|
Workshop Report on Crisis in Democracy &
Role of the Youth
Organised by Center
For Social Transformation, Nepal (CST- Nepal)
21 November 2004
Kathmandu, Nepal
Centre For Social Transformation, Nepal
(CST-Nepal) organised a one-day (Nov. 21, 2004) workshop in Kathmandu
on "Crisis in Democracy & Role of the Youth" with
the support of Fredrich Ebert Stiftung (FES). Youth leaders from
various student and youth organisation participate in the workshop.
Lead discussion paper was presented by a student activists and
leader Mr. Bishwa Prakash Sharma and commented by political leaders,
social and human rights activists and commentators from various
parties and organisation.
The workshop was divided into two parts. First
was ceremonial, introductory and presentation by lead discussant
followed by comments form assigned commentator and commentators
from various parties and professionals. Second session was open
discussion and comments from the participants followed by responses
from commentators and lead discussant. Workshop was chaired
by chair of the CST- Nepal. Secretary of CST- Nepal welcomed
the participants and highlighted the program. Hon. Narhari Acharya,
former Minister and Central Committee Member of Nepali Congress
party inaugurated the workshop. Mr. Dev Raj Dahal a renowned
social scientist and Country Representative FES Nepal spoke
on the importance of the workshop.
Dev Raj Dahal - Representative FES Nepal
Office
Mr. Dahal a renowned social scientist and
author of many acclaimed books on civil society, democracy,
development and social issues spoke at the beginning to set
the tone of the workshop. He began by saying that the crisis
of democracy is the crisis of politics and the fundamental objective
of democracy is to provide youth - a comprehensive knowledge
of what they are expected to know about positive national values,
about politics and their role as sovereign citizens. He drew
the attention of the participants to current state of youth
in Nepal ranging from hopelessness, or alienation, emigration
abroad, rebellion or even escaping into a kind of odious form
of consumerism. He observed that searching answers to the question
of structure of Nepali State, society, citizens and its relationship
with collectives, cultural moorings and values would provide
some way out. Thus " (A) genuinely civic praxis can connect
them (youth) to societal development, prevent the growth of
national pessimism and build their confidence to enter into
a successful path of character building for good citizenship.
Presentation of the Paper and comment by
a lead commentator and the panel of commentator.
Bishwaprakas Sharma, former president
of Nepal Student Union and prominent youth activists presented
a very thought provoking written paper on Nepali which served
as the basis for deliberation of the workshop. The title of
the paper was "Crisis of democracy and role of Youths".
The paper was broadly divided on six parts. First introductory
part linked the question of youth and democracy since society
always looked towards youth for change and furthering social
dynamics.
Second section discussed the current state
of democracy. Democracy at sickbed not been able to walk and
move. Sharma drew the beautiful binary paradoxes of state of
democracy between desired and actual. How constitution has imagined
Parliament, King, Parties and Prime Minister and how they are
functioning at this moment of history. The mismatch between
imagination and functioning of institution is born out of different
perceptions and reading of situation by the major political
actors of the country namely the King and political parties.
Political contradiction has furthered since October 4 , 2002
when the King used political situation emerged then to further
his position by assuming all executive power. His desire to
be active under the parliamentary multi-party system is creating
disjoints in the functioning of the system. Divided political
parties have furthered the deadlock. This situation is further
complicated by the threats to peaceful politics by the Maoist
violence and insurgency. Youths have to find their role in safeguarding
democracy at backdrop of derailment of constitutional process
and pressure of Maoist using violence as a method of political
change.
Third section deals with the factors which
ills democracy in Nepal. Major factors are classified as - psychological,
behavioural and political ones. Psychological position taken
by major political actors such as Monarchy never reconciling
with the popular demands and aspiration, it's supposed claim
of nation and state building, similarly psychological make-up
of the political parties - namely arrogance, self righteous
claims, individualist nature and parochialism.
Fourth section talks about what should have
been. It is basically derivatives popular movement and mandate
of election. Forgetting struggle and promises made to people,
placing power rather than people created the problem. This section
lays down some of progressive programs - socio-economic reforms
encompassing land, gender, caste and ethnic group, environment;
constitutional reforms; civil-military relation; administrative
reform. The main argument of this section is about linking delivery
of services and legitimacy in democracy.
Fifth section deals
with role of youth in the context of current democratic crisis
and suggests following:
- Various youth groups and organisations
can come together to form Youth Parliament, which could deliberate
on current political impasse, violent conflict and come up
with common position.
- Starting unified pressure movement to restore
normalcy and democratic constitutional order.
- Working towards committed and effective
youth movement.
- Commitments to fulfil promises and make
sure agendas are implemented sincerely.
- Commitments to work and aspire to build
democratic political culture.
- Firm pledge to dynamics social and political
reform and matching activism to promote the change.
- Work for building trust in politics, which
is vital for enhancing the effectiveness and prestige of democracy.
Comments on the Paper
Lead Commentator Mr. Shankar Pokharel
- member of dissolved parliament and former President of Student
Union, Tribhuvan University Central Campus was principle commentator
on the paper. He was in agreement with overall structure of
the paper however he has some point and explanation add. Any
sound analysis of current crisis of democracy in Nepal needs
to place in the context of success and failure of 1990 movement.
