Submit your Article

Bhaskar Koirala, the Director of Nepal Institute of International and Strategic Studies (NIIS), is an old China hand. He is a keen observer of the strategic competition among big powers in Nepal. Kamal Dev Bhattarai caught up with Koirala for his insights on Nepal’s foreign policy, the new rumpus over Venezuela and Nepal’s relations with China and the US.

How do you evaluate the Oli government’s foreign policy in the past one year?

The country is still in transition and even senior leaders are not sure which direction it is headed in. In this transitional phase, the leadership is weak, and there is a lack of clarity on the country’s foreign policy objectives. There are fundamental disagreements on what kind of foreign policy Nepal should pursue. So I do not know how you can claim success in the conduct of foreign policy. We can take the most recent example of Venezuela, and use it as a benchmark to determine the quality of foreign policy processes in Nepal. If you go back a bit and try to understand how this government has defined its relationship with China, India and the US, I see a lack of clarity.

Why do you think that is the case?

There is no creativity in the overall process. A lot of things could have been initiated in relationships with India, China and the US. But you do not see that happening. After one year, what is the result? Where is the government headed? How has the government defined its foreign policy? 

You referred to Venezuela. How has its handling by the ruling party and the government been?

Lately, the government seems embroiled in the Venezuela issue. Many were surprised by this; no one had expected happenings in that country to have reverberations in Nepal. It started with a press statement by a co-chairman of the ruling party. Some say it is an ideological issue and the communist party had to stand by it. But I think this is an example of negligence in the conduct of foreign policy. But let us not blow things up. There was similar negligence when the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was supposed to mention ‘condolences’ instead of ‘congratulations’ while sending a message to Indonesia after it was struck by a devastating cyclone. Venezuela’s case was one of similar negligence, no more. Nepal does not have a substantive relationship with Venezuela.

Do you espy China’s hand behind Dahal’s statement on Venezuela?

I think that’s totally ridiculous. I do not think China would dictate to another country what kind of foreign policy statement it should release. I certainly do not believe, unlike what some media outlets have suggested, that China somehow coaxed Nepal into taking this position.

It seems that the government’s position has created some friction in our relations with the US.

It has created a serious problem in bilateral relations with the US. How long its impact will last, I do not know but it seems to be a big issue. In a recently held diplomatic briefing of the government, the US Ambassador to Nepal was missing. The US has said that the investment summit that Nepal is going to organize in March is premature. Remember, the statement on Venezuela was signed by a co-chairman of the ruling party and on the party’s letter pad, and it was backed by the Foreign Ministry later. That is not how foreign policy issues should have been handled. Even small negligence can lead to a serious crisis.

Talking about the Americans, how important are Nepal-US ties?

The Nepal-US relations have been very important over the past 70 years. Recently, Minister for Foreign Affairs Pradeep Gyawali visited the United States. At a recent program in Vietnam, I met Alice Wells, the US Assistant Deputy Secretary of State, who gave examples of how the Indo-Pacific region is becoming more and more important for them. She said the $500 million grant to Nepal under the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) is a part of their overall Indo-Pacific Strategy.

The MCC does two things: road maintenance and construction of transmission lines. Roads are already there and the Americans help repair them. Nepal has huge potential in hydropower, so the US is helping Nepal stand on its own feet. So, you can look at it in those terms as well. And you do not have to see it as the US trying to contain China from here. The US is a big power. As a relatively small country in this region between two larger states, Nepal should have its own identity. Nepal should stand on its own feet and should be independent. 

I find the concept of the US Ambassadors Fund for Cultural Preservation (AFCP) interesting. Long before the earthquake, the US helped with the conservation of our temples through the AFCP. So, the US is trying to help Nepal to preserve its identity in this age of rapid globalization; maybe it thinks Nepal’s identity is being diluted. The US is helping us because it lost many aspects of its culture to modernization. They want to help us preserve our identity.

But there are views that China is concerned about Nepal cultivating closer ties with the US.

We are confining ourselves to a certain narrative. As someone who’s been interested in Chinese foreign policy for the last 15 years, I do not think China would be concerned if Nepal develops a closer relationship with the US and deepens its relationship with India, so long as these relations do not hurt its core interests. So long as its interests aren’t affected, China would be happy to see Nepal develop a multifaceted relationship with the United States. 

There was much talk about Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali’s visit to the US. How did you see it?

When the then Secretary of State Colin Powell visited Nepal 17 years ago, he did not specifically come here to meet our foreign minister and discuss bilateral issues or to talk about how Nepal had an important role in the US regional strategy. Powell had come here as a part of a world-wide tour after 9\11 to garner Nepal’s support on the war on terror. Gyawali’s recent visit is very important because such a visit took place after a gap of over 17 years. I do not know when the two countries’ foreign ministers had met before Powell’s visit.

What was the outcome of our foreign minister’s trip to the US?

Although Gyawali’s visit was a very important platform to cultivate relations with the United States, we were not able to capitalize on it. Maybe it was also the fault of the foreign ministry that didn’t know how to present the visit to the Nepali public, or to other international powers. It was not like Nepal had to sign on a dotted line that it was now subscribing to the Indo-Pacific Strategy. I do not see why Nepal could not take part in discussions on the concept of Indo-Pacific. There could be, for instance, discussions on how Nepal can contribute to the peace and prosperity of the Indo-Pacific region.

We can move ahead in far more positive, constructive and creative ways rather than simply saying Nepal is neutral and implying that the Indo-Pacific Strategy is directed at China and Nepal cannot jeopardize the BRI.

The government lost an opportunity. The idea of Indo-Pacific is not contradictory to the Belt and Road Initiative. Even international media are presenting the two as mutually exclusive ideas. We can reconcile the two broad foreign policy concepts, one coming from China and another from the US.

How do you observe Nepal’s evolving relations with China?

