Parties must demonstrate sincerity of purpose
The Government of Nepal appears to have adopted a one-step-forward-two- steps-backward policy in its efforts to resolve the crisis arising out of the ongoing agitation by Madhesi groups against certain provisions of the Constitution. On the one hand, the Government appeals for peace and interacts with prominent Madhesi leaders to find a solution. On the other, its security forces seek to brutally suppress the agitation. last week, an important Madhesi leader Rajendra Mahato, president of the Sadbhawana Party, was injured by baton-wielding police in Biratnagar on the India-Nepal border. He is still recuperating at a Delhi hospital. On January 2, three Madhesi activists were arrested and slapped with sedition charges for holding a mock referendum on the demand for a ‘free Madhes' state. Since the Madhesi agitation began in August last year, more than 50 people have died, including one who succumbed to his injuries on January 3. These actions do not create the right environment for reconciliation. The coalition Government in Kathmandu must tone down its belligerence if it wants to reach out to the protesters or else its conflict resolution efforts will come to naught.
In recent weeks, Kathmandu has tried to do some course-correction. Based on Madhesi demands, it has tabled in Parliament, albeit after much dilly-dallying, a Constitutional Amendment Bill which is currently being debated by lawmakers. It has also broadened the scope of negotiable subjects, bringing back contentious issues like provincial demarcations on the table. On January 3, senior leaders from all three of Nepal's major political parties, including Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, met with several Madhesi leaders. Together, they agreed to set up a joint task force that will seek a way out of the crisis. Overall, the meeting was a success — except for the fact that the injured Mr Mahato's Sadbhawana Party representatives stayed away.
Notably, the Sadbhawana Party has broken ranks with the Madhesi coalition (although it is unclear if it has split from the umbrella outfit) and announced another phase of street agitations. This will not only weaken the Madhesi movement but also make it difficult to script a solution that is acceptable to all. This brings us to the strategies adopted by the Madhesi parties themselves. While there is no doubt that they are fighting a legitimate battle and that the Constitution of Nepal, in its current form, does discriminate against minority groups from the plains, the leaders of the protest movement also need to foster a spirit of cooperation. This is true not just for their dealings with Kathmandu but also in their relations with one another. Also, taking needlessly hardline positions and making absurd calls for an independent Madhes state (even if this is just a negotiating tactic) does not help matters. It only polarises the conversation and pushes the warring parties further apart.