John Samuel
I.
Introduction
South Asia
is one of the most diverse regions in the world with one of the oldest heritage
of human civilization. South Asia is
also home for 1.74 billion people, almost a quarter of the world population,
making the region with the highest population density in the world. There are eight countries in the South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation ( SAARC). They are Afghanistan,
Bangladesh, Bhutan India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
South Asia
Region is one of the most diverse regions in the world in terms of language,
religions, ethnicity and political process. There are various forms of
governments that exist in South Asia.
South Asia region
faces serious challenges in terms of geo-political tensions, poverty,
inequality and shrinking of democratic spaces.
While almost every country in South Asia moved to electoral democracy,
the promises of real democratic governance, sustainable development or the
realization of human rights are not yet become real from most of the people in
the region. Because, South Asia has around 400 million poor people, the largest
number of poor in the world. And most of the countries of South Asia are at the
bottom level of the Human Development Index.
Despite some progress in the last few decades both in terms of partial
achievement of electoral democracy and some improvement in reducing poverty,
the challenges for democracy and development are still looming large in all
countries of South Asia.
The SAARC
itself is in crisis largely due to the very same challenges of democracy and
development in the countries of SAARC and due to the geopolitical tensions
between India and Pakistan. Though the
SAARC itself has a Democracy Charter, SAARC itself is a victim of the lack of
democracy within itself and within the countries that constitute it. The SAARC
Charter of democracy says: "Convinced that undemocratic and
unrepresentative governments weaken national institutions, undermine the
Constitution and rule of Law and threaten social cohesion and stability in the
long run, we here by commit to strengthen democratic intuitions and reinforce
democratic practises". If one
compares the SAARC Charter of democracy with the real practice, most of the
countries in the region have an awkward and partial progress in terms of
democratic practises. In most of the countries, the constitution and the rule
of the law and the institutions of democratic governance are undermined,
eroding the democratic spaces, human rights and sustainable development.
The SAARC Social Charter affirmed: Promote universal respect for and
observance and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, in
particular the right to development; promote the effective exercise of rights
and the discharge of responsibilities in a balanced manner at all levels of
society; promote gender equity; promote the welfare and interest of children
and youth; promote social integration
States Parties affirm that highest priority shall be accorded to the
alleviation of poverty in all South Asian Countries. Recognising that South
Asia's poor could constitute a huge and potential resource, provided their
basic needs are met and they are mobilized to create economic growth, States
Parties reaffirm that the poor should be empowered and irreversibly linked to
the mainstream of development. They also agree to take appropriate measures to
create income-generating activities for the poor.
However, all
the promises of democracy, development and human rights are far from being
realized in the countries of the region. That itself is the main contradiction
of democratic process in South Asia, wherein there is a huge gap between the
promises of democracy and development and the real practise on the ground. This
also is indicative of the gap between rhetoric and realities of democracy in
the region.
II. Assessing the present state of Democracy in
South Asia
It is for the first time in the history of
South Asia, there is a prevalence of electoral democracy in all the countries
of South Asia. However, this move towards democracy has not resulted in the
democratization of politics and society itself.
There is also wide range of diversity in terms of forms of governments,
political culture and the democratic practices on the ground. Such diversity is
also due to the chequered process of democracy in almost all the countries,
with a possible exception of India.
There are various forms of government and
political process that are in prevalence. The table below provides an overview
of the Countries, including the system of the governments
 |
|||||
 |
|||||
 |
|||||
 |
|||||
 |
|||||
 |
|||||
 |
|||||
 |
In terms of the assessing democracy, India and
Sri Lanka have relatively long history of democratic governments. Pakistan has
gone through a history of military authoritarianism and elected
government. Bangladesh too has a history
of elected governments and military governments. Nepal is an emerging
democratic country, with the abolition of monarchy and the emergence of
multi-party political system, though with a chequered history of unstable
governments. Maldives has moved out of long years of authoritarian rule to a
rather fragile electoral system with number of challenges for multiparty
system. Afghanistan, a country that became the theatre of the Cold War,
witnessed violent political transitions, many decades of war, destruction and
an uneasy transition to electoral democracy .Bhutan is still a constitutional
with a new process of electoral democracy. This wide range of governments is
also indicative of very diverse political process in these countries.
The countries of South Asia in general has also
witnessed violent political process, beginning with partition of the
subcontinent due to politics of religion, resulting in the death of hundreds of
thousands people. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh,
Nepal and Sri Lanka witnessed the political assassination of its foremost
leaders, resulting consequent violence in all these countries. The emergence of identity politics based on
religion, and ethnicities also plagued the politics within countries and across
the countries. The emergence of
religious extremism and fanaticism was another key issue that affect the
democratic system of government and practices. There is also a major challenge
in terms of minority rights and human rights in all countries of the region.
