संघीय शासन प्रणालीमा दलितको स्थान

- मान बहादुर बीके

नेपालको अन्तरिम संबिधान, २०६३ को पहिलो संशोधनले “लोकतान्त्रिक शासन प्रणाली”को प्रत्याभुती गरेको छ । केही झिनो विरोधका अलावा सामन्तवादी केन्द्रिकृत एकात्मक शासन व्यवस्थालाई स्वायत्त संघीय प्रणालीमा रुपान्तरण गर्न सवै राजनैतिक दल तथा जातजाती र समुुुदायहरु सहमत भईसकेका छन । तथापी कस्तो स्वरुपको संघीय प्रणाली भन्ने भने टुङ्गो लागेको छैन । आत्मनिर्ण्र्ाासहित या रहितको, संघ निर्माणको आधार जनसंख्या हुने या भौगोलिक वा जातीय उद्गम हुन,े कतिवटा प्रदेश हुुने आदि सवालहरुमा अहिले चर्को वहस चलिरहेको छ । यस वहसमा सवैभन्दा बञ्छितीकरण र छुवाछुत कै मार भोगिरहेका दलित समुदाय भने अलमलमा परेका छन । संघीय शासन प्रणालीमा सामन्तवादी केन्द्रिकृत एकात्मक शासनको सबै भन्दा ठुलो मार खेपेका दलित समुदायको सत्ता र श्रोतमा तुलनात्मक रुपमा गुणात्मक पहुच पुग्ने कुरामा दर्ुइमत छैन । तथापी अहिलेसम्म प्रस्तावित भौगोलिक, जनसंाख्यिक वा जातीय आधारमा तय गरिने कुनै पनि ढाँचामा यो समुदायको वाहुल्यता रहने एउटा पनि प्रदेश देखिदैन । न त उनीहरुको अवस्थालाई हेरेर कतैवाट प्रस्ताव नै आएको छ । अन्तरिम संबिधानले समावेशी लोकतन्त्रलाई प्रत्याभुत गरेको हुदा यस सवालमा आवश्यक छलफल, वहस र आन्दोलन हुनु जरुरी छ ।

राष्ट्रिय तथ्याङ्कमा १३ प्रतिशतमा प्रस्तुत गरिएको दलित समुदाय हालै राष्ट्रिय समाज कल्याण संघले ६ जिल्लामा गरेको अनुसन्धानले २२ प्रतिशत देखाएको छ । यसले दलित संघसंस्था र नेताहरुले न्युनतम पनि दलित जनसंख्या २० प्रतिशत भएको दावी गर्दै सो अनुरुप आरक्षण लगायतका मागहरु अघिसार्दै आएको कुरालाई पुष्टि गरेको छ । देशको कुल जनसंख्याको पञ्चांशमा रहेको भएता पनि धेरैठाउँ छरिएर रहेको तथा जग्गा बिहिनताले गर्दा बर्साईसर्राई भईरहने हुदा कुनै निश्चित ठाउँमा दलित समुदायको बाहुल्यता पाईदैन । यसै कारणले गर्दा दलित समुदायले गैह्र-प्रादेशिक निर्बाचन क्षेत्र ९ल्यल-तभचचष्तयचष्ब ऋियलकतष्तगभलअथ० को माग राख्दै आएका छन । यस्तो अवस्थामा जनताका नजिक शासन ब्यवस्था पुर्‍याउन ठूला प्रदेश भन्दा पनि साना प्रदेशहरु प्ा्रभावकारी हुने देखिन्छ । संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिकामा ५०, नाईजेरियामा ३६ र नेपाल भन्दा सानो स्वीट्जरल्याण्डमा २६ प्रान्तहरु छन । छिमेकी देश भारतले पनि २५ बाट २८ पुर्‍याएको छ । त्यसै गरी हाम्रो प्रादेशिक बाँडफाँडलाई अलि सानो वनाउन सकियो भने एकआध तर्राई र पश्चिमी मध्य पहाडमा दलित समुदायको केही बाहुल्यता देख्न सकिन्छ । नेपालमा हालसम्म अघी सारेको प्रदेशको संख्या बढीमा २५ सम्म रहेको छ । राष्ट्रिय जनजाती पार्टर्ीी १२, अखिल नेपाल जनजाती सम्मेलनले ११, नेकपा (माओबादी) ले ९, नेकपा (एमाले), नेता राजेन्द्र पाण्डेले १४, मधेशी राष्ट्रिय मञ्चका महासचिव अमरेश नारायण झाले १०, जनमोर्चा नेपालका परि थापाले ९, डा. महेन्द्र लावतीले १३, गोबिन्द न्यौपानेले ८, डा. बिजय राज शर्माले १५ र नेका-(प्र.) का नेता डा. नारायण खड्काले साविकका ५ वटा बिकास क्षेत्रलाई नै प्रदेशमा रुपान्तरण गर्ने सुझाव प्रस्तुत गरेका छन । नेकपा (माओबादी) बाहेक अन्य ठुला राजनैतिक दलहरुवाट आधिकारिक ढाँचा भने अहिलेसम्म बाहिर आउन सकेको छैन । यी मध्य भुगोलबीद् स्व. हर्क गुरुङको धेरै पहिला देखि नेपाललाई २५ वटा स्वायत्त जिल्ला (प्रदेश)मा शासन अधिकार बिभाजन गर्नुपर्ने सुझाव नै सबैभन्दा बढी प्रदेशको सुझाव हो । उनको यो बिभाजनमा भुूगोल, जनसंख्या र भाषिक/सांस्कृतिक बाहुल्यतालाई ध्यान दिईएको बताईन्छ ।

