Indigenous movement, once a champion for the rights of
indigenous people, is losing steam
Activists fighting on behalf
of the indigenous population themselves are not hopeful about sustaining their
efforts.
Tika R Pradhan
Tika R Pradhan
Published
at : August 11, 2019, Updated at : August 11, 2019 07:15, Kathmandu
Members of the indigenous communities in Nepal on Friday
gathered at Maitighar Mandala to mark the International Day of the World’s
Indigenous Peoples. Unlike in the past, when they organised events at Tundikhel
in Kathmandu, the indigenous communities this year decided to be
on the streets to mark the day, once again, to shine a spotlight on how despite various
political changes, the Nepali state has continued to remain exclusionary.
Nepal’s indigenous movement of late, especially after the
promulgation of the constitution, has taken a back seat. But the recent Public
Service Commission vacancy notice—a drive to hire more than
9,000 staff for the local bodies—has brought them together to demand that the
state uphold the principle of inclusion.
But those who have led the country’s indigenous movements and
those who have watched and studied these struggles say they doubt the efforts
will sustain.
“The fresh protest [against the Public Service Commission
vacancy notice] is a reactionary move,” said Shankar Limbu, an activist who
defends human rights of indigenous people. “If the indigenous peoples’ rights
were to be secured, we need to launch sustained and pro-active movements.”
Nepal’s indigenous people constitute 35.8 percent of the total
population. But historically, their representation in the state organs has been
dismal.
If the last nine years’ timeline is anything to go by, Nepal has
undergone a sea change—politically as well as socially. A decade-long civil war
that ended in 2006, the second people’s movement the same year, Madhes
Andolan the following year, the abolition of the monarchy and the
establishment of the federal republic in 2008 and a new constitution in
2015—all these should have added up to create a society where members of all
the communities enjoyed equal rights.
In the run-up to the constitution promulgation, the indigenous
communities and Madhesis had joined hands to protest, saying some of the
provisions in the charter discriminated against some sections of the society.
But the constitution was fast-tracked. In the 2017 elections, the indigenous
people won 29 percent of seats, around 7 percent below their share of the
population.
Since then it has been a slippery slope, as leaders of big
political parties managed to co-opt leaders of the minority groups, say experts
and researchers on Nepal’s indigenous people.
“Leaders of the indigenous movement missed the opportunity. They
should have pushed to get their demands addressed when the constitution was in
the making,” said Dambar Chemjong, the head of the anthropology department at
Tribhuvan University. “It’s difficult to get a similar historic political
situation again.”
One of the organisations that had been at the forefront of
movements for securing indigenous peoples’ rights in the past was the Nepal
Federation of Indigenous Nationalities, or NEFIN as it is usually known.
According to indigenous leaders, parties have largely been able
to co-opt this organisation also which once served as the umbrella organisation
of the indigenous peoples in Nepal. NEFIN today looks more like a sister wing
of a political party and it neither has the wherewithal to create a strong
movement nor conceptual clarity when it comes to the rights of indigenous
people.
“What is the difference between the federation led by Jagat
Baram and Om Gurung?” said Limbu.
Baram leads NEFIN while Gurung, the former general secretary of
NEFIN, leads the All Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities,
a sister wing of the CPN-Revolutionary Maoists under Mohan Baidya, which is
today consigned to oblivion with no presence at all in Nepal’s political
spectrum.
Limbu, however, dismisses that the indigenous movement has died
down.
Struggles have continued here and there but they are fragmented,
said Limbu, who is also a lawyer associated with the Lawyers' Association for
Human Rights of Nepalese Indigenous Peoples, an NGO that supports indigenous
peoples in their legal fight for their rights.
Limbu agrees that there is a need for a nationwide movement if
the indigenous people of Nepal were to push the government to address their
concerns and demands.
“But there is a catch,” said Limbu. “Some are demanding an
amendment to the constitution; others want the charter to be rewritten. There
is a problem in concept among the indigenous people. They are yet to figure out
what exactly they want.”
It’s not that all the past movements have gone down the drain.
Over the past decade, the indigenous movement has made a significant achievement
in establishing itself as a major force for democracy in the country. The
movement managed to bring the rights of indigenous peoples, inclusion, cultural
and linguistic rights and the concepts like nation-state and representation to
the mainstream.
Since the Maoist insurgency helped establish the issue of
indigenous rights, people from the indigenous communities had pinned high hopes
on Maoist leaders after they came to power.
But the Maoist party itself has suffered several splits and the
leaders have been part of the same ruling class against which it fought the war
for a decade.
Gradually, the indigenous movements lost steam—it lost strong
organisations and leaders committed to championing the cause of the indigenous
people.
“Leaders from the indigenous communities focused more on
personal benefits rather than working for the larger cause,” said Malla K
Sundar, a rights activist. “NEFIN should have given continuity to its struggle
for the 11-province model of identity-based federalism with self-determination
and proportional representation. But it failed.”
Many believe major political parties, after the promulgation of
the constitution, have strategically made moves to subvert the indigenous
people’s call for their cultural, political and linguistic rights.
Mukta Singh Lama, an indigenous rights activist who holds a PhD
in anthropology, said everything started with political parties co-opting the
major leaders fighting for the indigenous rights, especially those who were at
the helm of NEFIN. Then, they alleged that indigenous leaders who were raising
the agendas of the indigenous groups were trying to push the country towards
communal violence, according to Lama.
One example is a statement by the European Union last year, in
which it said Nepal’s inclusion policy was flawed. While the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs was quick to issue a rebuttal, calling the statement a direct
challenge to Nepal’s constitutional provisions, influential politicians
described it as an interference in Nepal’s internal affairs.
“Political parties have largely been able to establish that the
indigenous communities’ agendas are injected by foreign forces to divide the
country,” said Lama.
Though Chemjong, the anthropologist, is not very optimistic, as
he believes indigenous leaders have already squandered the opportunity due to
infighting, Lama says not all is lost yet.
“It’s time to introspect and self-criticiSe,” said Lama. “If the
current breed of indigenous leaders has failed, members from the new
generation, who are accountable to their communities and not the political
parties, should take the lead.”
Tika R Pradhan
Tika R
Pradhan is a senior political correspondent for the Post, covering politics,
parliament, judiciary and social affairs. Pradhan joined the Post in 2016 after
working at The Himalayan Times for more than a decade.
