What went wrong with Janajati movement?

• Observers say everything from power struggle, second CA poll results, to NC and UML

  
  

  

  Besides Tharu community, no other indigenous groups have

  opposed the preliminary draft of the new constitution and 

  the six-state federal model so far.

  
  

  Photographer: POST PHOTO

  KATHMANDU, AUG 14 - On May 9, 2012, the government signed a nine-point agreement with the Indigenous Nationalities Joint Struggle Committee, agreeing to federate the country based on ethnicity as recommended by the State Restructuring Commission and the Constituent Assembly (CA) Committee on State Restructuring. The agreement also guaranteed their demands for self-governed autonomous states, autonomous regions, autonomous areas, preserved and special areas with right to self- determination, and priority rights, besides ensuring a minimum of 60 percent proportional and 40 percent directly elected representatives.
  Three years have passed since the agreement, but it has not yet been implemented. The major parties are already preparing to promulgate the constitution. The indigenous groups, meanwhile, seem content with the fact that the nine-point agreement has been ignored. So what exactly went wrong with Janajati movement in these last three years?  
  Janajati leaders, intellectuals and activists say that series of events that unfolded, especially after the second CA polls, were responsible for pushing the identity movement to oblivion.
  “It all started with the defeat of pro-identity forces, including UCPN (Maoist) and Ashok Rai-led Federal Socialist Party Nepal, and emergence of Nepali Congress and CPN-UML as major political forces,” said Padmaratna Tuladhar, a Janajati leader.
  NC and UML leaderships, who considered Maoist’s defeat as people’s mandate against identity politics, swiftly backtracked from several past accord and progressive agendas. The ruling parties, who were ready to federate the nation into as many as 14 federal provinces in the first CA, are now supporting six-state federal setup.  
  “They are not even ready to support historical achievements enshrined in the Interim Constitution like secularism, let alone the past agreements. In fact, they are reverting to post-1990 phase,” said Pasang Sherpa, former chairman of Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (Nefin).
  Observers say the internal division among Janajati leaders is equally responsible for the downfall the Janajati movement.
  Besides Tharu community, no other indigenous groups opposed the preliminary draft of the new constitution and the six-state federal model. A coalition of Tharu lawmakers from across the party line, Tharu Kalyankari Sabha and Tharuhat Joint Struggle Committee have been enforcing general strike in 22 Tarai districts since Wednesday.
  Meanwhile, Tuladhar-led Adibashi Janajati Rastriya Andolan (Ajra), a coalition of pro-identity Janajati lawmakers, ethic organisations and rights groups, has remained largely inert in recent times.
  Internal rift among Janajati groups became apparent when Ajra failed to gather even 500 people in its much-hyped Occupy Baneshwor Campaign in January. Then, Nefin, the umbrella organisation of 56 indigenous groups, had boycotted the campaign.
  Pro-identity leaders say the influence of NC and UML on Nefin leadership led the federation’s decision to boycott the Ajra-led movement.
  “They became weapon of NC and UML to foil the identity issues,” said Ang Kaji Sherpa, former Nefin general secretary.
  Ajra leaders including Tuladhar had later accused Nefin leadership of bartering CA posts with identity issues and subverting ongoing protest as per the wish of ruling parties.
  Nefin Chairman Nagendra Kumal, however, said their refusal to collaborate with Ajra was the way the movement was designed to benefit the UCPN (Maoist) and not the indigenous people.
  “Nefin has already expressed reservation to the draft constitution and will now begin struggle for rights and identity of Janajati people,” said Kumal. Nefin has also expressed its “unequivocal support” to Tharu protest, and its has agreed to join the Kathmandu-centric demonstration which is scheduled to take place from next week.  
  Nefin has remained flexible on number of states but stressed that the state should be demarcated and named based on five criteria of identity— ethnic, dialectal, cultural, geographical and historical identities—and four criteria of capability—economic interrelationships and capability, development of infrastructure and viability,
  availability of natural resources and administration accessibility.
  Like Kumal, former Nefin chairman Raj Kumar Lekhi thinks it is too early to speculate demise of identity movement. He thinks that Ajra protest failed to gather momentum as many refused Tuladhar’s leadership. For example, even Krishna Bhattachan, who was actively involved in identity struggle before the first CA, had refused to support Tuladhar.
  “Tharu Aandolan is slowly gaining momentum. We are hopeful that it will lure many other indigenous communities to join protest in the coming days,” said Lekhi.