— KUSUM SHRESTHA
kusum.jpg (2300 bytes)
Eminent constitutional lawyer KUSUM SHRESTHA is well known advocate of local governance. Shrestha, who played a major part in drawing up the Local Self-Governance Act, spoke to SPOTLIGHT on the legal and constitutional implications of the government’s decision not to extend the local bodies’ tenure for a year. Excerpts:
How do you see the legal and constitutional implications of the expiry of the tenure of local bodies?
This move is a constitutional delinquency on the part of the government. Extension of the tenure by another year should have been the† first preference, as there is a categorical pronouncement in the act about the extension. The government should justify the reasons behind not holding the election.
The government is said to be considering forming all-party committees to operate the local bodies. How do you look at it?
So far as other alternatives are concerned, the law has not envisaged the mechanisms to substitute the local government by all-party committees. How can a selected body be an alternative to the popularly elected local government? This is an intentional step taken to weaken the representative bodies.
What does the act say about extension of tenure?
The government has to cite the cause why it did not they hold the elections. If it cannot give the reason for it, the government must extend the tenure of the local bodies for another year. There is a provision of accountability before dissolving them. The government cannot just pave the way for expiry of tenure of local bodies without announcement of a new election date. The spirit of the act is that the government cannot vacate the local bodies.
How do you see the role of local bodies in promoting democracy at the grass-roots level?
Democracy means people’s participation, which is known as a participatory democracy. The local government has existed since time immemorial. The laws have just institutionalized and given a name to the traditional system. After the revolution of 1950, the government envisaged ways to institutionalize the local bodies. Actually, the institutionalization of the local bodies took place during the time of Panchayat system. Despite autocratic system of the government, the liberal aspect of the Panchayat was the institutionalization of local government at the grass-roots level. Local government has become an orphan now, as nobody is there to raise a voice when it is has been virtually dismissed.
What will be the situation now?
After the expiry of the tenure, the grass-roots level political institutions have seen a political vacuum. Who will fill that vacuum? It breaks the chain of representative government. It will create chaos and confusion in the grass-roots level.
‘Hollowness Of Deuba’s Commitment To Democracy Has Been Exposed’
— RAJENDRA PANDEY
rajendra.jpg (3834 bytes)
Former member of parliament and head of the Local Bodies Department of the CPN-UML RAJENDRA PANDEY describes as undemocratic the government’s decision not to extend the tenure of local bodies. A former president of the Dhading District Development Committee, Pandey spoke to SPOTLIGHT on the issue. Excerpts:
How do you see the decision of the government allowing the tenure of local bodies to expire?
It is an undemocratic, illegal and unconditional act of the government. It is a conspiracy to create a situation without any elected representative in the country. Following the dissolution of the House of Representatives, the country does not have elected representatives at the top. After the expiry of the local bodies’ tenure, villages are without representatives. Whose interest is Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba serving by not extending the tenure of local bodies?
What is the political situation in the villages?
There is confusion and anarchy in the villages. Sher Bahadur Deuba’s decision serves the interests of the Maoists who have been working to destroy the local bodies for last six years. By a single stroke, Prime Minister Deuba and Local Development Minister Khum Bahadur Khadka have helped the Maoists do what they could not do in the last six years. The decision exposes the hollowness of Deuba’s and Khadka’s commitment to democracy.
Do you think all-party committees can replace the elected bodies?
How can nominated bodies replace elected bodies? Forming all-party committees would be undemocratic. There is no question of our participating in such committees. The government should have extended the tenure of local bodies and announced the date for the new polls.
Minister Khadka has said the government dissolved the local bodies to replace representatives elected fraudulently during the tenure of Bam Dev Gautam as deputy premier and home minister. How do you look at this remark?
If that is so, why didn’t Khum Bahadur Khadka dissolve the local bodies and call new elections earlier, since the Nepali Congress has been leading the government for last four and half years. Khadka wants an excuse for his undemocratic action. Let’s not forget he has also kicked out 55,000 Nepali Congress workers elected to the local bodies.
What problem will the people face following the expiry of the local bodies’ tenure?
First of all, it will disrupt development activities at the local level. Most importantly, people will have to go to the district headquarters to get permission and recommendation for small matters. It will create a major vacuum in the villages. Local bodies run schools, hospitals, campus and other social activities in grass root levels.
Why did not your party press Prime Minister Deuba to extend the tenure a month before the stalemate?
We met Prime Minister Deuba in March and asked him to announce the date for elections of the local bodies. Deuba argued that the law-and-order situation was not conducive to holding elections. He agreed to extend the tenure for another year. When a politician with the stature of Prime Minister Deuba changed his mind, what could we do?
Don’t you think formation of all-party committees is a viable alternative?
The alternative to elected bodies must be new ones formed through elections. Had western donor agencies not supported the local bodies, the government would have dismissed it many years ago. Since the last many years, donors have contributed a lot to improve the capacity of local bodies in implementing development projects. We have to appreciate their contributions. The decision will now hamper poverty alleviation projects at the grass-roots level. I don’t understand the reason behind this anti-national and unconstitutional step. The representatives of local bodies refused to resign even in the midst of death threats issued by the Maoists.
Is you party considering to challenge the decision in court on behalf of the local representatives?
As a political party, we are pressuring the government to set the date for local elections. We want to contest the elections and face the people. We are concerned by the callous manner in which the government decided allow the local bodies’ tenure to expire.