राष्ट्रिय जनगणनालाई आधार मान्ने हो भनेपनि २० प्रतिशत भन्दा बढी दलितको जनसंख्या भएका जिल्लाहरु ९ वटा (सप्तरी, म्याग्दी, बाग्लुङ, पर्बत, जाजरकोट, सर्ुर्खेत, दैलेख, अछाम र डोटी) रहेका छन । त्यसै गरी ती जिल्लाहरुकै सेरोफेरोमा १५ देखि २० प्रतिशत दलितहरुको जनसंख्या रहेको छ । जस्तै तर्राईमा सिराहा, धनुषा र महोत्तरीमा र पश्चिमको मध्य पहाडमा लमजुङ, कास्की, स्याङ्जा, गुल्मी, आर्घर्ााँची, प्युठान, रोल्पा, बाजुरा, बझाङ र डडेल्धुरामा दलितहरुको जनसंख्या १५ प्रतिशत भन्दा बढी देखिन्छ । यो अबस्थालाई दृष्टिगत गर्दा साना प्रदेशको अवधारणा अर्न्तर्गत महोत्तरी, धनुषा, सिराहा र सप्तरी मिलाएर एउटा प्रदेश; म्याग्दी, बाग्लुङ, पर्बत र कास्की मिलाएर एउटा र अछाम, दैलेख, जाजरकोट र सर्ुर्खेत मिलाएर एउटा प्रदेश बनाईयो भने कम्तीमा तर्राईमा एउटा र मध्य पहाडमा २ वटा प्रदेशमा तुलनात्मक रुपमा दलितहरुको श्रोत र शासनमा बाहुल्यता -करिव २५ प्रतिशत) रहन्छ । यसो हुन सकेमा केन्द्रिय सरकार सम्म दलितहरुको पहुंच पुग्न सक्नेछ भने उनीहरुको राजनैतिक मोलमोलाई क्षमतामा अभिबृद्धि हुनेछ । साथै सबै प्रदेशमा समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्वको प्रत्याभुती देशको संबिधानले नै गर्नु पर्छ । दलित र अन्य जातीहरुको संख्या अत्यन्तै न्युनहुने प्रदेशमा ती समुदायको प्रतिनिधित्व सुनिश्चित गर्न गैह्र भौगोलिक निर्वाचन क्षेत्रको ब्यवस्था हुनु पर्दछ । प्रतिनिधित्वको अलावा क्षमता अभिबृद्धि र सशक्तीकरणका लागि शिक्षा, स्वास्थ्य, आर्थिक अवसर आदिका क्षेत्रमा बिशेष ब्यवस्था संबैधानिक तवरले हुनर्ुपर्दछ । त्यस्ता प्रतिनिधित्व हुन नसक्ने अल्पसंख्यकहरुको अधिकार संरक्षणका लागि प्रत्यक प्रदेशमा एउटा अधिकार सम्पन्न अल्प संख्यक सम्बन्धि आयोग स्थापना गर्नुपर्दछ । यस्ता समुदायहरुको हित र अधिकार संरक्षणको दायित्व केन्द्रिय सरकारले समेत लिनर्ुपर्दछ ।

