Nepal is a small, landlocked Himalayan State, placed between India and China. Its population of over 18 million is predominantly rural. Since its unification 200 years ago, Nepal has been a monarchy. In the 18th century, the warrior king Prithvi Narayan Shah unified many princely states, bringing the country to its present shape and size. The unification marked the beginning of the rule by the Shah dynasty. In the past two-and-a-half centuries, the country has been ruled by 13 kings. For a century of isolation between 1850-1950, a feudal family—the Ranas—who called themselves kings, ruled Nepal. During their regime, the people were deprived of fundamental rights. In 1847 the Ranas took over power from the king and remained the de-facto rulers for 104 years. The Ranas word was law. The people revolted against the Rana oligarchy, and in 1951 the Rana regime gave way to democracy. King Tribhuwan supported the revolt. However, the ushering in of democracy wasn't completely free of political turmoil.
After years of political instability that followed, general elections were held in 1959 and for the first time the people had an elected government. B. P. Koirala became the first elected prime minister of Nepal. In less than two years, King Mahendra, successor of King Tribhuwan dissolved both the government and the parliament, brought democracy to an end and introduced the party-less Panchayat rule. The Panchayat system, in which political parties were banned, continued for 30 years. During this period a number of armed and unarmed struggles against the system took place, which was crushed by the government. Students launched a major political movement in 1980 against the Panchayat system, during King Birendra's regime. To resolve the tension, the King announced a referendum. People were to choose between multi-party democracy and an improved version of the Panchayat system. In a controversial result, the multi party democracy was defeated. However it weakened the Panchayat system, paving way for the restoration of democracy after a decade.
In 1950, a movement, jointly involving the people of Nepal and the King, overthrew the autocratic rule of the Ranas, and a parliamentary form of government was established. In 1960, the King banned the parliamentary system of government, and established a party-less, autocratic panchayat system.
For more than 30 years, Nepal had no party system. In the 1940s, the people of Nepal were greatly influenced by India's freedom struggle against British colonial rule. They rose against the Rana regime, which had suppressed the growing people's movement for democracy. Women started coming together, and from 1947 until 1952, several women's organisations were born to raise the political and social consciousness among women in Nepal.
In 1960, the King of Nepal subverted the democratic panchayat system to an autocratic one. This put a sudden end to all associations and their activities. Women, however, remained politically active. In protest against the undemocratic royal proclamation of 1960, a group of women openly waved black flags in a public procession, and were imprisoned. Later, in the people's movement of 1989, women actively participated to get rid of the autocratic panchayat system and to usher in a multiparty, democratic system. Women of various regions and ideologies contributed greatly to the success of this movement.
In 1989, there was a mass movement for the restoration of democracy. The constitution of Nepal, framed in 1990, after the restoration of democracy, mandates a parliamentary form of government, constitutional monarchy and the strengthening of multiparty democracy, and an independent judiciary.
The historical Movement of the people in 1990 overthrew the Panchayat system and restored multi-party democracy. Within a year, a democratic constitution was introduced, which, for the first time, made the people sovereign. Less than six years after the restoration of multi-party system, the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist started an armed insurgency in 1996 claiming that the people had not yet received justice.
South Asia presents a unique paradox. Almost every country in the region, with the exception of Nepal, has had a woman leader at its helm at some point in time, a phenomenon unparalleled in other regions of the world. Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have had the unique distinction of two women leaders in the course of their political history. This is in stark contrast to the dwindling numbers of women who are elected to national parliaments and legislatures during each election. The high visibility of women leaders is fully matched by the invisibility of women representatives in the national assemblies. In the case of Nepal, women's access to positions of power in executive bodies and the courts has been limited. In the 25-member panchayat cabinet that was dissolved on 8 April 1990, there was only one female minister, who held the health portfolio. Very few women attained positions of office in panchayat institutions. Of the 140 members in the outgoing national panchayat, eight (5.7 per cent) were women.
In the May 1991 election to the House of Representatives, the final list of the 1,345 candidates included only 81 women (6.6 per cent). In the case of the two leading parties, the Nepali Congress Party had 11 women among its 204 candidates, while the United Marxist-Leninist (UML) party included only nine women among its 177 candidates. At the district and village level, the percentage of women candidates was a dismal 0.3 per cent and 0.9 per cent respectively.
The results declared showed that of the 205 candidates elected, seven were women—five from the Nepali Congress Party and two from the UMI .Since the constitution requires that women make up five per cent of the upper house, three women were also nominated to fill the quota. At the national level, 10 per cent of the women candidates were elected. At the district level, although women constituted a negligible percentage of candidates, there was a 100 per cent victory for women, with all seven women winning. At the village level, 25 per cent of those women who stood for elections won.