It is headed in a positive direction. I frequently visit bordering areas such as Kerung and Hilsa. China is developing infrastructures along its border with Nepal. It shows how much importance China attaches to its relations with Nepal. We do not have the same level of infrastructure on the Nepali side. There is hardly any movement on our side. Bordering areas on our side do not have electricity. For example, police cum administrators are working without electricity in Hilsa, which is an important place. Hilsa is not connected with roads to the district headquarters. We can’t even get electricity from China, even though the locals want it desperately. There has not been any initiative to bring electricity from China to these areas. There is a lack of clarity. Pretty much the same could be said about our bilateral relations.

The BRI process in Nepal seems stuck. Then there is that talk of a debt trap.

Yes, obviously a country like Nepal, which is going through a transition and which is much weaker than China, India or the US, should be cautious. But this is just one narrative. We have to avoid the kind of entanglements seen in other countries like Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Everyone is talking about a debt-trap. But one narrative cannot define Nepal’s relationship with China. There are other bilateral issues.  Around 7,000 Nepali students are studying in China. There are 65 weekly flights between Kathmandu and various Chinese cities. They are important for boosting our economic relationship. Tourism is another area that can enhance economic relations.

But there are some structural problems between the two countries. There have been discussions on railway connectivity and people are very excited. But there is no road connectivity. We have not talked to the Chinese about ensuring our agriculture products’ access in their market. Our government authorities have not sat down with their Chinese counterparts to discuss and settle this issue. This is a glaring weakness on the part of our government. There are many examples of this relationship moving forward but there are also counter-signs. Take the example of the ring road in Kathmandu. We should take it in a positive way because it is a significant piece of infrastructure. Rather than indulging conspiracy theories, we should be thankful to the Chinese government. We can plant trees and manage cycle lanes there on our own. Again, there are multiple narratives. We should try to understand those narratives.

How does Nepal manage the strategic competition between the US, India and China?

We talked about the railway from China, which is an extraordinary development. The Nepali leadership wants to show it to the public. See this is how our relations are progressing! But the Nepali leadership has not taken the initiative to take India into confidence. We have a 1,700 km-long open border with India. It is a historical fact, whether you like it or not. Our border with China, on the other hand, is closed. Trade relations between India and China are growing and there are frequent interactions between them. They also have serious disagreements on security matters. How you allay Indian concerns about this railway from China? Is it not the responsibility of our leadership?

We have to be sensitive while dealing with this delicate matter. In sum, we have to take India and China into confidence. That is the only way to move forward.

4 In key appointments 

APEX Series

WOMEN IN POLITICS

1 In political parties

2 In the legislature

3 In the executive

4 In key appointments

5 Overall picture 

Currently there are five com­missioners (including the chief commissioner) at the Election Commission (EC), a constitutional body mandated to hold federal, provincial and local level elec­tions. Of the five, Ila Sharma is the only female commissioner. It’s ironic that the commission, which is responsible for ensuring the rep­resentation of 33 percent women in the national and provincial par­liaments and in political parties, is itself un-inclusive. The Public Service Commission (PSC), another constitutional body mandated to select public servants on an inclusive basis, also suffers from inadequate female represen­tation. Of its six members (including a chairperson), only one—Brinda Hada Bhattarai—is female. Both these key constitutional bodies, with the responsibility of implementing the nation’s policy of inclusion, are rather exclusionary.

Other bodies share the same fate. The Commission for the Investiga­tion of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) is another important constitu­tional body where the represen­tation of women is poor. Sabitri Gurung is the only female commis­sioner at the CIAA. The situation at the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is also disap­pointing; of its six commissioners, Mohana Ansari is the only woman. No constitutional body in the coun­try is headed by a woman.

There is no official record of polit­ical appointments of women, but observers say the low number of female appointees is an old prob­lem. The government makes dozens of political appointments (besides those to the federal and provincial parliaments and to the cabinet), but very few appointees are women. This clearly shows the political par­ties’ disinclination to ensure the constitutionally-required represen­tation of women in state organs.

The situation has remained unchanged even after the promul­gation of a new constitution in 2015, the holding of three tiers of elections in 2017, and the formation of a gov­ernment with a two-third majority last year. Now, there is a tendency of appointing a token number of women just to show commitment to the principle of inclusion.

In the third week of January this year, the government recommended the heads of five commissions—National Natural Resources and Fis­cal Commission, National Inclusion Commission, Madhesi Commission, Tharu Commission and Muslim Commission. None of the five rec­ommended chiefs is a woman.

In letter, not spirit

These commissions were envi­sioned by the constitution to pro­mote an inclusive polity, but the approach taken to make appoint­ments to them is not inclusive. This is a clear violation of the con­stitution, whose article 283 says: “Appointments to offices of con­stitutional organs and bodies shall be made in accordance with the inclusive principle.”

When it comes to political appointments to other state appa­ratuses, women’s representation is nominal as well. The core idea behind having a certain number of female political appointees is to ensure adequate representation of women in important decision-mak­ing processes. Since women are severely underrepresented in political institutions, observers say due attention should be given to securing a minimum number of seats for women.

“There is a flawed understand­ing among our political leaders that women cannot take up lead­ership and carry out their respon­sibilities well,” says Manchala Jha, a member of the Truth and Rec­onciliation Commission (TRC). “If women are given an opportunity, they are fully capable of leading constitutional and other state bodies,” she adds. Besides Jha, the TRC has one other female member (Madhabi Bhatta).

The basic principle behind political appointments is recruit­ing experts in specific fields. How­ever, women with close connec­tions to political parties are being appointed and those without such connections are denied the same opportunities. In other words, polit­ical cadres without the necessary expertise are being appointed to important positions.

Observers say the appointment of women with political access and connection does not fulfill the basic principle of inclusion, and that women from marginalized commu­nities without political affiliations must get opportunities.

“Political appointments since the Panchayat era clearly demonstrate that women with better political con­nections are getting all the opportu­nities,” says Harihar Birahi, former President of the Federation of Nep­alese Journalists. Bihari, who has been closely following the country’s political developments for several decades, says women close to the monarchy were appointed to gov­ernment positions during the Pan­chayat period. “Right through the past five decades, capable women without good political connections have been passed over in favor of less deserving candidates with such connections,” says Birahi.