III.
Historical
context of Democracy and Development in South Asia
What makes South Asia unique is that almost
entire region was under colonial rule for centuries. Most of the countries in
the region, particularly India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, were under the British
Raj. One the one hand the British rule provided an opportunity to make
administrative unity by bringing most of the geographical territory under its
direct rule or forcing all the princely Kingdoms under its protectorate. They have also build up Railways,
communication system and basic institutional and governance infrastructure to
extract natural resources and taxes across the region. This paradoxically
unified the region that was otherwise so dispersed in terms of language,
religion, regions, caste and creed, consisting of thousands of princely
kingdoms of various sizes warring with each other. The colonial rule also gave
rise to English education through establishment of schools and colleges, and in
many ways the establishment of the Universities of Bombay, Madras and Calcutta
in 1857 gave rise to the evolution of a more aware educated elite class in the
subcontinent. While there were number of movements in different parts of the
continent against the Colonial powers, particularly the British, only towards
the end of 19th century, a new movement emerged based on multiple
narratives of nationalism as a collective imagination to resist the oppressive
colonial rulers. The history of the
civil society process in the subcontinent began in the early 19th
century. One of the first civic social reformers of the subcontinent was the
movement and advocacy led by Raja Rammohan Roy in the 1820s for social equality
and against oppressive social customs and for education. It is through such
efforts SATI( the practice of women committing suicide by jumping to the
funeral pyre of their husbands), an oppressive anti-women system was
abolished. Though there were such
sporadic efforts for social reform, education and dignity were in various
forms, including the efforts of missionaries in different parts of the subcontinent.
However, it is the establishment of the Indian National Congress on December
28, 1885 in Mumbai heralded the political movement for freedom from British Raj
and the first movement for Independence in the world. Though the Indian
National Congress was established by a group educated social and economic
elites[2], largely an advocacy network of urban English educated
elites, eventually Indian National
Congress emerged as a national platform for a political struggles for
Independence from the British Rule. The movement spread across the subcontinent
( largely consisting of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh).
The politics of the resistance against the
Colonial power was based on the emerging narrative of national pride. When nationalism emerged as a broader
narrative, the British Colonial regime sought to adopt a divide and rule
policy. This was resulted in the division of Bengal province in to the East
Bengal( Present Bangladesh) and West Bengal( as state in India). This
eventually paved the way for three kinds of narratives on nationalism: two of
them based on Hindu and Muslim Identity and the Indian National Congress sought
an inclusive nationalism based on secular principles.[3] The establishment of the Muslim League in 1906 in Dhaka and
formation of Hindu Mahasabha in 1909[4] indicated the efforts of the Colonial Powers to divide and
rule policy. The seeds of many of the conflicts in the South Asia particularly
between India and Pakistan, and also the rise of exclusive communal politics of
neo-conservatism that militate against democracy , human rights and liberal value
, began with the British Policy of sowing the seeds for discord within the
region.
However, it is the mass mobilization against
the British Colonial rule , under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and under
the broad umbrella of the Indian National Congress that unified and galvanized
people across caste, creed, religion and region within this sub-continent.
Hence the real movement for active democracy and freedom began in the early 20th
century, seeking for Swaraj. In 1926 itself Indian National Congress affirmed
its commitment to Human Rights. Indian National Congress was indeed a platform
of struggle against the Colonial British Rule. However, it was also a movement
for democracy. One of the clearest commitments to Human Rights and Democracy is
the Karachi Resolution of the Indian National Congress in 1931[5].
This included
the following:
1) Basic civil rights of freedom of speech, Freedom of
Press, Freedom of assembly, Freedom of association,
2) Equality before law
3) Elections on the basis of Universal Adult Franchise
4) Free and compulsory primary education.
5) Substantial reduction in rent and taxes
6) Better conditions for workers including a living
wage, limited hours of work.
7) Protection of women and peasants
8) Government ownership or control of key industries,
mines, and transport.
9) Protection of Minorities.
In many ways, this was the most clear
expression civil and political rights and also economic social and cultural
rights many years before the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Karachi
Resolution is also important as it provided a broad normative framework of
commitment to democracy, development and human rights.
However, the very partition of South Asian
sub-continent during the decolonization in 1947 also gave rise to one of the
biggest violation of human rights and dignity in the world. Millions of people
had to shift from Pakistan to India and vice-versa. A huge number of people
were killed. The two nations theory based on religious identity is still a
reason for violence, mistrust and geo-political tensions.