The new constitution of Nepal promulgated in 1990, provided women with equal political rights. It states that women can vote, compete in local and national elections, involve in political parties, and support and adopt any political ideology. In 1990, constitutional provisions were introduced that made it mandatory to nominate at least five per cent of women candidates for the House of Representatives, and to provide for seven seats for women in the National Assembly. The only provision added to appease women is the article on election rules . The constitution now requires that women amount to at least five per cent of the candidates fielded by each political party in the elections for the House of Representatives.
In the decade long armed conflict more than 13 thousand Nepalese lost their lives. Thousands were displaced and hundreds disappeared. Terror, instability and infrastructure damage took its toll on the nation. In the meantime, the entire family of King Birendra was wiped out in the infamous Royal palace massacre. The subsequent rise of King Gyanendra, pushed the country to further turmoil. The government failed to hold elections in time. On charges of incompetence Sher Bahadur Deuba's elected government was overthrown and the King formed his own government.
The Maoists movement had in the meantime gathered momentum, hindering the holding of elections. The new government under Lokendra Bahadur Chand also failed to conduct elections. Surya Bahadur Thapa was appointed as the new Prime Minister. He held peace talks with the Maoists to prepare an environment for elections, but that too resulted in a failure. Deuba was reappointed the Prime Minister, but only remained in office for a short time, as dialogue with the Maoists did not materialize. The escalation of violence and killings only added to the people's desperation and increased security problem.
On February 1st 2005, the King took over absolute state powers and assumed the role of the Chairman of the cabinet, a cabinet that he had himself nominated. This led the political parties to form an alliance with the Maoist rebels. In November 2005, a 12-point agreement was signed by the seven political parties and the Maoists. The first objective of the agreement was to end the violent conflict and restore peace in the country. This agreement provided the Maoists an opportunity to suspend the armed movement and participate in a peaceful democratic movement.
The peaceful movement turned into a people's movement. Millions of people marched onto the streets demanding an end to the tyrannical monarchy and the writing of a new Constitution through a Constituent Assembly. The people finally forced the king to relinquish state control on April 24, 2006. The success of the People's Movement II left king Gyanendra powerless. The political parties are now committed to writing a Democratic Constitution through a Constituent Assembly elected by the people. The Maoists have become a part of the Parliament. The responsibilities vested in the King have now been transferred to the Prime Minister.
An election for the Nepalese Constituent Assembly was held in Nepal on 10 April 2008 after having been postponed from earlier dates of 20 June 2007 and 22 November 2007. The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (CPN (M)) placed first in the election with 220 out of 575 elected seats, and it became the largest party in the Constituent Assembly. It was followed by the Nepali Congress with 110 seats and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) with 103 seats. As of 17 April, 26 women have secured seats in the new assembly, 22 from the CPN (M), one from the Nepali Congress, two from the Madhesi Jana Adhikar Forum, Nepal and one from Tarai-Madhesh Loktantrik Party from direct election on the basis of first track past post.
South Asian nations share certain predominant features: centralised governments; socio-economic inequalities based on class, gender and caste; and nationalistic divisive claims on grounds of ethnicity, language and religion. India and Sri Lanka have remained democracies for the past 50 years, while Bangladesh and Pakistan have been swinging between democracy, militarism and autocracy. Nepal has passed from democracy to absolute monarchy and back to democracy, absolute monarchy, and federal democratic republic.
India was under British colonial rule for approximately 200 years, and became an independent State in 1947. India then encompassed today's Pakistan and Bangladesh. Indian women's involvement in politics started in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Although British imperialism profoundly influenced the political engagement of both elite and non-elite women during this period, its impact on the character and purpose of their engagement was very different. Non-elite women fought against the British colonialists. Moved by the hunger of their children, the British confiscation of their land (which was their means of livelihood), and oppressive taxes, women participated alongside men in `famine revolts' in the late 18th and 19th centuries, and other revolts in the 19th century.
In 1947, with the end of British colonial rule and partition from India, Bengal became East Pakistan. The marriage with West Pakistan proved incompatible over issues ranging from language to economic exploitation of the east wing, and domination by the bureaucracy and military of West Pakistan. In 1971, Bangladesh was born to fulfil the dreams and aspirations of the people.
Historically, two important movements characterised South Asia. One was the political movement of challenge and resistance to British colonialism, and the other, the social movement to reform traditional structures.
