Belying predictions of widespread violence and disruption, Nepal's landmark Constituent Assembly (CA) elections on April 10, passed off almost peacefully throughout the country. With 55 political parties contesting the polls for the 601-member CA, and around 10.5 million voters, almost 60 per cent of registered voters, turning out to cast their votes amidst threats from some disgruntled armed outfits, the initial anxiety was running high across the country.
While counting is expected to continue for some days to come, with ballot boxes being transported across tenuous roads and tracks from remote polling centres, initial results suggest a Communist Party of Nepal--Maoist (CPN-M) juggernaut building into at least a clear majority in the CA, and consequently a defining power in the hands of the former rebels in relation to the character and content of the new Constitution. At the time of writing, the Maoists had already won 97 of the 171 seats where counting was complete, and were leading in 16 of 40 seats were counting was ongoing. The Communist Party of Nepal-- United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), which had been tipped as the leader in pre-election predictions, was trailing in third place, with just 23 seats, and a lead in 9; while Prime Minister Girija PrasadKoirala's Nepali Congress (NC) had secured 28 seats, and was leading in 5.
240 of the 601 CA members are being elected by the direct vote which is presently being counted, while 335 will be elected by the nationwide distribution of votes on a Proportional Representation (PR) basis. The remaining 26 members will be nominated by the new Cabinet. While there were 3,970 candidates in the fray for the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) election, there were 5,701 candidates in the PR category, including one half of women candidates, nearly two thousand Madhesis, over 600 Dalits (lower caste Hindus), over 2,000 Janajatis (indigenous nationalities), nearly 200 from backward regions and over 1,700 from other groups.
The armed Terai groups and the Maoists [including the Young Communist League (YCL)] were thought to be the primary security threats to a free and fair conduct of the polls. However, apart from a few untoward incidents, the election remained largely peaceful. Immediately after the voting was over on April 10, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Bhoj Raj Pokharel had announced that the polls were conducted peacefully and that repolling was only to be held at 33 polling stations. With some complaints trickling in later, this number was eventually raised to 60 polling booths in 16 constituencies across 10districts.
Defying prophecies of chaos and violence, the government managed to conduct polls in the Terai region. While disruption by the Terai armed groups was almost entirely prevented, it was the Maoists who were reportedly involved in a number of incidents of booth capturing and other disruptive activities. Maoist disruptive activities were reported fromdistricts including Chitwan, Saptari, Siraha, Mahottari, Arghakhanchi, Lalitpur, Dolakha, Baglung, Sunsari, Bajhang, Rukum, Gorkha, Sindhupalchowk and Ramechhap.
Nevertheless, the Terai region did not witness any large scale election-related violence, primarily owing to thegovernment's antecedent Eight Point Agreement with the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF), the biggest political alliance in the region, on February 28, 2008. All important leaders of the UMDF including, Hridayesh Tripathy, Mahanta Thakur and Upendra Yadav contested the polls. Other disgruntled armed groups were successfully contained by the Security Forces (SFs) during the elections, with the exception of two booths of the Trikaul VDC in the Saptari District, which is the birthplace of Jaya Krishna Goit, the leader of the All Terai Liberation Front (ATLF), earlier known as Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha--Goit(JTMM-G). Election officer Yogendra Prasad Shah disclosed that no political agents and voters came to the booth as a result of threats and fear.
Pre-poll electioneering had, however, witnessed large scale violence among the supporters, principally, of the three major political parties: the NC, the CPN-UML and the CPN-Maoist. The Maoists had, clearly, been at the forefront of such confrontations. Such incidents included barring candidates and supporters from visiting constituencies or addressing rallies, targeting the candidates and clashes between supporters. Worried about the deteriorating law and order situation, CEC Bhoj Raj Pokharel, on March 31, 2008, had summoned the top leaders of three major political parties in thegovernment and exhorted them to adhere strictly to the Election Code of Conduct.