Major shortcoming after 1990 was because of lack trust among
the partners of the movement. The achievement of 1990 was no
doubt great but some viewed change through dogmatic lens, which
created distrust among the major political actors. Because of
this differing perception, many important agendas of political
and social transformation suffered. One of them was we could
not reform military. Similarly our views on Maoist insurgency
also differed party-to-party, institution-to-institution, and
person-to-person. However, current crisis has given us both
challenge and opportunity. He asked youth to understand the
need of restructuring the State for desired social and political
transformation. He asked youths to study more and develop expertise
so that they lead the changes and ensure the implementation
of agendas of reform and change.
Panel of Commentator
Khagendra Sangraula, a leading social
and literary critic asked youths to find their role in the backdrop
of events of June 1, 2001 and October 4, 2002. Democratic parties
are confronted with the monarchy, which has feudal foundation.
Political parities can maintain their relevance in this confrontation
only through ensuring internal democracy. The strength to fight
comes from righteous image of the representative institutions.
Youths have to ensure that parties functions properly and effectively.
Social dynamics are best represented by the youths and they
need to taken seriously.
Hari Roka, a political commentator
and research scholar at JNU, New Delhi said that the today's
political crisis emerged because of political contradiction
emerged out of relationship between representative dimension
of political parties and feudal character of the Monarchy. The
obstacles to emergence of new order in Nepal are prevalence
of feudal and traditional social orders and institutions. Youths
need to gear up to change such social and political structure,
which impedes the changes. Youths can bring different political
grouping into one forum for collective deliberation of social
change.
Sudip Pathak, President of Human Rights
Organisation of Nepal raised the issue of commitment on the
part of youth movement to further the social and political change.
He highlighted the need for unity of action and program among
various youth groups. He said adhering to due process of rule
is must for any meaningful resolution of the crisis.
Gyanendra Karki, leader of Nepali Congress
Party (Democratic) and former President of Student Union of
Tribhuvan University Central Campus said political parties have
failed to attract youths into politics. We need to open to new
possibilities and issues so that we can address the crisis.
Youths can bring vigour and change in the parties which is so
important for the working of democracy.
Pradeep Gyawali leader of UML and member
of parliament at dissolved house said rather than blaming each
other we should look afresh to crisis of democracy in Nepal.
First there should be some consensus regarding the crisis and
then move toward the resolution of that crisis. Youths can bring
that fresh look and new perspective to the situation analysis
and ways to address them because their future is based on hope
not on despair. Therefore search for meaningful transition between
older generation leadership and new is urgent. Legacy of old
leadership is important but youths have to understand the success
and failure of old generation. It seems that we have lost dreams
amidst the chaos and confusion, let us work toward generating
new and fresh dreams so that we can prove that we have the future.
Hardayesh Tripathi general secretary
of Nepal Sadvavana Party and Member of Parliament at dissolved
house warned youths that they needed to careful since many use
movements for securing power and for personal narrow gain. Meaningful
and determined movement is essential for addressing the crisis.
He said new constitution through constituent assembly is the
only way out in this current impasse.
Narahari Acharya, Central committee
member of Nepali Congress Party and former Law and Parliamentary
Affairs Minister said that the dogmatic adherence to the Constitution
of 1990 lead to current impasse. Political and constitutional
arrangement after 1990 could not properly define the constitutional
monarchy similarly political society failed to grasp the fast
changes in social, economic, technology. Poverty of ideas and
action also marred the working of political parties. Youth needs
to push redundant leadership but they should first prepare themselves
and assure the society on their intent and effectiveness. Role
of youth is ever-present and ever need for changing society.
Participants' intervention and discussion
After comments from panel the floor
was open for discussion. Following participants placed their
concerns and opinion on the floor. Jitendra Thapa ( FIEUN),
Badri Timilsina ( Nepal National Teachers' Union), Navraj Dahal
( FES) , Shyamlal Tandukar ( youth activists), Surendra Pandey
( Nepal Tarun Dal -democratic),Niraj Acharya ( youth activists)
, Tek Raj Paudel ( NSU), Mahdukar Khanal ( youth activists),
Binita Adhikari ( President Padmakanya Campus Student Union),
Rajendra Ghimire ( Youth Campaign), Gagan Thapa ( former Gen.
Sec Nepal Student Union), Shushil Chaudary ( Youth activists),
Ram Chandra Ghimire ( Political activist), Devendra Prasad Paudel
(NSU) Bal Bahadur K.C. ( Student), Krishan Khatiwada ( Youth
activists), Sanu Ghimire ( Student), Prakash Snehi ( NGO federation
of Nepal- Bajhang), Keshar Pandit a youth activists. The over
all concern of the discussion focused around the host of issues
such as - learning from the past mistakes; comparative learning
from youth movements around the world; whether youths can be
political, apolitical or non political; image of youth movement
and leadership; question of discipline and character; need for
study circle and effective political education for better performance;
youths and gender sensitivities; addressing social issues such
drug, environment, social harmony. The major theme of debate
was apathetic nature of today's youth on politics.
|