The national movement against British colonial rule in undivided India, spearheaded by Mahatma Gandhi, was instrumental in bringing women in large numbers into the public space. Gandhi played a crucial role in creating a favourable atmosphere for women's participation in the freedom struggle by insisting that the struggle for women's equality was an integral part of the movement of swaraj. His choice of non-violent Satyagraha as the mode of struggle also allowed women to play a far more active and creative role than was possible in more masculine-oriented movements.
While he wanted a vanguard role for women in the freedom movement, Gandhi did not encourage women to compete for power. Rather, he wanted them to enter public life as selfless, devoted social workers to undertake the crucial task of social reconstruction. He wanted women to cleanse politics, to feminise it by bringing in the spirit of selfless sacrifice, rather than compete with men in grabbing power, and thus prove their moral superiority even in the realm of politics. In Gandhi's view, "Women are the embodiment of sacrifice, and her advent to public life should, therefore, result in purifying it, in restraining unbridled ambition and accumulation of property." Gandhi, therefore, created a political space for women within the patriarchal system, projecting the concept of women's role being complementary to men's, and embodying virtues of sacrifice and suffering.
Gandhi, however, was very conscious of the power that women could have in a struggle based on the concept of non-cooperation. He stressed the importance of their participation in political and social matters, and exhorted them to join the nationalist struggle. Gandhi, therefore, played a vital role in attempting to feminise the nationalist movement in India. In the process, the values and views that he espoused influenced and shaped the women's movement in the early phase of independence of the other nations of the region.
The leading South Asian social and religious reformers in the 19th century were males, whose principal objective was to cleanse and reinforce family life. For those early pioneers, women were, at first, objects of their emancipatory efforts. But, in the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, they became more and more subjects in the political and social spheres, as is clear from the examples of women's political struggles around a variety of issues in the countries of the region. Yet, the basic understanding of the national movement's leaders on women's issues continued to be filtered through the existing patriarchal system.
Women of India participated in demonstrations such as the all-night dharnas of 1930 against foreign cloth, and in selling `the salt of freedom' during the salt Satyagraha. These campaigns succeeded in breaking the myth of segregation. They also articulated liberal sentiments like suffrage rights. To advocate women's equality and their right to participate in nationalist politics, the All India Women's Conference (AIWC) was formed in 1927 through an amalgamation of various regional women's groups. It also spearheaded constitutional reforms and other provisions for women. Consisting of reformist, revivalist and radical streams, the AIWC played a critical role during the freedom struggle, and helped women systematically articulate their political rights in public forums.
In Pakistan, in the 1946 election, two Muslim women, Begum Jahanara Shahnawaz and Begum Shaista Ikramullah, were elected to the Central Constituent Assembly. That same year, Muslim women organised and held demonstrations to prevent the government's refusal to allow the Muslim League to form a ministry. Violence was used against the women demonstrators, and they were arrested as well. Initially, most of these activities were confined to Lahore and Karachi. However, the civil disobedience movement of January 1947 mobilised even the Pathan women, considered the most conservative in the subcontinent. They marched in support of the movement, publicly unveiled for the first time. The most interesting form of political participation was the secret organisation called the War Council, formed by the Pathans, in which women helped run an underground radio station until independence.
By 1947, Muslim women were organising funds for the Pakistan movement, fighting oppression on the streets, and addressing issues such as education. The greatest numbers of women were not mobilised around issues relating to women's rights or their political and legal status. Instead, the rallying cause was the Muslim homeland. The women believed that the newly created government would automatically expand women's rights and open avenues for their participation at all levels.
In Bangladesh, the provincial education minister, Abdul Hamid, decided to close down the girls' schools, as there were not enough teachers and students. Jobeda Khatun Chowdhury, the first Muslim woman politician of East Pakistan, resisted the closure of Sylhet Women's College. She sought an interview with the minister on this matter. He stipulated a one-year period to enrol the requisite number of students; otherwise, the college would be closed down. Jobeda and a few other dedicated women then began a door-to-door campaign in search of students. They succeeded, and the college remained open.
In Sri Lanka, the erstwhile Ceylon, several movements characterised the fight against British rule. The Suriyamal campaign, which was started as a counter to the sale of poppies to assist British soldiers, was the training ground for the rise of the leftwing socialist movement in Sri Lanka, which spearheaded activities against British imperialism. For the first time, women entered radical politics. They became vocal and visible, and a variety of women's organisations emerged, like the Mothers' Union, the Ceylon Women's Union, the Women's Franchise Union, the Women's Political Union and the Lanka Mahila Samiti. The formation of the Eksath Kantha Peramuna (the United Women's Front) was another great event in the political history of the country. It was the first autonomous socialist women's group in Sri Lanka. This party asserted its socialist policies in its declaration seeking changes in the fundamental structure of society. The women of these organisations continued to take part in active politics as members of parliament and cabinet ministers.