Old problem

There is no official record of the political appointments made during the Panchayat and the democratic periods. But very few women were politically appointed during the Pan­chayat era for a few reasons. First, the number of educated women during that period was very low and it was difficult to find the appropri­ate person. Second, few places were allocated for political appointments. Third, the concepts of inclusion and women’s empowerment were not firmly established and there was no pressure group to take up the issue of women’s representation.

Birahi says the Panchayat regime appointed very few women to gov­ernment bodies. “Now the space for political appointments has expanded, and there has been some progress in women’s representation but still not up to a desirable level,” he says.

Although there are enough qual­ified women now and sufficient space for appointing them, politi­cal parties are seemingly hesitant to do so. Even in offices that meet the constitutional requirement of female representation, the roles and contributions of women are not always properly recognized. There are complaints that women’s opin­ions are not heeded while making important decisions. Often women also carry the extra burden of hav­ing to go beyond the call of duty to prove they are as qualified as their male counterparts.

Ambassadorship is another area where the government makes political appointments. Accord­ing to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nepal has embassies in 30 countries, of which two—those in Oman and Japan—have women ambassadors who were politically appointed: Sarmila Parajuli Dhakal and Prativa Rana respectively. Rana, who is the mother-in-law of the Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba, was appointed by the previous government. Besides Dhakal and Rana, Sewa Lamsal Adhikari is a woman ambassador (to Pakistan), but she’s a joint secretary at the MoFA, not a political appointee.

Lucky Sherpa, who was serving as the Nepali Ambassador to Australia, stepped down a few days ago after being accused of human trafficking, although she has denied the charges. In 2012, Maya Kumar Sharma, who was serving as the Nepali Ambassa­dor to Qatar, was recalled over her objectionable remarks against the Gulf nation.

Disturbing patterns

Among those most recently rec­ommended for an ambassadorial position, the only woman is Anjan Shakya (to Israel). There is already criticism that Shakya was chosen directly under Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s order: The two are distant relatives.

The current pattern of ambas­sadorial appointments clearly goes against constitutional provi­sions. Article 282 of the constitu­tion says, “The President may, on the basis of the principle of inclu­sion, appoint Nepalese ambassa­dors and special emissaries for any specific purposes.”

In contrast, powerful countries are appointing female ambassadors to Nepal. Hou Yanqi is the new Chi­nese Ambassador to Nepal. Other countries have also appointed female ambassadors to Nepal. Egypt, Bangladesh, Brazil, Sri Lanka and China have female ambassadors in Kathmandu, as does the Euro­pean Union.

Besides constitutional bodies and ambassadorial positions, political appointments are made to public enterprises, which are under gov­ernment control. But again, very few women have been appointed to these bodies. And the heads of state-owned Nepal Television, Radio Nepal, Rastriya Samachar Samiti and Gorkhapatra Cooperation are all politically appointed males.

Political appointment is an over­looked issue in Nepal. Women leaders and members of the civil society haven’t exerted enough pressure on the government and political parties to ensure 33 per­cent female representation in polit­ical appointments. The current scenario is unlikely to change unless women leaders from across the political spectrum come together to build pressure. Similarly, the Public Service Commission should compel the government to ensure that at least a third of the political appoin­tees are women.

3 In the executive

 APEX Series

WOMEN IN POLITICS

1 In political parties

2 In the legislature

3 In the executive

4 In key appointments

5 Overall picture

The male bias in cabinets

 Despite the consti­tutional provision of 33 percent women’s representation intro­duced after 2007, there has not been much improvement in female representation in the cabinet. An examination of all the cabinets formed after 2007 shows that women’s representation remains frustratingly low. After the promul­gation of the interim constitution in 2007, 10 cabinets have been formed but none has 33 percent representa­tion of women.

Even after the promulgation of the constitution in 2015, the num­ber of women in the cabinet has not increased significantly. Women’s representation in key decision-mak­ing bodies remains disappointing. Women have generally been rel­egated to the posts of deputies in local bodies and state ministers in provincial governments.

 In the federal cabinet led by the Nepal Communist Party (NCP) Chairman KP Sharma Oli, there are 22 ministers and three state ministers. Only three of the 22 ministers are women—Tham Maya Thapa (Minister for Women, Chil­dren and Senior Citizen), Bina Magar (Minister for Water) and Padma Kumari Aryal (Minister for Land Management, Cooperatives and Pov­erty). Of the three state ministers, one is woman—Ram Kumari Chaud­hary (State Minister for Agriculture and Livestock). This is a clear violation of the con­stitutional provision that requires 33 percent women’s representation in all state organs. Among the 22 ministers, Thapa, Magar and Aryal hold 14th, 21st and 22nd positions respectively in the cabinet. In prin­ciple, the council of ministers consti­tutes ministers, state ministers and deputy ministers, but the state and deputy ministers are barred from participating in cabinet meetings.

A few days ago, Minister Thapa publicly demanded 33 percent women’s representation in the cabi­net. Ruling party leaders didn’t pay any heed.

Constitutional and legal provi­sions stipulate that all three levels of government should appoint 33 percent women, but political parties tend to ignore these provisions in areas where the Election Commis­sion (EC) cannot impose its decision. For example, the EC cannot dictate how the cabinet is formed.

In provincial governments too, women’s representation is disap­pointing. Of the seven provincial governments, Provinces 1 and 3 have no women, which shows sheer negligence on the part of the political parties. In Province 2, there are two women who are state ministers, namely Dimpal Jha and Usha Yadav.

In Province 4, Nara Devi Pun is Minister for Social Development; in Province 5, Aarati Poudel is Minis­ter for Land Management, Agricul­ture and Cooperative; in Province 6, Bimala KC is Minister for Land Management, Agriculture and Coop­erative; and in Province 7, Binita Chaudhary is Minister for Land Reform, Agriculture and Coopera­tive and Maya Bhatta is Minister for Industry, Tourism, and Forest and Environment. That is it.