It is also important to note a whole range of
subaltern movement in the subcontinent. The upraise of Adivasis population
under the leadership Birsa Munda and the emergence of movement of Dalits and
marginalized people by Mahatma Jyothirao Phule, and later on by Dr. BR Ambedkar
also helped to deepen the discourse on democratic and social movements. A range of social reform movements in
different parts of sub-continent by Narayana Guru in Kerala, Tagore in Bengal
and Periyar Ramaswamy in Madras Province helped to build a broader movement for
dignity, socio-economic inequality and justice. The women’s movement led by
Savitribhai Phule and Pandita Ramabhai and many others also helped to develop a
movement that sought women’s rights and development in the subcontinent. The impact of the struggle against the
Colonialism and Imperialism and movement for social reforms not only helped to
politicise the society but also paved the way for an active civil society in
South Asia.
In the beginning of the 1950s, the economic
situation and social conditions of most of the South Asian countries were
depressing. South Asia also witnessed Bengal Famine, one of the biggest famines in the world in the
1940s killing hundred thousands of people. Despite the struggle for freedom, at
the beginning of the 1950s, all the South Asian countries had stagnant
economies with hardly any economic growth, dilapidated institutions left behind
the British rulers and a vast majority of people without education, health,
land or livelihood, making the majority of countries some of the poorest
countries in the world. This huge poverty, stagnant economy and political
divide on the basis of religions posed huge challenges for the independent
countries in the region.
In the aftermath of Independence, India and Sri
Lanka were the only countries managed to sustain as democracies. Despite an aberration during the emergency in
1975 to 1977, India remained an effective and sustainable electoral democracy,
known as the largest democracy in the world. However, the major issue was that
electoral democracies themselves do not transform in to democratic societies
and substantive democratic practice. The
major challenge to democratisation of society and governance was also due to
feudal hierarchical societies that marginalized dalits, Adivasis and minority
communities. This has also affected the democratic process in Sri Lanka as the
Tamil speaking minorities and poor people felt discriminated within the larger
democratic process within Sri Lanka. Most other countries in the region were
either under military dictatorship or under authoritarian governments till the
1970s.
IV.
Diverse context
of political Process and Democracy in South Asia
It is not easy to describe the movements for
democracy in generic terms as there are entirely different historical
trajectories of political process in all eight countries of South Asia. The
diversity of these countries is evident in terms of the Governance index of the
major countries of South Asia.In terms of Human Development Index; almost all
countries of the region, except Sri Lanka are in the bottom of the HDI.
Corruption index is also high in case of many countries, with possible
exception of Bhutan. Each of the governance indicators, including rule of law,
accountability and government effectiveness show the diversity among countries
in the region, wherein the performance of some countries are very law. Among
the countries, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and India are relatively better performing
countries in terms of the governance index
|
Governance Index ranking for core countries
|
||||||||
|
Bangladesh
|
Bhutan
|
India
|
Maldives
|
Nepal
|
Pakistan
|
Sri Lanka
|
||
|
142
|
132
|
130
|
104
|
145
|
147
|
73
|
||
|
Corruption Perception Index
(2015) (global ranking of
168)
|
139
|
27
|
76
|
N/A
|
130
|
117
|
83
|
|
|
The Worldwide Governance Indicators
(2012)[
|
Government Effectiveness (percentile
rank)
|
22.49
|
67.46
|
47.37
|
48.33
|
16.75
|
23.44
|
45.93
|
|
Rule of law (percentile rank)
|
19.43
|
59.24
|
52.61
|
38.39
|
26.54
|
30.96
|
52.13
|
|
|
Political stability and absence
of violence/terrorism (percentile rank)
|
9
|
72.51
|
11.85
|
86.97
|
8.53
|
0.95
|
22.75
|
|
|
Voice and accountability (percentile
rank)
|
34.12
|
38.86
|
58.29
|
32.23
|
27.96
|
23.70
|
29.86
|
|
|
31.5%
|
23.7%
|
21.9%
|
16%
|
25.2%
|
21.4%
|
8.9%
|
||
|
Primary School Enrollment
|
92%
|
91%
|
94%
|
N/A
|
98%
|
72%
|
94%
|
|
|
Secondary School Enrollment
|
54%
|
78%
|
71%
|
N/A
|
67%
|
38%
|
99%
|
|
Source: UNDP Human Development Report 2015,
Transparency International Corruption index, 2015 and the World Bank Report
2015.
This diversity of political process makes it
difficult to discuss democracy as system of government and practice without
discussing the specific context of the countries. Hence, it is important to
discuss experiments with democracy within the specific political and historical
context of each of the eight countries.
