The parliament of Nepal will meet tomorrow, April 28, 2006, for its first meeting since King Gyanendra of Nepal was pressured into re-establishing it as a result of weeks of massive popular protests in the country. The meeting represents the dawning of a new era in Nepal, and credit is due to the peoples movement that brought it about. However, the meeting of the parliament is not an end in itself, nor does it fulfil several key demands of the peoples movement. The holding of a constituent assembly, which will be empowered to re-write the Constitution of Nepal, repeal nefarious ordinances put in place by the King and decide on the fate of the monarchy through an all-inclusive democratic process, must be seen as the target towards which all actors in Nepal must strive. The end to the conflict that has blighted the country and the inclusion of all sides in the democratic process is another such goal. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) welcomes the unilateral three-month ceasefire announced by the Maoist insurgents today as a useful step in this direction, and hopes that this will pave the way for a permanent cessation of hostilities. These are all prerequisites for the protection and enjoyment of human rights in the country.
Deserved celebrations have been held in the streets of Nepal. However, as the initial jubilation passes, some hard questions are now emerging. The present issue is that of proper constitutional arrangements and the development of forms of governance that are capable of battling Nepal’s long standing problems. It is at this stage that the Nepalese people need the support and understanding of the global community.
Unfortunately, in the recent past, the ideas of democracy and human rights have been tarnished through their use as mantras to disguise actions undertaken as part of anti-terrorism or the conflicts in the middle-east. Democracy and the respect for human rights cannot be imposed in or transplanted onto a society. They must come as the fruits of non-violent democratic movements, which are vibrant enough to have credibility and momentum, as has been seen in Nepal. It is vital that such movements do not falter before reaching their goals.
The sort of energy that emerged after the Second World War as a result of the war’s terrible price is no longer visible at the international level. This energy needs to be revived through inspiration resulting from events such as those in the streets of Nepal during the last few weeks, and in other countries, such as Ukraine, Lebanon and Georgia, where peaceful and steadfast democratic movements have given rise to positive political change in recent times. Through their actions, the Nepalese people have challenged other societies that live under brutal authoritarian regimes or are beset by internal conflicts to bring about change through democratic popular movements.
As stated above, the peoples movement in Nepal has not yet seen all of its key demands met. The holding of a constituent assembly still needs to be reached. The times devoted to the drafting of constitutions are enormously important from the point of view of the future. They should be treated as times of particular and paramount importance, in which new rules apply. These are times in which political imagination should be enlarged to grasp the real problems facing the nation and to create the avenues for their resolution in the long years to come. Petty quarrels can often result in very limited constitutions, which then create obstacles to the future development of democracy in a nation and the associated enjoyment of human rights. It is necessary during such crucial times to be able to transcend petty considerations and enter into constitutional dialogues that will enable the foundation and expansion of rights and freedoms and firmly ground the responsibilities of the state.
Under these circumstances, while the central onus is on the discussions that will take part in Nepal, these discussions need to also be taking place outside the country, so that the space for discussion will be enlarged. Ultimately, the people of Nepal must steer their own future, but when broader spectrums of people from different parts of the world can also listen to and perhaps contribute to the local debate, this itself can assist in transcending some narrower considerations that some groups may have, notably concerning resolving matters related to the constitution.
The Asian Human Rights Commission fervently hopes that the meeting of parliament in Nepal on April 28, 2006 will usher in a period of energetic and enthusiastic discussion involving all sectors of people in the country. We also hope that the international community, in particular the human rights community, will take part in trying to understand the local debate and in contributing to it in whatever manner is possible. We hope that, much as the South African Constitution made a great contribution to the way in which democratic institutions should develop while balancing vision and fundamental realities, the Nepalese constitutional debate will also turn out to be rich and beneficial both for Nepal and for other societies around the world.