In local government

The local election held in 2017 after a two-decade hiatus proved his­toric in terms of ensuring 33 percent women representation. Currently, there are 753 local level units—six metropolis, 11 sub-metropolis, 276 municipalities and 460 rural munic­ipalities. The local polls elected a total of 35,041 representatives, of whom around 14,000 were women. This means, for the first time in Nepal’s political history, there is 40 percent women’s representation in local governments.

The number of women at the local level increased significantly due to the legal provision imposed by the EC, which provided that 40 percent of all nominee seats be reserved for women candidates. This included the requirement that between the mayor and the deputy mayor, and between the chair and the deputy chair of rural municipalities, polit­ical parties has to field at least one woman candidate.

The parties mostly picked a male candidate for the mayor’s post and a female candidate for the deputy mayor’s. That is why an overwhelm­ing number of deputies in the local bodies are female and chiefs are male. At the ward level, the Local Level Electoral Act 2017 has reserved two seats in each of the nearly 7,000 ward committees for women, one of which has to be for a Dalit woman.

History of women in cabinet

Political awareness in the coun­try grew after the overthrow of the Rana regime and the establishment of multi-party democracy in 1951. A cursory analysis of the national cab­inets formed after 1951 shows that women’s representation is depress­ingly low; there were no women in several of these cabinets.

The 10-member cabinet formed after the establishment of democ­racy in 1951 and led by Mohan Shum­sher Rana had no woman. In fact, no Cabinet between 1951 and 1959 had any women. The 20-member cabinet formed on May 27, 1959 and led by the late Nepali Congress leader Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala had one woman member, Dwarika Devi Thakurani, making her the country’s first female minister. That cabinet was soon dissolved by King Mahendra, who then imposed a par­tyless Panchayat regime that lasted three decades.

The first cabinet led by King Mahendra himself had no woman. In fact, it wasn’t until 1972 that Nepal got another female minis­ter. The cabinet led by Kirti Nidhi Bista in 1972 had one women min­ister—Kamal Shah—who served as the state minister for health. All cabinets formed between 1972 and 1990, including the interim gov­ernment led by the late NC leader Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, had only one woman minister—save for the 1988 cabinet that had two women.

1990 to 2007

The first elected government led by the late NC leader Girija Prasad Koirala after the promulgation of a new constitution in 1990 had one woman minister, a number that remained unchanged when the cab­inet was later reshuffled. The cabi­nets formed between 1991 and 1995 saw no representation of women. The cabinet formed under the NC leader Sher Bahadur Deuba in September 1995 had no woman, but when it was reshuffled later in the same year, one female minister was appointed.

In all cabinets formed after 1995, the representation of women was negligible; there was either none or one female cabinet member, with one exception in 1996, which saw three female ministers. All the cabinets from 2001 to 2006 had very low representation of women. In this period, the number of female ministers ranged from one to three.

The first cabinet formed after Janaandolan-2 led by the then NC President Girija Prasad Koirala in April 2006 had no female repre­sentation. When the cabinet was reshuffled the following month, two women ministers were inducted.

No improvement after 2007

Despite the constitutional pro­vision of 33 percent women’s rep­resentation introduced after 2007, there has not been much improve­ment in female representation in the cabinet. An examination of all the cabinets formed after 2007 shows that women’s representation remains frustratingly low. After the promulgation of the interim con­stitution in 2007, 10 cabinets have been formed but none has 33 per­cent representation of women.

The first cabinet led by the then NC President Girija Prasad Koirala after 2007 had only two women ministers.

After the first Constituent Assembly (CA) election in April 2008, the then Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal formed an eight-member cabinet, which was expanded to 20 members after a few weeks. The number of women ministers in that cabinet was four, a significant improvement from previ­ous cabinets.

On May 25, 2009, the then CPN-UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal replaced Dahal and formed a two-member cabinet, which was later expanded to nine members, including two women ministers. The cabinet was again expanded to 18, but there was no increase in the representation of women. On February 7, 2011, the then UML leader Jhala Nath Khanal replaced Madhav Kumar Nepal and initially formed a three-member cabinet with no female representation. That cabinet was later reshuffled and expanded to 27 ministers, including eight women. Khanal was succeeded by the then Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai, whose 36-member Cabi­net included 10 women ministers—a huge improvement.

That cabinet was expanded to 38 members and the number of women ministers reached 11. After the dissolution of the CA, the then Chief Justice Khila Raj Reg­mi-led government, formed in 2013, had 10 ministers, only one of whom was female.

After the second CA election in November 2013, the then NC Pres­ident Sushil Koirala became prime minister, whose 19-member cabinet had only three women ministers.

Even after the promulgation of the constitution in 2015, which ensured 33 percent women’s representa­tion in all state organs, the number of women in the cabinet has not increased significantly. The gov­ernment formed under the then CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli in October 2015 had only two women ministers. When the then Maoist Chairman Dahal replaced Oli, the number of female cabinet members dropped to one. The NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba, who succeeded Dahal in 2017, reshuffled his cabinet six times. In his 56-mem­ber ‘jumbo’ cabinet, there were very few women.

Despite some improvement, women’s representation in key decision-making bodies remains low. Women have generally been relegated to the posts of deputies in local bodies and state ministers in provincial governments. This shows that political parties are not serious about meaningful female partic­ipation. They should go beyond tokenism and appoint women to key positions in their party as well as in the government.

2 In the legislature

 APEX Series

WOMEN IN POLITICS

1 In political parties

2 In the legislature

3 In the executive

4 In key appointments

5 Overall picture

With 33 percent women rep­resentatives in both the federal parliament and provincial assemblies, Nepal out­ranks other Asian countries when it comes to female representation in parliament. A close study of par­liaments formed after Nepal’s first parliamentary elections in 1959 clearly shows that women’s rep­resentation is increasing, thanks to some strict constitutional and legal provisions. There has been improvement on this front despite the political leadership’s reluctance to provide due space to female lawmakers. This week, we explore the represen­tation of women in our legislative branch, in what is the second part of the five-part APEX “Women in politics” series.