1) India
In terms of democratic government and practice,
India has the most established practice. Though India is considered to be the
largest democracy in the world with free and fair elections, a great
constitution and relatively stable institutions, there have been difficult
challenges to realize the full potential of democracy in India. The first
challenge came in the form of Emergency that suspended all democratic and human
rights from 1975 to 1977. The violent attack against the minority Sikh
community in Delhi that killed thousands of people, following the assassination
of the Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her
security guards of Sikh identity, also exposed the internal challenges of democracy within
India. The demolition of the Babri
Masjid in 1992 and also the planned attack against Muslim minority community in
2002 in Ahmadabad exposed the gap between the promises and performance of
democracy in India. India also witnessed
a serious of separatist movements, partly driven by the geopolitical tension
between India and Pakistan, resulting in violence and ongoing role of
armed forces in many states, particularly in Kashmir and parts of North
East. This has also resulted in serious
terrorist attack in different parts of India, paving the way for a new politics
of mistrust and hate. The role of Rastreeya Swayamsevaks Sangh- RSS (National
Volunteers Corps), a militant Brhamin-Hindu supremacist organisation,
polarising and dividing the country in religious basis has in many ways
affected the promises and performance of democracy in India. Mahatma Gandhi,
prophetic leader of freedom struggle and democracy was assassinated by the
extreme right wing Brahmin supremacist was indicative of the increasingly
violent politics in India. India has also witnessed communal violence in
different parts of the country. There is also a major challenge of violent
politics of Maoism and the ongoing fights between the armed forces and Maoist
militants in some of the most marginalized and poor areas of the country.
Despite its economic growth, India still faces
huge inequalities, largest number of poor people in the world, and caste based
discrimination that affect the promises and performance of democracy in India.
The well-established democratic system of government is yet to make the society
democratic in India. However, it is also important to note that that there is
diversity in terms of democratic process in different states of India. In India,
political process in many states is still driven by caste-politics and often
political parties are run by families with hardly any democratic parties
within. Another key challenge that
hinders democratic process are the high amount of corruptions within the
government and also the financing of elections by rich corporate families
resulting in a nexus of Political elites, economic elites , media elites and bureaucratic elites.
Despite the huge diversity in terms of
languages, region, ethnicity, caste, creed and religion, it is indeed a great
testimony of the resilience of a democratic system that sustained in India over
the last seventy years. Given its diversity, population and high prevalence of
poverty, Indian experiment with democracy is unique in the world itself as
largest number of people vote election and after elections in India. And the
election commission of India has been one of the relatively more independent
and effective democratic institutions in India conducting elections across the
country all through the year. The
emergence of Local governance Institutions through the 73rd and 74th
amendment to the Indian constitution also resulted in the localization of
democracy and relative successful political participation of people at the
grassroots level. One of the major factors led to relative democratization at
various levels is the presence of active civil society movements during the
freedom struggle and also in the post-independent India. Not only the political
party process in the global south began in India, some of the most active human
rights and civil society movements also began in India. People Union of Civil
Liberties , a voluntary civil society
movement , emerged in the mid 1970s was the first of its kind of human rights
movement in the global south and it played an important role in resisting
Emergency in India.
One of the greatest achievements of Indian
democratic experiments of the last seventy years is that Military remained in
the barracks without involving in the political process of the country. This
also made Indian democracy somewhat resilient and sustainable compared to other
countries in the region.
2)
Pakistan
While India and Pakistan became independent from the British
Colonial powers, the division of
the Indian sub-continent on
religious lines also paved the way for long-standing geo-political tensions
with its religious sub-texts. While
Pakistan set out to emerge as a Democracy, the early demise of its leader MA
Jinnah resulted in postponing the promises of a secular democracy in
Pakistan. The army that took control of
the government in the 1950s resulted in the militarization of institutions and
political process in Pakistan. Pakistan adopted a Constitution in 1956, making
the country in to an Islamic Republic. And the country was ruled by the
Military throughout the 1950s and 1960s.
The first multi-party democratic election in
Pakistan was in the 1970, since its independence in 1947. However, when Awami
league, under Sheik Mujibur Rahman, with
a primary base in East Pakistan ( present day Bangladesh) won against the
Pakistan People’s party, the military establishment refused to hand over power.
This was a triggering point of war of liberation in East Pakistan that to the
establishment Bangladesh as an independent country in 1972. Democratic rule
resumed in Pakistan when Zulfikar Ali Bhutto assumed power from 1972 to 1977.
The promise and hope for democracy with
the emergence of Pakistan People’s Party and the emergence of ZA Bhutto also got crushed with the Military coup by
Gerneral Zia. This resulted in the hanging of ZA Bhutto, indicating the demise
of democratic political process for a very long time.