Inclusion of Dalits

By DR KHAGENDRA N SHARMA

During the post Janandolan II, various issues of inclusion have been articulated and sharpened by various communities, agencies, organizations and individuals. The most glaring example that emerged was that of the Madhesi issue followed by that of the indigenous and ethnic communities. Women’s inclusion has also been favorably considered and lobbied. But the Dalit issue has not been pushed as hard as the other issues have been. The House of Representatives (HOR) declared Nepal a state free from untouchable. Are the Dalits flattered that they are no more untouchable? Has the untouchable factor really gone? Why else is there no heat in the Dalit campaign for equitable inclusion in the power structure?
In legal terms, the untouchable factor had been abolished in 1964 amendment of the old Civil Code which was the basis not only for the courts but also for the entire social system. Even in the Panchayat system that stood for the preservation of old values, there was no provision for caste discrimination and some Dalit representation was visible here and there.

But there was a great discrimination in behavioral terms. This distinction has to be noted and evaluated whether there has been a real difference. In legal terms, the HOR declaration is weaker than the amendment of 1964 which had the force of a law. In practical matters, the caste discrimination still persists. Dalits are still physically assaulted for just touching the person or the food or drink of the upper caste and tortured as a form of punishment.

The distribution pattern of Dalits has made them a minority community throughout the country. This is one main reason why the Dalit voice is not very loud and daunting. Contrasted with this, the ethnic communities are area specific and they are in a majority in each respective geographic region. There is a Limbu area, a Rai area, a Magar area, a Tharu area; but there is no Kami area, no Damai area, no Sarki area, no Kasai area and so on.

So, when Limbus can call for a Limbuwan autonomy, or the Tharus can call for a Tharuwan autonomy, the Kamis and Damais or the Sarkis cannot call for a Kamiwan autonomy, or a Sarkiwan autonomy, or Damaiyan autonomy. There is no area specific reference also in the case of the Brahmins and the Chhetris, but there is a big difference. The Brahmin-Chhetri combine holds politico-economic power and social influence. In fact it is this superimposing status of the Brahmin-Chhetri combine that has triggered most of the present socio-political controversy.

The social discrimination factor is present not only between the Dalit and the high caste people, but it is also equally present between the various Dalit castes themselves. It is this inter-community discrimination that is impeding the growth of the Dalits as a class. They can neither claim the autonomy on a regional basis like the ethnic communities, nor can they have a strong organization which requires solidarity among the participating communities. Most of the Dalit population can be characterized as illiterate, poor and destitute. They are, therefore, always vulnerable. They are economically exploited, socially despised and politically weakened. They have the least access to all channels of socio-economic enhancement.

Although the Dalits are the most deprived class in the Nepali context, they have some very good and strong qualities. As they do not have an area specific identity, they have the national identity. This is the best ground for the consolidation of a strong nation. In the context of building a new federal structure, the Dalits can retain a total national identity. (In this sense, the Brahmin-Chhetri combine also fall on the same ground: one good side in an otherwise oppressive class.)

The ethnic groups have not addressed the issues of the Dalit communities, because they feel that the Dalits are the hybrids of the Brahmin-Chhetri combine and they are not the indigenous Mongoloid stock as most of the ethnic groups are.