In 1959, Nepal elected its first bicameral parliament through a general election. Of the 109 mem­bers elected, only one was female. Dwarika Devi Thakurani was in fact Nepal’s first Member of Parliament. She later became a member of the BP Koirala-led cabinet in 1959, in what was Nepal’s first democrati­cally elected government.

After King Mahendra dissolved Nepal’s first parliament as well as the Koirala government and imposed a party-less regime in 1960, there was no democratically elected parliament during the three-decade-long Panchayat era. Instead there was the Ras­triya Panchayat, a mixed bag of people appointed directly by the King and zonal representatives favored by the regime. The first Ras­triya Panchayat formed in 1963 had three women. During the entire Panchayat regime, women’s repre­sentation was nominal.

After the restoration of democracy in 1990, women’s representation increased slightly, but was still very low. In the first parliament elected in 1991, there were six women MPs. The number reached seven in 1994 and 12 in 1999.

 "Naturally, it would be easier for female lawmakers to highlight women’s issues, but they are yet to play the role expected of them. They are learning though" Sashi Kala Dahal, Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly

The bare minimum

The historic changes of 2006 and the subsequent interim constitution of 2007 fixed the minimum number of women in the national parlia­ment, compelling political parties to abide by it. In many cases, the parties tried to flout the constitu­tional requirement. But now the provision of 33 percent women’s representation in the parliament is firmly established.

Still, the parties have only fulfilled the minimum constitutional require­ment and have not taken proactive measures to increase the number of women MPs.

In the first Constituent Assembly (CA) in 2008, the number of women elected under the first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system was 30, which represented just 12.5 percent of the total parliamentarians elected under the system. As many as 26 of these women lawmakers were affiliated to the then Maoist party. The constitutionally-mandated 33 percent women’s representation was fulfilled in the first CA through proportionate representation.

The percentage of women par­liamentarians who won under the FPTP system came down to 4.17 in the second CA elections in 2013, which elected only 10 female candi­dates. Women’s total representation also fell to 30 percent, which was an open violation of the interim constitution. Despite pressure from the Election Commission, parties were reluctant to ensure 33 percent representation of women.

The number of women who win under the FPTP system is still very low. It is primarily because the party leadership thinks women candidates cannot win direct elections. But there is another side to the story; top women leaders of major parties prefer to be MPs under the Propor­tional Representation (PR) category, with almost guaranteed election, whereas contesting an election is always a risky bet. (Perhaps they are well aware of their slim chance of winning in what is still largely a patriarchal society.)

Not in leadership

In the current House of Represen­tative (HoR), of the 165 lawmakers elected under the FPTP category, only six are women. The politi­cal parties met the constitutional requirement by selecting more women in the PR category.

Of the 275 HoR members, 90 are women (32.7 percent). And of the 59 National Assembly (NA) members, 22 are women (37.3 percent). How­ever, women are not in leadership positions. Both the speakers are male whereas the deputy speak­ers are female. (Shashikala Dahal is the deputy speaker of the NA and Shiva Maya Tumbahambe is the deputy speaker of the HoR.) In the provincial assemblies, all deputy speakers are women. This clearly shows women’s secondary role and position—from the center, down to the grassroots.

However, in a recent noteworthy achievement, in the second Constit­uent Assembly (CA), Onsari Gharti was elected the first female Speaker in Nepal’s parliamentary history. Gharti was a leader of the then CPN (Maoist Center). The second CA was transformed into a parliament after the constitution’s promulgation in September 2015.

There is also the provision of 33 percent women’s representation in the parliamentary committees, which are considered mini-par­liaments. Of the 12 parliamentary committees under the HoR, women lawmakers lead four. Of the four committees under the NA, women lawmakers lead two.

Article 84(8) of the constitution clearly states: “Notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this Part, at least one third of the total number of members elected from each political party repre­senting in the Federal Parliament must be women. If women are not so elected as to constitute one third of the elected members of any political party… such political party must, in electing members… so elect that women members constitute at least one third of the total number of members elected to the Federal Parliament from the party.”

Provisional figures

Women’s representation in the provincial assemblies is satisfac­tory, but not particularly encour­aging in that the parties have just met the constitutional provision of 33 percent women’s represen­tation but not gone beyond that. In the 93-member Provincial Assembly (PA) in Province 1, there are 31 women.

In the 107-member PA in Province 2, there are 35 women. In Prov­ince 3, there are 36 women in the 110-member PA. The 60-member PA in Province 4 has 20 women. The number of women in the 87-member PA in Province 5 is 29. There are 13 women in the 40-member PA in Province 6 and 17 women in the 53-member PA in Province 7.

A report of the global Inter-Par­liamentary Union (IPU) says: “With 33.5 percent women parliamen­tarians in the two houses of the Federal Parliament, Nepal is well above the global average of 23.8 percent women parliamentarians.” The average for Asian countries is 19.8 percent. The report says Nepal is ranked 37th out of 193 countries, followed, among South Asian coun­tries, by Afghanistan (55), Pakistan (93), Bangladesh (95), India (147), Bhutan (170), Maldives (178) and Sri Lanka (180).

Globally the number of women in parliaments seems to have stagnated at around 23 percent and women’s progress in politics has been painfully slow. Accord­ing to the Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, it will take 50 years to achieve 50-50 parity at this rate.

Nepali women lawmakers say their representation in the parlia­ment has contributed to highlight the myriad issues women face. “Nat­urally, it would be easier for female lawmakers to highlight women’s issues, but they are yet to play an effective role expected of them. They are learning though,” says Sashi Kala Dahal, Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly. She says women are heading some parlia­mentary committees effectively. “The role of women lawmakers will be more effective as they gain expe­rience in parliamentary practice,” she says.

But Dahal wasn’t happy that deputy speakers of pro­vincial assemblies are ranked below an undersecretary in the new precedence order in Provincial Assembly, and thinks that it needs to be corrected.

With women’s increasing num­bers, and hopefully more mean­ingful participation, in the national and provincial legislatures, we can expect them to formulate laws that address the problems faced by women, who constitute 51 percent of Nepal’s population. Other laws will also be more balanced.