The real challenges for establishing a
multi-party electoral system also is due to the fact that the Cold War Politics
in the Afghanistan was played by making use of the Pakistan by the US
government. Huge amount of aid for the military and establishment of Taliban,
making use of the Zia regime not only led to complete militarization of all
establishments but also resulted in the making of highly fundamentalist and
militant Islamist forces to fight the proxy war for the USA. This islamisation
and Militarisation of political process
posed the biggest challenges for the promises and performance of
democratic system in Pakistan. The
Islamization of politics at different levels of government and political
process also resulted in the marginalization of minority communities with in
Pakistan, and also prevalence of oppressive and discriminatory Blasphemy laws
in the country. This has also resulted in the emergence of violent non-state
actors consisting of armed militant organizations often unleashing terror and a
politics of fear within the country. This also makes more challenges to human
rights, democracy and development in Pakistan.
Despite all these challenges, Pakistan also
witnessed the emergence of active multi-party system and witnessed a succession
of elected governments, often hampered by the role of military in multiple
ways. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto also indicated the high prevalence of
violence within the political process of Pakistan. Like almost all other countries in the
region, corruption at the level of government and politics posed a huge road
block between the promises and performance of democracy in Pakistan. Recently
the Supreme Court of Pakistan made its elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sheriff quit , due to the corruptions charges against
him.
The real positive aspect of democratic process
in Pakistan is the active presence of civil society process and movements, the
prevalence of a relatively vibrant media and the prevalence of active political
parties across the country. However, like India, the political parties in
Pakistan too are often leader centric and family centric.
3) Bangladesh
The emergence of Bangladesh as an independent
country in 1972 itself was indicative of the gap between the promised and
performance of democracy within Pakistan.
Here too identity politics based on language played a role. It is the
imposition of Urdu language and the perceived and real marginalization of
Bangladesh that resulted in a movement for freedom and democracy in Bangladesh.
The process of the emergence of Bangladesh was a painful process due to the War
and violence that unleashed on the people. The political turmoil, frequent
instances of natural disasters, very high density of population and prevalence
of higher poverty rate made Bangladesh a vulnerable democracy. The
assassination of its elected leader Sheik Mujibur Rahman and his family by Military in August 1975 indicated
the first crisis of democracy in
Bangladesh. In its history of the last 45 years, Bangladesh witnessed Military
governments and democratically elected governments. The erstwhile Military ruler of Bangladesh
General Ershad too embraced democratic political party process by floating his
own Jatiya Party.
Bangladesh is a highly politicised society with
active civil society and active political party system. While political parties
are very active in a highly politicised society , the society , including civil
society, is often polarised on political party lines. The tussle between the Awami League and
Bangladesh National l Party has in many ways had affected the performance of
democracy and democratic institutions in Bangladesh. Bangladesh with its
well-entrenched history of student mobilization and university politics also
often resulted in political violence between two political parties. The deep
divide and non-cooperation between two major political parties resulted in the
effective absence of opposition within the Parliament or governance. This also is due to the fact the ruling
governments , including the present ruling Awami League governments, often
target the opposition parties and their leaders by undermining all institutions
of democracy including that of the independence of Judiciary itself.
This has also resulted in politics of violence
and also high incidence of political killings and enforced disappearance, and
human rights violations across the country making Bangladesh a hotspot of human rights violations in the
world. Another major challenge is the radicalisation of Islamic politics and
the emergence of neo-conservative politics in Bangladesh, resulting in
political murders of advocates of liberalism, secularism and independent view.
The recent killings and attack against many bloggers and publishers is also
indicative of the increasing threat to civil society and human rights in the
country.
Bangladesh is an example of a vulnerable democracy with an elected government, though the election itself raised the legitimacy of the process in terms of free and fair elections. The recent targeting of journalists and human rights defenders also indicate the increasing gap between promises and performance of democracy in Bangladesh. The hope for Bangladesh democracy is the prevalence of highly active civil society, a relatively highly politicised polity and established political party process. However, the key challenge is for the major political party process to mature in to basic cooperation and respect for opposition parties in the process of democratic governance.
4)
Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka has a relatively long history of
electoral democracy and democratic practice.
Sri Lanka emerged as an Independent country from the British Colonial power
on 4th February 1948. The political process in this Island national
began in towards the end of 19th century, resulted in the formation
of Ceylon National Congress in 1919. However, these united political efforts of
Sinhalese and Tamil Leaders did not last for long. This division of politics on
the basis of ethnic lines of Sinhalese and Tamil influenced the political
process of Sri Lanka in a substantial way, undermining the potential and
promises of democratic governance of a unified Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka with its relatively high human
development index, relatively less instance of poverty and relatively long
history of democratic process, was expected to emerge as the first developed
country in South Asia. Sri Lanka in the 1950s provided great promises of
democracy. But the ethnic divide following the discriminatory policies of the
government in the 1950s resulted into a major civil war with the establishment
of LTTE ( Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam)
as a military force. This has not only adversely affected the economy ,
political process but also gave rise to a politics of mistrust, exclusion and
violence based on ethnic divide between the Majority Sinhala Population, Tamil
Speaking population and Muslims in part of Sri Lanka. The civil war, human
rights violations and politics of mistrust often resulted in human rights
violations and stood in between the promises and Performance of democracy.
