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

3. MAJOR ISSUES
Disagreement with the name of the province: Participants who were not
from ethnic groups seriously objected to giving the province a name
that recognizes the identity of one particular ethnic group. Further, this
recognition also provides them prime rights in the province. However
the ethnic participant from Syangja supported the federal arrangement
because, as he said, “There is no alternative to accepting the Federal
structure since the old mechanism failed to address the issues of the
people. We must accept this change.”
TExpectations from the new structure:
People hope that unlike the unitary
system, federalism will provide more local
opportunities and services. Therefore
participants found it difficult to realize
that federalism is based on the principle of
interdependence but not self-dependence.
They hesitated to accept services like
education, health at easy accessible, no matter
how close, if they were within the adjoining
province. Similarly, participants were very
conscious about the decentralization of
power and authority, and concerned about
the centralized fiscal system. However, other
voices provided a rationale for this provision.
Mr. Bhim Karki, UML representative from
Manang stated, “The local infrastructure is
not ready for a decentralized fiscal system
and thus the local government must be
empowered while ensuring the provision of
a decentralized system in due time.”
Diverse understanding on the right to
self determination: As usual participants
understand the right of self determination
in various ways, and the ethnic people are
interested in obtaining clear information
about this right for aboriginal people.
However, Khemraj Adhikari the representative
of Nepali Congress from Tanahu argued that,
“If the right to self determination is provided,
it should be guaranteed to all sectors.
Otherwise there is no use of the right to self
determination.” The resource person clarified
that there are two extreme opinions about
the right to self determination: one that does
not support this right for ethnic people at
all, and the other extreme that is in favor of
forming separate states through the right to
self determination. Neither of these extremist
views supports building the nation.
Demand for assurance of Women’s and
Dalit’s rights: Both women and Dalits
demand that their rights be ensured in the
federal structure. Khagi Sara Thapamagar
asserted, “Women’s inclusion should be
proportional and a reservation of 50% seats
in administration and education at the
central level and 32% at the local level should
be ensured for 10 years.” The Dalits asked for
compensation for being exploited by the
state and Mr. Khadga Bahadur Nepali asked
that the practices of discrimination against
Dalits be considered not only as social crimes
but as crimes against the state.
Development of Minorities in federal structure:
The participants want to ensure that all minority
communities have sufficient opportunities to
develop in the ethnic province. Therefore the
participants proposed conducting actual field
visits before considering autonomous region,
protective or special area s for any particular
ethnic community. Discrimination in favor of
certain minorities could result in continuous
conflict unless it is based on their actual numbers,
underdevelopment and inaccessibility.
12 Federalism Dialogues Series 5