1 In political parties

APEX SERIES

WOMEN IN POLITICS

1 In political parties

2 In the legislature

3 In the executive

4 In key appointments

5 Overall picture

Nepal has four national parties that got over three percent of the total votes cast in the last general elections. And all four are illegitimate. The Nepal Communist  Party, the Nepali Congress, the Fed- eral Socialist Forum Nepal and the  Rastriya Janata Party Nepal have something terrible in common. The representation of women in them is well below the 33 percent threshold as required by electoral laws. It is also against the spirit of the new constitution.

NCP co-chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal recently admitted that his  party was illegal for the same rea- son. No other top leader from the  Big Four has been so forthcoming.  But they are all the same: illegiti- mate. In the 441-member NCP cen- tral committee, there are only 75  women (17 percent).

Meanwhile, in the 84-member central working  committee (CWC) of the Nepali Con- gress, there are 17 women (20.24  percent). Madhes-based parties, which have strongly raised the issue of inclusion, have also failed to ensure enough female participation in their party  structures. In the RJPN’s 815-mem- ber central committee, only 129  women (15.8 percent) have been  appointed and the 268-member cen- tral committee of the FSFN, a coali- tion partner of the Oli government,  has only 28 women (10.44 percent).

It is not just within the formal  structures of political parties  that women are under-represent- ed. There are not enough wom- en MPs, ministers and appoint- ed representatives in important  constitutional bodies.

Our five-part weekly APEX Series, ‘Women in Politics’, deals with this important but often neglected issue. (The first part in this issue focuses on women’s representation within political parties.) Nepal can never be an inclusive society unless  women, who make up over 50 per- cent of the national population, are  proportionally represented in all state organs.    

How the major parties have become male bastions

On May 17, 2018, lead­ers of the CPN-UML and the CPN (Maoist Center) jointly submitted an applica­tion to the Election Commission (EC) to register the Nepal Com­munist Party (NCP), formed after the merger of the two parties. The commission asked the new party to ensure that one-third of its central committee members are women. Initial­ly, the EC took a firm stand that constitu­tional and legal provi­sions do not otherwise allow it to register a new party. Some commission officials suggested giving the NCP a month to meet that requirement. The party, however, was not serious about implementing constitutional and legal pro­visions. Instead, top party leaders started exerting pressure on the EC to com­plete the registration pro­cess at the earliest.

Nepali Congress: The first central working committee (CWC) of the Nepali Congress elected in 1947 did not have a single woman. Neither did another CWC elected in 1950. In fact, all CWCs elect­ed before 1960 lacked women representatives. The 31-member CWC elected in 1960 saw the rep­resentation of one woman. There is no official record of CWC forma­tion and women’s representation during the Panchayat regime, as party activities were banned.

After the restoration of democ­racy in 1990, there was some progress in women’s representa­tion in the party. The 18-member CWC elected by the eighth gener­al convention in 1992 had three women representatives. The number remained unchanged for a few years. The convention held in 2001 elected only one woman in the 18-member CWC. In 2008, the number of wom­en representatives in the CWC reached seven and in 2010 it increased to 17. Now, there are 17 women representatives in the 85-member CWC.

Communist parties: Before 1990, the Nepal Communist Party was the country’s mainstream communist party, although it suf­fered several splits. Records show that there were no women in the central committee (CC) of the NCP from the 1950s to the 1990s. After the restoration of democ­racy, the CPN-ML was the main­stream community force, which was later renamed the CPN-UML. In the first 17-member central committee of the CPN-ML in 1989, there was no woman.

The fifth general convention of the CPN-UML held in 1992 elected only one female representative in its 34-member CC. The sixth gen­eral convention in 1998 did not elect any woman as a CC member. Likewise, the seventh General Convention in 2003 elected four women in its 39-member CC, and the eighth general convention in 2014 elected 22 women in its 93-member CWC, which, though inadequate, is a huge progress.

Former Maoists: Data show that the Maoist party, which launched the 10-year-long insur­gency, has not been serious about women’s representation in the party either. The central com­mittee formed in 1994 did not have any women. In 2000, only four women were elected in the 51-member CC. In 2004, the num­ber plummeted to nine. In 2006, only two women were elected in the 34-member CC. In 2006, in the 34-member CC, the number of women was only two, which remained unchanged till 2008.

In December 2008, the Mao­ists elected only 13 women in the 125-member CC. Then, in 2013, the party formed a 128-member CC but with only 23 women rep­resentatives. After that, the size of the Maoist CC varied substantially from time to time due to multi­ple splits, and there is no official record of the number of women representatives.

(Historical data in the article from the pre-1990 period have been borrowed from journalist Dhurba Simkhada’s book ‘Mulukako Muhar’ published by Himal Kitab)

With a month left before the expiry of two transitional justice mechanisms—the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission on Inves­tigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP)—the government has stepped up consultations with opposition Nepali Congress and other stakeholders. The extended tenure of the two commissions expires on Feb 10.

Minister for Law and Parlia­mentary Affairs Bhanu Bhakta Dhakal, Minister for Energy Barsha Man Pun and NC leader Ramesh Lekhak are in close consultations to finalize the amended draft of the TRC law. “We are holding consul­tations but the government is yet to clarify its position,” Lekhak told APEX. “Once the government comes up with a clear position on how to amend the law, we will make our position clear as well.”

Senior NCP leader and party spokesperson Narayan Kaji Shrestha said discussions are aimed at amend­ing the TRC laws in line with the Supreme Court order. “Consensus has not been achieved yet,” Shrestha said. He added that the current offi­cer bearers of the two commissions are unlikely to be continued.

Shrestha, however, played down the prospect of creation of new mechanisms to replace the two existing commissions. “We will not replace those commissions by new mechanisms. The commissions will be extended but there could be new appointments,” Shrestha said.

There is national and interna­tional pressure to amend TRC Act in line with the Supreme Court order. In 2015, the apex court had struck down amnesty provisions in the Act and sought clarity in provisions related to serious human rights vio­lations. The SC had also criminalized torture and disappearance.