Within the larger context of electoral
politics, Sri Lanka has been successful in terms of changing the government
based on free elections. The other major achievement of Sri Lanka is that
despite a war like situation Military never got involved in the mainstream
political process of Sri Lanka. Another important aspect is that Sri Lanka has a relatively high educated middle class with
high political consciousness and a very active civil society. The change in the
government following the last election in 2015 also gives a sense of hope for
the Sri Lankan experiments with democracy.
5) Nepal
Nepal
has emerged as a Federal Democratic Republic with an active political party
process and strong civil society process across the country. Over the last few
decades Nepal has moved from a Monarchy to a more democratic government. The
movement for democracy made its nation-wide presence in the 1990s, resulting in
the first democratic reforms in 1991 establishing a multi-party electoral
democracy within the framework of constitutional Monarchy. However, the killing
of the King Birendra and the entire family in June 2001, created a challenge to
the very institution of Constitutional Monarchy. Though the King Gyanedra ,
brother of the former King Birendra, tried to take full control of the
government, the democracy movement in 2006 resulted in process abolishing the Constitutional
Monarchy and in 2008 declaring Nepal as a secular democratic
Republic.
Nepal has witnessed decades of political
turbulence and valance due to the armed Maoist efforts to capture the state.
However, Nepal also witnessed active political party process with well
established political parties in the country. The Maoist Political party
joining the mainstream politics winning the largest number of seats in the
Constituent Assembly elections held in June 2008, heralded a new chapter in the
democratic politics of Nepal. However, Nepal also witnessed frequent changes in
the government resulting in a vulnerable transition to a democracy. In 2015, a new Constitution of Nepal was
announced transforming Nepal in to a full secular Democratic Federal Republic.
In a way, Nepal is promise of hope in the
establishment of a new democracy, successfully making a difficult transition to
a democratic republic. Nepal has an active civil society process and a vibrant
human rights movement. In the last twenty five years, there has been
considerable politicisation within the society with relatively active polity.
This also paradoxically resulted in the form of the emergence of identity
politics based on region, particularly the political tensions in the context of
multiple political narratives in the Tharai region closer to India
Nepal is a new hope to democratic process in
the region, though it is still a new a vulnerable democracy. Given the active
civil society and political parties, there is fair chance for Nepal to emerge
as an effective electoral democracy in the region.
6)
Maldives
Maldives is a fragile electoral
democratic system, though with relatively less democratic space and increasing
restrictions for freedom of expression and freedom of association. Maldives
experiment with democracy is yet to stabilize as a system of democratic
governance, with relatively less space for civil society movements.
Like many other countries in the region,
Maldives witnessed the presence of various colonial powers such as Portuguese,
Dutch and eventually the British. Maldives became an independent on 26 July
1965. Maldives is the least populated
country in the region and suffered great loss due to the Tsunami in 2004.
Ever since its independence, Maldives have
witnessed a very chequered of history of elected governments and authoritarian
governments and sporadic movements for democracy. After a series of
governments, election and political and economic instability, Maumoon Abdul
Gayoom took over the government in 1978, continuing for a period of thirty year
rule, ‘winning’ six elections without opposition. Though there were a series of attempted coup
in the 1980s, Gabon government survived. While Maldives witnessed political and
economic stability, there was an absence of real elections or democratic
governance. This led to the movements for democratic reforms in the first
decades of this century, also the establishment of Maldivian Democratic Party(
MDP) by a journalist activist Mohammed Nasheed . The demand for democratic
reforms resulted in the announcement of new Constitution in 2008. In the first
ever Presidential election Mohammed Nasheed won the election. Though he sought to initiate a democratic
process, with his resignation in 2011, following political unrest, the promises
of democratic governance too suffered a setback in Maldives.
The challenges of democracy in Maldives include
the relatively weak institutions to sustain democracy, and also the absence of
an effective and independent Judiciary. There are also efforts towards the
radicalization of Islam that undermine the promises of a liberal democracy
within the country. Given the smaller size of the country and its population,
there is less space for vibrant and independent civil society movements. The
civil society organisations in Maldives are also under-resourced and under
constant watch of the government. This restrictive space and increasing
intolerance to human rights defenders make Maldives as a very fragile
experiment in democracy and development.
