Elections Fail to Deliver Meaningful Change for Nepal's Marginalized Dalit Community

The primary goal of politics is the acquisition of power. There are fundamentally two ways to attain power dash; one through the electoral front, the other through the front of rebellion. The path of rebellion is often violent. Such violence can lead to the sacrifice of many lives. Power attained through rebellion is achieved only after traversing a very arduous journey, and there is an equal possibility of it collapsing midway.

For a rebellion to succeed, a balance of many aspects is necessary, including objective circumstances, public support, leadership capability, strategic skill, and tactical maneuvering. Therefore, although the path of rebellion is used less frequently for gaining power, it is often employed as a last resort. In Nepal, the 007 revolution, the 046 Jana Andolan (People's Movement), the Maoist People's War, the second Jana Andolan, and the recent 'Jana Gana Sena' (JGS) rebellion are methods of revolt used to seize power.

The most universally prevalent method for acquiring power is the electoral front. This is mostly non-violent. The widespread participation of adult citizens is the backbone of elections. Therefore, in modern state systems, elections are almost universally accepted as the legitimate means of gaining power.

Especially in states adopting democratic systems, elections are considered the lifeblood. Elections are used in almost all countries worldwide as the best way to keep the system of governance alive by taking in 'air' (renewal) within a fixed period. The practice of elections for representative governments began in Europe and America around the 17th century.

The first election in Nepal where people cast their votes was in 015 BS. Since then, there have been 6 elections during the Panchayat era, 3 during multi-party systems, 2 Constituent Assembly elections, and 2 elections held after the promulgation of the 2072 Constitution. Currently, following the JGS rebellion, the government led by Sushila Karki is preparing to hold the House of Representatives election.

• The Meaning of Elections for the Dalit Community

The Dalit community is the most marginalized in terms of development. Dalits are at the bottom of human development indices, including food, shelter, clothing, education, health, and employment. Dalits are the first to be at risk from climate change, natural disasters, and any other calamity. The majority of Nepal's landless squatters are Dalits.

Dalits constitute the largest number among the landless. In other words, if one looks at the statistics to see who is below the poverty line, the Dalit community is easily seen in abundance. While non-Dalits also experience these problems to some extent, the most painful issue for Dalits is self-respect.

In society, Dalits are still discriminated against and subjected to untouchability solely based on the caste into which they were born. Due to this inhumane and hateful treatment, more than 4 million Dalits are condemned to live subhuman lives today.

Since elections are the legitimate path to acquiring state power, they should mean the most to the Dalit community. This is because the question of Dalit liberation is intrinsically linked to state power itself. As long as the state power is not in favor of or led by the Dalit community, there seems to be no prospect of resolving the problem of the caste system.

The legislature formed through elections is responsible for making laws. Such excellent laws can eradicate caste discrimination and untouchability. Such authority can grant historical compensation and special privileges to Dalits. Such a state mechanism where the Dalit community is given the first priority to be equal to others. Elections have the power to change not only many such laws but even the constitution itself.

However, a serious question arises here dash; why has the election, which holds so much potential, not worked for the liberation of Dalits in Nepal? For that, we must examine the structure of our state power and its relationship with Dalits from a historical perspective.

The foundation of the modern state began with the expansion of the kingdom by Prithvi Narayan Shah. Until 063 BS, the Shah dynasty maintained direct or indirect dominance over state power. During that period, state power was captured by the Ranas for 104 years. After 007 BS for a few years, and after 046 BS, political parties got the opportunity to run the government under their leadership.

Those who have been running the government, initially through rebellion and later through elections, have seen the decisive role in leading all those revolutions and elections dominated by non-Dalits, primarily Aryans and Khas people. This has a direct impact on parliamentary elections, and the reality is clear that Dalits have always been marginalized in the policies and leadership they create.

Another important aspect is linked to class upliftment. Since power is a means to control resources, dominant groups fear losing their supremacy when including partners. This dominant mentality of continuously deriving structural dividends based on specific caste, class, gender, region, or religion is the main reason why elections are not meaningful for Dalits.

• Dalit Contribution and Claim to Rights

It is true that Dalits have contributed as much as non-Dalits to nation-building, and many times more in the labor sector. This is because, according to the Varna system law, the responsibility of Dalits was to serve. From the expansion of the state in Nepal until now, Dalits have faithfully performed this role. After democracy arrived in the country in 007 BS, Dalits began to appear sporadically in politics.

During the Panchayat era, the King even picked one or two Dalits and made them ministers. By the time of the multi-party system, one or two Dalits succeeded in becoming members of parliament. In Nepal's first Constituent Assembly, for the first time, 50 Dalits became assembly members dash; 7 directly elected and 43 through proportional representation. This was a historic beginning.

