 KIRAN PANDAY |
There has been enough debate on the provinces proposed by the State Restructuring Committee. The Big Three parties have also agreed to form a commission to finalise the federal model, despite originally neglecting to do so as specified by the Interim Constitution.
The Maoists have said the proposed 14 provinces can be reviewed as required, which leaves enough room for an appropriate model of federalism. They can't easily give up on the ethnic model of federalism as they fought the war with support from backward and marginalised communities. However, ethnicity-based federalism isn't the way
to go.
There are 103 ethnicities, yet only nine of the proposed provinces have been named after ethnic communities. This might invite communal conflict. Ironic, since the stated purpose of federalism, as Article 138 of the Interim Constitution declares, is to end discrimination based on on class, caste, language, sex, culture, religion and region.
Discimination exists although there are laws that forbid it. Federalism is supposed to eliminate this by empowering the marginalised through inclusive development. The creation of ethnic provinces doesn't help in this regard.
How can the creation of ethnic provinces in a country where there are over 100 ethnic communities speaking 92 languages lead to economic, social, and religious equality? What should be the status of a non-ethnic community within an ethnic province? Should we call the ethnic people back into their own provinces to ensure their rights are protected?
In Nepal, 18 to 75 percent of each ethnic community lives outside of its proposed province. According to TU Professor of Geography Bhim Subedi, 29 per cent of Limbus, 52 per cent of Rais, 78 per cent of Sherpas, 18 per cent of Yadavs, 51 per cent of Tamangs, 50 per cent of Newars, 67 per cent of Gurungs, 58 per cent of Magars, 38 per cent of Tharus, and 71 per cent of Muslim people live outside their native provinces. Ethnic provinces will create more problems than solutions.
Ecology-based provinces can be an alternative to ethnic provinces, and could incorporate the interrelated economies of the Himal, Midhills and Tarai. There are three river basins in Nepal: the Kosi, Gandaki and Karnali. The Kosi watershed has two tributaries, the Kankai and Kamal, in its basin. Similarly, the Gandaki basin incorporates the Bagmati and the Karnali basin has Mahakali, west Rapti and Babai.
The proposed 14 provinces don't take geography and the availability of resources adequately into account. Additionally, the draft has proposed 14 legislatures, executives and judiciaries as well as institutional and physical infrastructure for the capitals of these provinces. This requires a lot of resources.
The direct investment of time and money for the development of Janajatis, Dalits and backward communities would do more to empower them than the investment of resources towards the formation of 14 provinces. Language and cultural upliftment programs can help protect their identity while investment in education and health will help improve their capacity. Autonomy and proportional and inclusive representation will guarantee their participation in development activities and state affairs. Development activities should be taken to the local level for transparency and accountability.
A proper utilisation of water, land and forest resources can be the basis of the sustainable socio-economic development of Nepal. River basin-based provinces can only help the country's economy grow. All three ecological zones are inter-dependent as they have their own limitations and advantages: the Tarai in food grains, Himal in medicinal herbs and Midhills in horticulture and vegetables. Besides, a north-south corridor will help business and economy prosper.
READ ALSO:
Constitution 2010, Nepali Times coverage of issues related to writing the new constitution