On the day of the polls, a tight security blanket was thrown over the entire country. Thegovernment began air patrols by helicopters from April 5 and deployed thousands of SF personnel nationwide, ahead of the polls. Around 56,000 Nepal Police personnel, 25,000 Armed Police Force (APF) personnel and 54,000'temporary Police' were deployed to oversee security during the polls, but, as Inspector General of Police, Om Bikram Rana, clarified, it was not necessary to call out the Army to help with the arrangements. The border with India was sealed on April 10 to prevent the movement of criminals and other disruptive elements. As a preventive measure the Home Ministry also directed local Police administrations to prohibit the entry of people from other constituencies on polling day, apart from those carrying permits approved by the Election Commission, the Returning Officer or security agencies.
The election was conducted under the supervision of the United Nations and several other national and international observers. Ian Martin, the Chief of the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) noted, "This has beenNepal's most observed election." Apart from 28 international organisations, there were 148 national level observer groups and 95 District level organisations accredited by thegovernment to observe the polls. UNMIN and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Nepal (OHCHR) deployed teams across the country to assist in'creating a free and fair atmosphere for the election'. In addition to the technical assistance provided to the Election Commission in all 75districts, UNMIN civil affairs teams and OHCHR human rights officers operated in mobile teams across 45districts. UNMIN arms monitors were present at all 28 Maoist Army Cantonment sites and operated mobile patrols from the five regional headquarters, visiting Nepal Army locations, and in Joint Monitoring Teams in communities near Cantonment sites.
The election was also observed by the media throughout the country. The Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ) began nationwide monitoring through national and international missions, and local branches on the state of access to information, travel of media persons and security of media institutions and media persons. The International Mission comprised representatives from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), International Media Support, Internews Network, International Safety Institute, Open Society Institute and Nepali representatives. The purpose of the missions was to carry out field based media monitoring of the pre-poll, polling and vote counting processes in Kathmandu valley, Biratnagar, Nepalgunj and adjoining areas.
Commentators, however, insist that the absence of manifest violence masked an insidious mix of "propaganda and street muscle" employed by the Maoists. Kanak Mani Dixit, editor of Himal, noted, "The Maoists promised the Earth to poor, marginalised people and also ran a country-wide campaign of fear and intimidation to win the elections."
Despite the tremendous achievement of a poll relatively free of overt violence, the elections raise some troubling questions on the reaction of the Maoists as results trickle in. Senior Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai had, of course, announced that the Maoists would launch a'new revolution' if the Party lost the CA. Elsewhere, at an interaction with media persons in Kathmandu on March 14, Bhattarai had stated, "I think the decade-long conflict will not find its justification if we are defeated in the Constituent Assembly poll." At an election meeting in Kaski District on April 5, 2008, Bhattarai said that the Maoists would go in for "State Capture" if the results for the upcoming Constituent Assembly election did not favour his Party, adding "It will not take us more than ten minutes to capture the State." Such an eventuality has, of course, now receded in view of the early Maoist successes.
The fate of king Gyanendra and the 240-year old institution of monarchy, in any event, now appears to be sealed. In the past few months, theking has been stripped of all his powers and property by the government. Even as hopes of conciliation diminished, theking had called for free and fair elections: "We call upon all adult citizens to exercise their democratic right in a free and fair environment." Earlier on April 5, Prachanda had warned the monarch of "strong punishment" if "he (theking) wants to resist the verdict of the masses". He added, however, "If he respects the wishes of the masses in the election then our masses will forgive him and he can live as a common citizen." The future of the monarchy is the first issue to be decided by the new CA.
The Maoist intent remains fraught with menace. Maoist supreme, Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda had clearly declared, on February 29, 2008: "We will capture the Constituent Assembly through elections in a new method and witness a miracle in one-and-a-half months." He did not elaborate what the "new method" was, but it is evident that it has succeeded in sufficient measure. If initial trends are sustained, the elections will have transferred the power to define the newconstitution into the Maoist fold. With a significant--if not absolute--majority in the CA, and clear control of thegovernment, pushing through a radical, possibly totalitarian, agenda could quickly become a question of mere tactic and timing. The total seizure of state power, the long-held and unambiguous objective of the Maoists through war and'peace', is tantalizingly close.
Advertisement
Prasanta Kumar Pradhan is Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management.Courtesy, the South Asia Intelligence Review of the South Asia Terrorism Portal