7)
Bhutan
Bhutan is a lack locked Kingdom in South Asia
which was never colonized. Bhutan’s experiment with democracy is relatively new
with its transition from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy only
in 2008. The first election to the National Assembly of Bhutan was held under a
two party system in 2008. The political system consists of National Council
with an upper council with 25 elected members and National Assembly with 47 law
makers from political parties. The executive powers are with the Council of
Ministers, led by a Prime Minister.
Bhutan is a new democracy that witnessed two relatively free and fair elections in 2008 and 2013, and successfully changing the government in the last election in 2013. Given its long rule of absolute democracy and given the absence of significant political movements, the civil society process in Bhutan is relatively new and relatively small. Bhutan is also in the process of building institutions of democracy and there is more chance for Bhutan’s transition to a stable democratic system under the Constitutional monarchy. Bhutan is the second least populated country in the region, though Bhutan also has a long history of stable governments without least political turmoil in the government. Bhutan economy and political process is also significantly dependent on India and Bhutan is the recipient of the largest aid from India.
Bhutan is a new democracy that witnessed two relatively free and fair elections in 2008 and 2013, and successfully changing the government in the last election in 2013. Given its long rule of absolute democracy and given the absence of significant political movements, the civil society process in Bhutan is relatively new and relatively small. Bhutan is also in the process of building institutions of democracy and there is more chance for Bhutan’s transition to a stable democratic system under the Constitutional monarchy. Bhutan is the second least populated country in the region, though Bhutan also has a long history of stable governments without least political turmoil in the government. Bhutan economy and political process is also significantly dependent on India and Bhutan is the recipient of the largest aid from India.
8)
Afghanistan
Afghanistan’s history of politics and
political culture is significantly different from other countries of South
Asia. The country has witnessed series of wars and conflicts throughout its
history and Afghanistan has become the major theatre of the Cold war politics
from the 1970s. Afghanistan witnessed a stable monarchy of Mohammad Nadirsha
from 1933 to 1973. From 1973 onward, the country has become the theatre of
politics, revolution and armed violence, resulting in pro-soviet Communist
government from 1978 to 1992. And the radical islamisation of the country and
the entire region began with the support of America to the Muhajideen
fighters which also eventually resulted
in the Talibanization of political process.
A long history of civil war, violent politics and war made the very
state-building process of Afghanistan fragile and still vulnerable. As an
Islamic republic, there is less space for independent civil society and human
rights movements in Afghanistan. Though few elections were held, Afghanistan is
also a case of illiberal electoral system without much space or scope for human
rights, and freedom. This is also due to the fact that non-state actors and
religious extremist forces still active in Afghanistan and hence there is a
serious threat to the lives of human rights defenders and also those who stand
for a more democratic governments. So in
terms of democratic process and civil society, there are serious challenges in
the country.
V.
The Challenges
of Democratization movement in South Asia
While there are still movements of civil
societies and process seeking to expand the democratic and civic spaces, the
rise of neo-conservative politics and governments in the region also pose great
challenges for the movements for democratic spaces, human rights and social
justice. With unprecedented level of
inequality, the wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of few big
corporate families and they tend to finance elections and electoral process
undermining the very integrity of elections and democratic process. Crony
capitalism and the nexus between economic elites, political elites, media and
military elites often lead to the elite capture of the state despite claims of
electoral democracy and economic growth in most of the countries.
a)
Prevalence of
feudal political process driven by political families
If we analyse
the democratic and political process in all the eight countries in the region,
the one trend across the region is that it is often few political families who
run political parties. Though different countries of South Asia has very
different trajectories of democratic process and movement, the one common thing is the feudal family
politics where even leadership is ‘inherited’ , rather than due to any
intrinsic reasons. These political
families often are in nexus with business families and they tend to control
government and decide the policy framework.
b)
Lack of
democracy within Political Parties
Political
Parties are very important actors in the sustenance of an effective electoral
democracy. However, there are very few parties that have internal democracy.
Most of them are run and led by families of political leaders or a an oligarchy
of political leaders .In the case of South Asia, a liberal democratic system is
in constant tussle and tension with the feudal and semi feudal polity. In many
ways India is the only decolonized country with such a long and sustained
democracy. However, the major challenge
for Indian Democracy is the electoral democracy as a system of government
operates along within a feudal society with caste discrimination and communal
tensions.
c)
Increasing
Economic, Social and Political Inequalities
Most of the
South Asian countries witnessed economic growth in the last twenty years. While
few of the countries have moved in to middle income status and India has
emerged as powerful economic player not only in the region and the larger
world, the one common trend across the region is the unprecedented level of
inequality.
