Federalism is a political system in which the sovereign power is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units. Federalism provides a technique of constitutional organization that permits action by sa shared government for certain common purposes, together with autonomous action by constituent units of government for purposes that relate to maintaining their distinctiveness, with each level directly responsible to its own electorate (Ghai and Jill, 2007:2).
Now, the country has been divided into the various groups on the types of the federalism. They are divided among those who favour a geographically based federation and those who favour a federation based on ethnicity, language or ‘historical regions’. Other considerations also touch on the choice: representativeness and participation, democratisation and fairness to all the inhabitants of the constituent units. The people of Nepal need to select the most appropriate type of federalism which will meet the socio-economic aspirations and strengthen the national unity.
In addition to the above mentioned issue, there is a great concern of people of Nepal that the type of federal system Nepal is going to adopt in near future must embrace the aspirations of the people ensuring the national unity and security. The people of Nepal wish to see the unification of the people of Nepal not only geographically but also with the social and economic justice and harmony. People are confident that the system will strengthen the political, economical, social, informational and military harmony among the people. The federal system will provide equal opportunity for all types of people in the state mechanism and also gives greater space for the recognition of identity and the empowerment of marginalized people. The co-existence and brotherhood among the people which will be of course the outcome of the federalism, creates unity among the people in every sector (ibid.,49). The issue of federalism came up after the Maoists launched their armed struggle (Lawati, 2005:21). They advocated the policy with a view to attract people of different ethnic groups and succeeded in making it popular to a large extent. Now, people from various walks of life are lauding it. Federalism became Nepal’s major political agenda after the April uprising.
Defining the arrangement of federalism in Nepal is not an easy task. Different armed groups and the Madhesi Front are demanding that the Tarai be declared an autonomous state on the basis of region. Similarly, Kirat, Tharu and other ethnic communities are demanding federalism on the basis of ethnicity. But one criterion alone is not enough to establish the extent of the federal states. The size and structure, among other things, should be determined by careful examination of various factors. One of the things for federalism is always an issue of how to design the central government so it represents the diversity of the country. The failure for forming a federal regime is when the people think that the federal government belongs to only one or two groups and another feels excluded. So the federal government has to be concerned about whether in some way it reflects the whole country. The more discussion and dealing with those kinds of things in the national structure, the more the federal government will be protecting the minorities across the country. These are the things which are potentially very important. The whole concept is start building a federation, thinking as a kind of community or ethnicity. Domestic Federal models have to try and build a Nepali identity; the value has to be Nepali, respecting the diversity and accommodating it and promoting it. Though the “Federalism” issue has been a hot cake for all the political arena, the feasibility has yet to be proved. After the unification of Nepal by King Prithivi Narayan Shah up to present government has adopted policy of equity majority of the people are failed to explore those opportunities by individual. Government has given equal importance to all the people since its establishment .This can be prove by the statement of King Prithivi Narayan Shah “NEPAL CHAR JAT CHATTIS BARNA KO FULBARI HO.”
The federal democratic republic of Nepal thus must establish the rights and duties of its partially self-governing units of the governments. One of the basic ‘self-governance’ rights of the local governments is to conduct elections to form their bodies of the governments. Local governments under federalism are fully responsible for their local administration, law enforcement, justice, developments, infrastructure maintenance, school management, local tax and revenue regulations and so on. Except for policymaking, funding and overall state infrastructure development the state has no control over the local governments’ right to self-governance. However, the issue of ethnicity, ethnic identity and self rule was started to rise after the people’s movement of 1990 and during the Maoist movement which has taken a shape at this moment. But it can easily be noticed that the demands of ethnic identity is politicized in such an extent that is has resulted a number of negative impact and seemed to have disturbed the social harmony in Nepal (ibid.,51).
Statement of the problem
Federalism generally implies federation comprising a member of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central “federal” government. However, in the government level the self-governing status of the component states or regions is constitutionally established and no unilateral decision of the central government can alter it. Primarily, state or regional governments must consist of a unit of partially self-governing local governments in which people have constitutional right to govern their own constituencies. It is the partially self-governing local level of governments that play vital role for the stability, prosperity and national integrity of a federal democratic nation.
The country has become more vulnerable and its sustainability has been questioned in recent years and federal system keeps it alive. This is because of its failure to manage its internal order and its inability to promote much needed social, cultural and economic development. Its failure to provide good governance, protect citizens’ basic rights and fulfill their basic needs has led the country towards chaos and instability. The people’s increasing aspirations and successive governments’ failure to meet the general masses’ expectations has precipitated violent conflicts, internal displacement, and an environmental crisis. The experience of many other countries indicates that ethnicity, language and religion could represent other sources of insecurity. Nepal is fast falling victim to this problem, and unless appropriate interventions are made to assure adequate space to all disadvantaged communities, this insecurity could grow. The security threat perception of Nepal has been changing due to growing vulnerability and internal disorder rather than insecurity from external factors. The internal disorder ultimately might pose external threat as well. In the changing context of Nepal as a federal state challenges and prospects to be researched thoroughly.
In this regard, the research is based on the following questions: