English - Support to Participatory Constitution Building in Nepal ...

2. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED TAMUWAN
PROVINCE FEDERALISM DIALOGUE
The fifth Federalism Dialogue was held in Pokhara, capital of proposed
Tamuwan province, from 14 May to 16 May 2010. The participants
were from all parts of the proposed Tamuwan territory, including the
Himalayan districts (Manang and Mustang) and hill districts (Kaski,
Lamjung, Dhading, and Gorkha). Both the Hindu castes (Hill Brahmin,
Chhetri and Dalit) and the major ethnic groups (Gurung, Magar and
Newar) were represented. The participants came from different walks of
life, and included local party leaders, ethnic, Dalit and women activists,
and members of civil society.
The Tamuwan dialogue was significant in
many aspects.
Informed Debate: Participants had not
read or studied the report of the CA CSRDSP.
Their primary sources of knowledge were,
as noted by the participants of previous
Federalism Dialogues, limited to the claims
of ethnic organizations, party propaganda
and/or media reporting. The participants felt
the three day Dialogue was significant for:
(a) enabling them to acquire a much greater
degree of information about the proposed
federal structure, and Tamuwan province in
particular, (b) assembling influential people
from different castes and ethnicities and
political parties living in different parts of the
proposed territory of Tamuwan to discuss,
debate, and interact on several critical
issues of federalism, i.e., autonomy, right to
self determination, minority rights, and (c)
creating a positive mindset to live together
under the new federal political structure.
Consensus Building: Discussion began
with differences of opinion on the name and
territory of the proposed Tamuwan province.
Some participants, particularly from hill
Hindu high castes and Dalits, objected to
the name Tamuwan since it is associated
with the identity of Gurung ethnicity.
This represented, in a larger context, their
opposition to “caste/ethnic based federalism”.
They argued that ethnic federalism would
have a negative impact on social harmony,
national unity and integration. The Janjati
participants also (mis)understood that the
CSRDSP had adopted the principle of ethnic
federalism. Partially because of the resource
persons’ explanations that the proposed
provinces were not designed in line with
ethnic federalism and mainly because of
the agreement to remove the claims of
political prime rights (e.g., by Gurung in
Tamuwan), the participants agreed to frame
federal units on the basis of ethnic identity.
Eventually, they endorsed the name of the
province, Tamuwan, as well. This consensus
sends a larger message that compromise
can be achieved to mutually retain an ethnic
provincial name and withdraw the provision
10 Federalism Dialogues Series 5