There are two views within the ruling NCP on how to deal with war-era cases. The leaders of former CPN-UML want to prosecute those involved in serious human rights violations such as killing, disappear­ance and rape. The former Maoist leaders prefer blanket amnesty on all war-era cases. Otherwise, they, including Pushpa Kamal Dahal, fear being implicated in war crimes in international courts. The NC, mean­while, is likely to take a position in line with the SC verdict, which will make it difficult to find a solution.

Of late, conflict victims have also sought their involvement in transitional justice. The TRC and CIEDP were originally formed for two years. Their terms have twice been extended by a year. The two commissions have received about 66,000 complaints among them but not a single case has been fully investigated.

Commission members say indirect political interference from political parties crippled their investigation.

Divergent interests of ruling party, conflict victims and international community mean parties will, as an immediate solution, again insert vague positions into the TRC law. If this happens, the TRC will again become a platform to provide jobs to those close to the government and to give continuity to the status quo.

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s ‘instruction’ to federal lower house Speaker Krishna Bahadur Mahara to administer the oath of office and secrecy to parliament-elect Resham Chaud­hary, the prime suspect of the Kailali killings, has raised many moral, political and legal ques­tions. The decision on the swear­ing-in of Chaudhary was jointly taken by PM Oli and co-chairman of his party, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, without consulting other party members and seemingly without any inputs from legal and consti­tutional experts. It clearly signals that Oli wants continued support of Madhes-based parties and will make any compromise to that end. But the decision has invited criti­cism within his own party. Nepal Communist Party leader Bhim Rawal, for instance, has labelled the decision “inappropriate”. On August 23, 2015, a group of protestors had lynched seven policemen and an infant in Tikapur, Kailali, raising fears that the constitution drafting process would again be halted. The police filed a case against Chaudhary, accusing him of being the key archi­tect of the killings (See box). Chaud­hary’s party Rastriya Janata Party Nepal (RJPN) has always denied his involvement.

Political or criminal case?

Krishna Pahadi, a human rights activist and civil society leader, thinks that Chaudhary’s swearing-in signals the growing trend of politicization and institu­tionalization of crime. “What hap­pened in Kailali was not a political movement. It was a grievous crime and the perpetrators should be punished,” said Pahadi, adding that delay in court settlement of the case has invited complications.

Bhimarjun Acharya, a consti­tutional expert, thinks Chaud­hary’s swearing-in is against the constitution and parliamentary rules. “The swearing-in of some­one with a pending criminal case is unconstitutional. The demands of the Tharu population are of a political nature, but the slaugh­ter of seven police officials and an infant is a crime. In fact, Chaud­hary was ineligible for elections under existing laws,” says Acharya. Madhes-based parties, however, are of the view that Chaudhary’s case is a political one and should be withdrawn or resolved through political consensus.

When Oli became prime minister in February last year, he sought the support of the Madhes-based parties and pledged to fulfill their demands. Ever since, the RJPN has continuously asked for the with­drawal of the case against Chaud­hary. Recently, after Oli seemed non-committal, the RJPN issued a seven-day ultimatum on Dec 25, stating that it would withdraw support to the government if its demand was not fulfilled. Although the prime minister has sufficient numbers in Parliament, he wants continued support of the Mad­hes-based parties, if only to demon­strate that he has their back.

Chaudhary’s swearing-in indi­cates a shift in Oli’s position on the Kailali killings. Soon after the incident, Oli had been against talks with the protestors, saying it was a criminal activity and there was no room for talks. In 2016, as the then Home Minister Bimalendra Nidhi prepared to withdraw the case against Chaudhary, the then CPN-UML had protested.

NCP co-chairman Dahal has also been pressing Oli to fulfill the demands of the RJPN. The then CPN (Maoist Centre) led by Dahal had taken the Tikapur killings as a political incident, whereas the then UML led by Oli had termed it a crim­inal case. During his visit to India in 2016, Dahal had met Chaudhary and pledged support in his case.

RJPN’s victory

For the RJPN, Chaudhary’s swearing-in was a political victory that has enhanced its position in the Tharu community. Soon after the swearing-in, RJPN cadres in some far-western Tarai districts broke into celebrations. “We did not issue any directives, but there was spontaneous celebration by Chaudhary’s supporters,” said RJPN leader Laxman Lal Karna, adding, “Chaudhary is innocent and his swearing-in is a step towards hon­oring the public mandate.”

The Oli government spokes­person, Gokul Baskota, also defended the swearing-in: “It is the government’s duty to respect the public mandate. But we are also ready to abide by relevant court decisions, if any.”

RJPN leaders say Chaudhary’s swearing-in is a first and major vic­tory. Their priority now is to create political consensus in order to get the government to withdraw the legal charge against Chaudhary.

Following the swearing-in, there is now a sort of competition between the RJPN and the Sanghiya Samajbadi Forum led by Upendra Yadav, a part of the Oli government, to take credit for this ‘achievement.’

Though Chaudhary is accused of the Tikapur killings, he enjoys strong support in the Tharu com­munity, which was also evident in his victory by a huge margin from Kailali-1 constituency in the 2017 national elections. He had filed his nomination in absentia and had conducted his election campaign secretly. His voters believe he is innocent and should be freed.

What the law says

Article 244 of Parliament Regula­tion deals with the status of a par­liamentarian if he or she is charged with or convicted of a crime.

• If any parliamentarian is arrested, Speaker should inform the house about such arrest.

• If a lawmaker is arrested and charge sheet filed against him or her in court, he or she can­not function or enjoy any rights as a lawmaker, and he or she would not get any remuneration or facilities.

• If the court convicts any lawmaker on a criminal case, he or she will be automatically suspended.

Tikapur and its aftermath

When the first draft of the con­stitution was finalized in July 2015, some political parties and groups protested against it. In the far-western Tarai districts, the Tharu community organized a series of protests demanding an autonomous Tharu province. The Tikapur killings took place on Aug 23, when high-level police officials were trying to negotiate with the Tharu protestors.

