The Nepali Congress (NC) and the Unified Marxist-Leninist (UML) party and their leaders were hailed as champions of democracy after the restoration of democracy in 1990. The NC and the UML did not have to work hard to obtain votes from the masses after 1990. The NC had - Ganesh Man Singh, K.P Bhattari, and Girija Prasad Koirala – the troika as men of principles and were widely cited in election campaigns of 1990. The UML, though the major communist force after the restoration, was willing to play its part under a ceremonial monarch and this greatly helped them in their campaigns.
By the time of 1994 general elections, the popularity of the NC troika had eroded as people saw them as selfish and power-hungry, in contrast with the past, where they had a status as men of principles. Now that the NC was unable to attract masses through its ideology and its leaders, it relied heavily on the other main method of party building, i.e. patronage. The recipient may be varied: relatives and friends of party leaders, party workers, intellectuals, local notables, and other affluent sections of society who wish to use the party as an instrument to achieve their own personal interests (Gellner, 2002; 154). Ram Chandra Poudel, Minister of Local Development in the G.P. Koirala government of 1991-94, said: ‘Soon after the NC formed the government, party workers from all over the country flowed to Kathmandu seeking personal benefits and recommendations for jobs and other services to their relatives and friends’ (interview, 15 October 1996, as quoted in Gellner, 2002: 155).
The UML tried to institutionalize the government’s patronage distribution systems. It formed the State Affairs Department at both the central and local levels. Its main function was to control the appointment, transfer, and promotion of all civil servants in the country. Recommendation from the party itself or at least from the party District Committee became mandatory (Gellner, 2002). These actions by the largest parties in Nepal became a huge barricade for the ordinary Nepalese citizens who could now not get appointed in government positions without recommendation from some influential politician in power. Fairness in hiring and firing of government employees vanished in thin air as soon as there were changes in the central government. Each time the government changed there would be massive changes in executive posts at all levels, not only in the bureaucracy but also in other public institutions, i.e. government corporations, hospitals, educational institutions, and so on. These posts were filled up with ones who had been loyal to the party or had enough money to bribe the leaders and helped in increasing the party’s financial standing.
Governments formed after the Maoists joined the political mainstream have continued the system of patronage and seen to it that this becomes a hallmark of Nepalese democracy. Some may argue that the patronage privileges have roots back in the days of the Panchayat era or even during the rule of the Ranas and the Shah Kings. Democracy was introduced as a much better governance system where there would be equality of opportunity to all citizens in Nepal. But history has taught us that democracy has an even better way of perpetuating the old norms and values which are against the very spirit of democracy itself. Now the question is how Nepalese from all walks of life would be included in the state’s governance structure when we will adopt a federal system given the fact that we have still not mended our past habits of wrongdoings.
REFERENCES
Gellner, David N. ‘Introduction: Transformations of the
Thanks Dikshant for nice topic. I think you brought up the idea considering that the patronage started after 1990 which in my opinion is half true. The political patronage started after 1990 but what about other forms of bigger patronage that we can find in history. During Panchayat system when there were no parties, there was even bigger patronage system whereby many people who supported Panchayat did all sorts of things and were never questioned. King distributed lands just because someone supported his agenda. If we talk about impunity, it was worst. Many of the violence and crime cases which involved kings, armies and other people in power never came into highlight. However, I am not supporting the current misuse of power by political parties. We need aware and well-informed people who can exercise democracy to enable us to question politicians. For example; recently it came to light that Maoist party misused the allowance of around 3000 PLA combatants and they have also been taking half of the salaries of all combatants. Why no one is speaking against it? This is systematic corruption which gives indications that there might have been many party based corruption within. Thanks for bringing up relevant agenda.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the post
ReplyDeleteI agree with your logics Dikshant. How long this system go ahead! The signals for corrective actions are not seemed yet rather it is in the process of institutionalization. What sort of competency do we have we can not see our future career with out being worker for any party.
ReplyDeleteThank you Dikshant for bringing this agenda.As we know until from the past,who ever support any party or people related to the politics they always reward as various term and types and the neutral people always got nothing.we have a very big form of corruption in the various name and status which we have to destroy.
ReplyDeleteIts true that the party patronage in the appointment of vacant positions in government and non- government sector is increasing these days. It has been a great threat to the younger generation who is seeking to develop career in own country. Every political parties are equally responsible for it. But more than it, those people who are running after the leaders for seeking patronage are more responsible. Actually, they are compelling the leaders to do so. So, its better to develop owns quality, be able to compete anywhere or be an independent entrepreneur, rather than just blaming the politicians.
ReplyDelete