Nepal,+elections+without+candidates

=**Nepal’s elections without candidates**=


 * By Mohammed A. R. Galadari**


 * Khaleej Times, 30 January 2006**

ELECTIONS without candidates is the strange situation that Nepal is facing now. There are no candidates to fill so many seats in the municipal elections claimed by King Gyanendra to be a fore-runner to the promised parliamentary polls in April next year.

This typifies the overall scenario in Nepal today, a situation aggravated by the so-called “high-handed” actions and abrupt seizure of power by the monarch, who, unlike his deceased brother and former monarch, is proving to be far removed from the people. The more he involves with governance, the more the offensive against his dispensation.

Gyanendra had gone into hyper-action by overriding parliamentary norms, dismissing a people’s government howsoever hopeless it was, declaring emergency and jailing politicians in February last. Yet, an opportunity was at hand for him to effect a turn-around, possibly so, when the Maoists unilaterally declared a ceasefire. That positive action also helped bring the Maoists closer to the democratic system, as a rare unity was unfolding between the political parties and the rebels.

Why was such an opportunity squandered by sharpening the attacks against them? The result is that rebel fighting is in full force again. Feelings are that Gyanendra is facing tough times, also for the reason that the unity between the rebels and the political parties is proving to be the undoing for him.

The municipal elections would see that there will be no contest in some one-third of the about 60 urban areas, because of lack of candidates. If so, their legitimacy will be called into question, even as Gyanendra claims the elections to be part of his “democracy roadmap”, an initiative that he has undertaken under pressure from the West in recent months. Some 3000 candidates being in the fray for 4000 seats is a strange scenario and will be seen as a mockery of democracy. The rebels and the opposition had already branded the exercise a farce, and hence the threat by rebels to eliminate those entering the polls.

The ground reality, as is reflected in media reports from Nepal, is that the rebels are in control of much of the territories outside of capital Kathmandu. How long can a weak dispensation hold on, is a moot point. It is likely that Nepal will be totally paralysed by the week-long general strike called by the rebels to coincide with the February 8 polling. That might also lead to more aggressive actions against the dispensation.

Gyanendra had seized power on the ground that the people’s government was found wanting in the matter of controlling the insurgency. A year past his action, it is evident that he has only helped worsen the scenario. There are no two opinions that the rebel violence should not be allowed to go on. But, unlike in most other rebel campaigns elsewhere, the dispensation in Nepal was not ready for discussions even when scope for it emerged.

This looks strange, too. More so, as the rebels are growing in their influence. Gyanendra has proved, if anything, that it is not possible to end the rebel offensive with the relatively weak security systems that Nepal has. Good sense must dictate that Gyanendra go an extra mile to restore peace and democracy in the country.


 * Readers’ response may be forwarded to marg@khaleejtimes.com**


 * From: http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/comment/2006/January/comment_January24.xml&section=comment**