However, this process declined starting from the second Constituent Assembly. It became very difficult for a Dalit to become even one minister in every government formed after elections.

The limited political achievements currently attained were not given to Dalits out of any mercy. Rather, they are the result of contributions and sacrifices equal to or greater than those of non-Dalits. In the Maoist People's War alone, 1,687 Dalits sacrificed their lives. In the second Jana Andolan, 3 Dalits were martyred.

In the recent JGS rebellion, 6 Dalits shed their blood. They had to sacrifice themselves while fighting on the front lines of those rebellions, revolutions, and movements. The irony is that Dalits were never in the decisive tier of the parties leading those revolutions and movements.

• Neglect by Parties

With the country moving towards a Federal Democratic Republic, the number of political parties in Nepal has sharply increased. Moreover, our electoral system has helped increase the number of parties. Currently, 137 political parties are registered with the Election Commission. Among them, 65 political parties have filed nominations for direct representation in the upcoming House of Representatives election.

Under this, a total of 3,406 candidates have registered their nominations, including political parties and independents. Among them, 232 (6.81 percent) are Dalit candidates. This includes 2 from CPN (UML), 1 from Nepali Congress, 2 from the Communist Party of Nepal, 2 from Rastriya Swatantra Party, 7 from Janata Samajbadi Party Nepal, 8 from Shram Sanskriti Party, 1 from Janmat Party, 1 from Nagarik Unmukti Party, 4 from Ujyalo Nepal Party, 6 from Pragatisheel Loktantrik Party, and 20 (15.38 percent) from CPN (Maoist).

For proportional representation, parties are compelled to submit closed lists according to the 13.8 percent stipulated in the House of Representatives Election Act, 2074.

Here, the candidacy given by parties in the direct election is a litmus test to examine how liberal, sensitive, inclusive, democratic, or committed the parties are towards Dalits. At a minimum, every party should field 13.8 percent of its candidates from the Dalit community. Furthermore, parties genuinely committed to achieving Dalit liberation quickly should ensure 20 to 25 percent candidacy.

Regrettably, UML, considered the country's largest party, fields only 2 Dalit candidates. Is it not a regression that the then Maoist (now Communist Party of Nepal), which elected 7 directly in the 064 BS Constituent Assembly election, fields only 2 Dalit candidates now? How shameless is the Nepali Congress, which claims to be the most democratic party, to field only one Dalit candidate? Did the Rastriya Swatantra Party, claiming to be an alternative, find only 2 Dalits worthy?

The situation of Ujyalo Nepal Party and Pragatisheel Loktantrik Party, which emerged as new parties after the JGS rebellion, does not appear fundamentally different from the old parties. The CPN (Maoist) led by Biplav remains an exception. This is not just the neglect of the Dalit community by non-Dalit leadership but a continuous repetition of dominance.

• Conclusion

Social justice is a strong pillar of democracy. The pillar of social justice cannot be firm until castes, ethnicities, genders, and communities historically subjected to discrimination and injustice in society are brought into the mainstream. How can parties that do not wish to transform the Dalit community, which is at the bottom of oppression imposed by the state itself, into at least an equal status be democratic?

How can democracy be strengthened without the participation of nearly a quarter of the population? Participation is not just about casting votes; it is about their minimum proportional stake in governance.

Nepal's Constitution of 2072 guarantees the right to live with dignity for all individuals. The fundamental rights include the right to equality, the right to social justice, and the right to freedom. Under fundamental rights, the right of Dalits to participate in all state bodies based on the principle of proportional inclusion is ensured.

Viewed this way, the failure of every party to ensure proportional representation for Dalits through both electoral systems appears unconstitutional. However, since Nepali parties are adept at exploiting legal loopholes, there is absolutely no possibility of them becoming Dalit-friendly unless it is explicitly written in the law.

Looking at the character of the existing parties and the state run through them, it is very difficult to find Dalit-friendly and sensitive leadership. Elections, dominated by a few clever, wealthy, elite non-Dalits, have consistently been like 'a crow finding a ripe jujube fruit: neither joy nor surprise' for Dalits.

Implementing a policy of historical compensation and special privileges for the Dalit community, which has been marginalized by laws for three thousand years, will bring a tangible sense of justice. Only such policy, leadership, and behavior will ensure their stake in law-making favorable to the Dalit community and in the centers of governance.

The formal election, which views Dalits merely as a 'vote bank,' lacks the capacity to resolve real Dalit issues. Instead, it is certain to push the country further towards conflict and instability.

(The author is a Dalit scholar.)