However, the ethnic communities are depriving themselves, by this means, of a great support from the Dalit class. The Dalits constitute about 15 percent of the Nepali population. Their combined strength could have worked as a greater pressure than the recent Madhesi movement.

The ethnic identity is a negative pressure for the division of the nation into federal units. Such a partisan tactics weakens the social fabric that sustains a nation. Instead, the call for the formation of federal units should be based on the common aspirations of the people living together in a contiguous geographical region, bound by socio-historical bonds.

Supposing a division on the basis of ethnic identity is conceded as the basis of a federal structure, several inter-communal questions will emerge. What will happen to the other minority communities? Will the ethnic state declare a permanent war against those communities that are different from the ethnic state group? Will it always regard the Brahmin-Chhetri combine as their superior enemy as of now, and guard against their entry into the new power structure? Will the ethnic state regard the Dalit communities as a subordinate class and continue to mistreat it? Will the issue of inclusion end with the establishment of an ethnic state? Will the ethnic state ask or order the other communities to evacuate their state? Will it not be paranoia to pursue a policy of ethnic cleansing?

It is evident that the Dalits are the most deprived groups, wherever they are living. The ethnic groups have nothing to lose in lobbying for the cause of the Dalits. In fact, they can gain a nationwide support for their cause of autonomy: an autonomy that is holistic in goal setting. The autonomy should be for the entire people living in a specific area or region. A call for such a regional identity will not only get spontaneous support of the local or regional people, but will also create a viable local unit within a unified, strong nation.

The major ethnic group or groups living in a specific region will obviously get the major portion of the cake of power, but they will be hardly able to eat the cake if the other components of the region are not given a proportional share of the cake.

Given the multiethnic nature of Nepali society, the inclusion issue is an issue of national integration. We are not trying to break the nation into incompatible psychological units. Nor are we trying to build a pyramid of tribal states or units. The ethnic call for federalization can have a greater logic and strength by including the Dalit aspirations in their present agenda. Conversely, the Dalit movement will also create a greater political arena by aligning with the ethnic movement. The Dalits should also take two simultaneous initiatives. First, they should start a war to do away with their inter community discrimination. Second, they should join hands with the ethnic groups in settling the inclusion issues. ]

The Dalit community had a miraculous success in the recent election held in India’s UP state under the charismatic leadership of Mayawati. The Brahmins also accepted her leadership and they were accommodated in her electoral strategy. If a Hindu conservative UP can be ruled by a Dalit woman leader, why can’t a similar strategy succeed in an equally conservative Nepali society?

The Indian constitution was drafted by a Dalit scholar. India also put one Dalit as its president. A Dalit President of the Democratic Republic of Nepal is not a distant picture. This view can be the culmination of the inclusion issue.

Source: eKantipur.com.

Nepal: Compensate the Oppressed

An interview with a leader of the Communist Party of Nepal

Rupesh Silwal (rooproop)

Nepal’s interim parliament has declared the country “discrimination free” but no impact at the local level has been observed. Dalits still cannot gain access to social and political sectors and their rights are limited in black and white terms. They are the poorest of the poor.

In this interview, a leader of Nepal’s second largest political party Madhav Kumar Nepal, the general secretary of the Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist) says, “We do not bear atrocities, exploitation and suppression. Those are prevailing since centuries among Dalits. They should be entitled compensation and their rights established.” Click here for full text of the interview >>> Nepal: Compensate the Oppressed

The Jana Utthan Pratisthan (JUP -Nepal) invites the application form from the qualified Nepali Dalit professionals for the position of District Program Coordinator to implement the Poverty Elevation Program with the partnership of Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF) in Mahottari District.

Qualification: At least bachelor Degree with 3 years experience in related field.

Application together with supporting documents (PP size photo, Bio data) should reach no later than 11 July, 2007 at the following address.

High preference will be given to Madhesi Dalit candidate!

Only short listed candidates will be called for further examination.

Jana Utthan Pratisthan (JUP- Nepal)
Anamnagar, Kathmandu
Po Box no: 14298
Email: jucn@wlink.com.np