At the grass-roots level, constitutional provisions have ensured reservation for women in India, Bangladesh and Nepal. In India, there is a 33 per cent reservation for women through direct elections to panchayats or local-level self-governance institutions that function in almost every State. At the local level, the new ordinance of 1997, which ensured a 20 per cent reservation of seats for women, has been a breakthrough, and has contributed to the increased participation of women in local elected bodies. One seat is reserved for women in each ward of the Village Development Committee. The new ordinance forced all political parties to support at least one female candidate. This fact encouraged women to get more involved in political activities in Nepal. About 40,000 female candidates were elected in the local elections of 1997. This provision has increased the numerical involvement of women in the local government units. However, their involvement in positions of decision-making and influence is insignificant. Overall, a strong male domination prevails.
The long history of struggles in South Asia--from women's suffrage to women's participation in electoral politics at national and provincial levels--is an ongoing one. The family and the community have replaced the State as the agency for granting voting rights to women. The State's initiative of granting quotas or reservation for women has proved to be a mixed bag, depending on the country in question and the stipulation for reservation. India is still struggling for a constitutional amendment reserving 33 per cent seats for women in the parliament and State assemblies through direct election. The system of indirect elections through nominations to the national assembly and parliament, as in Pakistan and Bangladesh, has ended up in women depending on political patronage and becoming `secondary members'. Here, affirmative measures such as reservation and quotas end up as merely notional.
At the grass-roots level, the case of India, which now has direct election and 33 per cent reservation for elected members in the local bodies at all three tiers of administration, with an additional equal reservation for leadership position, has emerged as the best model. Bangladesh and Nepal feature restricted reservation at a particular tier of administration. Whatever the outcomes, the power of legislative reforms to ensure women's participation in electoral politics cannot be underestimated. Women are emerging as leaders, waging struggles on several fronts.
South Asia boasts no documented case of political parties promoting the active participation of women in the party hierarchy or politics. In contemporary South Asia, the interaction of women in the public sphere has improved as a consequence of the women's movement, particularly at the grass-roots level, and due to the proliferation of non-political women's organisations. They have created alternative political spaces for women outside the party and other formal political structures, and women have started to engage with the State on a larger scale.
It is, however, evident that there are variations in this relationship between the State and women. Across countries in South Asia, constitutional provisions, legislative reforms and affirmative actions designed to encourage women's participation in politics at the national level did not automatically result in the enhanced participation of women in politics. Socio-economic, religious and cultural factors remain major impediments. The governments of these countries are taking various initiatives to increase the political participation of women. However, it must be remembered that the affirmative measures are being injected externally into societies with extremely entrenched systems and traditions, and therefore, political restructuring will take a long time to usher in social transformations.
Women have greater potential and opportunities under democracy than under any other political system, although there are enough examples of autocratic and repressive practices within democratic systems, especially in the realm of party politics. The experience of democracy in practice in South Asia is that elected representatives routinely make politically expedient compromises and betray the confidence of their electors. That has been a negative development, as far as women in these countries are concerned.
The mere fact of being elected to office as a woman does not, however, automatically ensure gender sensitivity. This is a serious issue that needs to be dealt with, as it involves matters of class and caste. Having articulated the limitations of elected representative democracy, one must, however, emphasise that South Asian women would never have been able to rise to where they now are without democracy and reservation.
The women's movement in South Asia, despite constraints and fragmentation, has had a number of achievements. In every country of the region, a vibrant movement has become a countervailing power to the State. However, the relationship between the State and the women's movement is an uneasy one. There are attempts to co-opt leaders from the women's movement through policies and actions. Once they are co-opted, self-aggrandisement gets priority over gender issues. Then the `female patriarchs' perpetuate the existing system.
It is important to strengthen the links forged amongst the women's movement, activists, civil society and women politicians. At the same time, there is need for extensive programmatic interventions to develop women's skills to be efficient candidates and managers in governance, both locally and nationally. There is need to develop a system to provide women with information. Women also have to be taught to overcome the psychology of subordination, of being portrayed as victimised and helpless, and not be content with being guided by men. In all these countries, the training programmes on women in politics were received with great enthusiasm, despite the hurdles the women faced in getting to attend them. The women are fully aware of the importance of knowledge and skills to fulfil their new roles, and, in many instances, are creating new leadership models.