, the government seems to be utterly unwilling to materialize this constitutional provision.

All these sad chapters remind us of the story of 'overpromise and under-delivery'. Power-holders and policymakers need to remember that Nepal is a mosaic of different ethnic/indigenous communities. They need to paint rosy picture of the country respecting cultural diversity, which is the corner stone of national unity and multiculturalism.