It took several weeks to bring the situation under control and prevent possible communal tensions. Political parties were divided. The Nepali Congress and the then CPN-UML termed it a law and order problem, whereas the then CPN (Maoist Center) and Madhes-based par­ties billed it a political incident that called for a political resolu­tion. The government formed a panel to investigate the case, but its report is yet to be made pub­lic. The police subsequently filed a charge-sheet against Chaud­hary for his alleged role in the killings. (After the killings, there were reports of arbitrary arrests, torture and ill-treatment of mem­bers of the Tharu community.)

Chaudhary fled to India and started lobbying for the with­drawal of the case against him. In February last year, he surren­dered before the Kailali District Court, where the case against him is still pending. The court has completed recording the statements of around 100 peo­ple including Chaudhary, but the date of the hearing has not been fixed. As some key docu­ments related to the case were with the Supreme Court, the hearing could not take place in Kailali. Chaudhary filed a case in the apex court, arguing that his detention is illegal. However, upholding the District Court’s decision, the SC on Jan 7 ruled that Chaudhary cannot be freed on bail. Following the verdict, the Kailali District Could is expected to start its hearing soon.

It has been over a decade of prepa­rations to create a bureaucratic structure for federal Nepal. But a solution is nowhere in sight. The Civil Servant Adjustment Ordinance 2075, which was issued in the sec­ond week of December with the aim of deploying civil servants at the provincial and local levels, has instead created multiple problems. Mainly, the provincial and local governments are facing a human resource crunch, hampering service delivery and development projects. The protest over the ordinance has clearly signaled that provincial and local levels will continue to run short of manpower.

 Number of civil servants required

In the federal government : 46,000

In the provinces : 22,000

At the local level : 67,750

Total civil servants at present : 86,000

Constitutional ambiguity

Several commissions have been formed to suggest ways to deploy civil servants under the federal setup. Soon after the promulga­tion of the constitution in 2015, the government formed a high-level committee under the PMO to study federal restructuring. It held several meetings, to no avail.

The government is now facing multiple problems in the deploy­ment of civil servants at the three levels. Kasiraj Dahal, an expert in public administration, says this is the result of ambiguous constitu­tional provisions.

He thinks that as the constitution is silent on specifics, employees in various services are demanding that they be adjusted in an area of their choosing. “It has for instance created difficulties in addressing the demands of employees working at the local level, in Parliament and in the education sector,” Dahal says.

The ordinance on adjustment of civil servants has drawn flak from stakeholders. Representatives of civil servant organizations say they were not consulted. The govern­ment is also facing criticism for issuing the ordinance by bypassing parliament. Nepali Congress, the main opposition, as well as some ruling party lawmakers, have voiced their criticism, putting the government in a tight spot.

In 2017 the then govern­ment had promulgated the Civil Servant Act, but the new Oli government refused to take ownership. “Instead of implementing the previous Act promul­gated when the Nepali Congress was in power, the new government suddenly came up with another law with new provisions. This has created problems,” says NC leader Gagan Thapa.

The Civil Service Act 2074 had a provision of voluntary retirement for the civil servants who do not want to continue on their jobs. But the government did not imple­ment this provision, citing budget­ary constraints. The new govern­ment issued the ordinance thinking that it would take a long time to deploy civil servants.

A major concern of civil servants is that their promotion and transfer to the federal government should not be blocked. They say they are ready to work at the provincial and local levels, but they should not be confined there. They should also be allowed to become Secretary and Chief Secretary in the federal government.

In negotiation with civil ser­vants, the government has agreed to address those concerns through an amendment, but they are not convinced. “The government has blocked the transfer and growth of civil servants. The Act is against the spirit of the constitu­tion,” says Gopal Prasad Pokhrel, Chairman of Nepal Civil Servant Union. He says civil servants will not accept their assignment if their demands are not fulfilled.

No solution in sight

Observers say difficulties in the deployment of civil servants will persist as the government is not serious about coming up with a durable solution, as envisaged in the constitution. As per constitu­tional provisions, provincial and local governments can create their own civil services. The constitution stipulates provincial Public Service Commissions for the selection and deployment of civil servants. But there has been no effort to formulate the Provincial and Local Civil Ser­vice Act. “A draft of laws relating to the basis of provincial Public Service Commissions has been registered in the federal parliament. If the bill is endorsed, it would pave the way for a long-term solution,” says Umesh Prasad Main­ali, Chairperson of Public Service Commission.

Dahal says that forma­tion of the provincial Pub­lic Service Commissions is the only lasting formula for the management of civil servants at the federal, provincial and local levels.

The rigid position taken by civil servant organizations also doesn’t help. Civil servants prefer to work in convenient places. There have been several instances whereby civil servants deployed at the local level have stayed in district headquarters, hampering service delivery. “We have already implemented a federal structure, but civil servants have a centralized mindset and are hesi­tant to work at provincial and local levels,” Dahal says. Civil servants, however, say the incentives to work in rural areas are inadequate.

Observers think that even if the current row is resolved, it would be a herculean task to keep civil ser­vants in rural areas.

Politicization of bureaucracy

Civil servants with right political connections get transferred to urban areas, while those lacking such con­nections are forced into rural areas. Past experience also suggests that civil servants tend to stay in dis­trict headquarters and still enjoy foolproof political protection. Civil servants have also formed unions that stage protests if the government makes an unpopular decision.

“We should go for a win-win formula. The government should assure the concerns of civil servants will be accommodated while endorsing the Federal Civil Service Act. Civil servants should then cooperate,” says Dahal, the administrative expert.

The federal parliament’s National Concerns and Coordinate Commit­tee has invited Law Minister Bhanu Bhakta Dhakal and Minister for Gen­eral Administration and Federal Affairs Lal Babu Pandit to discuss civil servant adjustment. Repre­sentatives of trade unions are also invited in the meeting early next week. But even if the government and civil servant association reach an agreement concerning transfer, career growth and other issues, it will be implemented only after the promulgation of the elusive Federal Civil Servant Act.