In the case of
South Asia, there is already a history of social inequality based on caste
discrimination and historical marginalization of the Dalits, indigenous people
(Adivasis), ethnic and religious minorities. And the increasing economic
inequality further marginalizes the people who also suffer from social
inequality. In the context of South Asian countries, social and economic
inequality also leads to political inequality without substantive democratic rights
and more vulnerable to human rights violations. These multi-dimensional
inequalities with its links with identities often create conditions for
political and social violence in many of the countries and also give rise to
more authoritarian tendencies. The emergence of various political religious extremists,
particularly that of radical Islamists and Hindu fanatics poses serious threat
not only to liberal values and democracy, but also target human rights
defenders and proponents of freedom.
d)
Undermining of
Institutions of governance
With the
emergence of illiberal politics in many of the countries, there are efforts to
undermine the independence of judiciary, election commission and other such
important institutions. While many of the relatively new democracies and
fragile democratic countries are yet to develop strong institutions that can
sustain democracy and democratic governments, in the case of relatively well
established governments and governance systems the existing institutions are systematically
undermined. This poses the challenges of systematic undermining of institutions
by the neo-conservative political forces and proponents of illiberal elected
democracies, often driven by the majoritarion politics.
e) Geopolitics that undermine democracy
and development
Many of the root causes
of political conflicts within countries and between countries can be traced to
the Colonial policy of divide and rule.
In the process of resistance to the Colonial rule in the sub-continent,
the British Colonia powers actively perused a policy of dividing people on
religious lines, resulting in the creation of countries based on religious
identities. From the inception of Pakistan, based on the Muslim Identity, there
have been a tussle between Pakistan and India over number of issues, and the
most prominent is the contestation over the Kashmir. The mutual mistrust
between the governments and militaries of these countries resulted in wars and
ongoing tussle over number of years. This also has resulted in cross-border
terrorism and both countries accusing each other of supporting various
separatist movements. All these resulted in a long standing geo-political
tussle between India and Pakistan resulting in a huge allocation of budgets for
buying arms and ammunition and often not spending enough for human and
sustainable development or poverty eradication.
This has not only adversely affected democratic process in the region, but also resulted in the effective collapse of the SAARC process.
This has not only adversely affected democratic process in the region, but also resulted in the effective collapse of the SAARC process.
VI.
Regional Political Process
South Asia is one of the few regions
in the world without a regional human rights mechanism or process. The Social
Charter and Democracy Charter of the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC) look more ironic than ever. The SAARC is itself in deep
crisis due to the absence of core democratic values within itself and in most
of the countries that constitute SAARC. It was formed in Dhaka on 8 December
1985.
The problem is the SAARC itself is in ventilator and
in comma. Compare this Charter with real practice on the ground. Despite
electoral democracy in many countries, the real democratic institutions and
practices are undermined in almost all the countries.
The last SAARC Summit happened in Kathmandu on 26-27
November 2014. And the next Summit supposed to be held in Pakistan was
cancelled due to increased tensions between Indian and Pakistan. Ever since
SAARC as a political platform cooperation among countries of South Asia became
dysfunctional.
As of now the very future of SAARC
is in question due to the deficit of substantive democracy in many countries,
and also India the largest economy and state not investing in the SAARC
political process. India is moving towards new formations such as Bay of Bengal
Initiatives for Multi-sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC)
with more collaboration between countries of South Asia and South East Asia,
without including Pakistan.
Hence, regional political and democratic process is
very weak due to number of reasons, including the geo-political tensions
between India and Pakistan.
V. Conclusion
Though there is a prevalence of elected governments
in all countries of South Asia, the character and quality of democratic process
is very diverse in the region. The multiple challenges for democratic system
often hamper the democratisation of society and political process in almost all
countries. The emergence of new identity politics based on exclusion, mistrust
and targeted violence tend to annul the promise of democracy and democratic
practises in most of the countries. Increasing instances of corruption,
shrinking of democratic civic spaces, new challenges for civil society
organisations and the increasing instances of human rights violations make the
challenges to the realization of democracy, development and human rights in the
region. Despite elections, the emergence of crony capitalism and the nexus
between political and economic elites tend to lead to the elite capture of the
state in many countries.
Apart from this, the larger politics of India and China also play a key role in the region. Both countries have huge influence in terms of politics, economy and governance in most of the smaller countries of the region. This larger geo-politics also tend to pose new challenges to the democracy, development and human rights in the South Asia Region
Hence, there is need to invest more in building young leadership and a renewed youth and social movements for sustaining and deepening democratic process at the local, sub-national and national and regional level. Most of the countries in the region are facing challenges to democracy and this can only be addressed by revitalizing a new politics of inclusion, peace and prosperity for all based on the principle and practice of democracy, human rights and sustainable development. Hence, there is a need to revitalize the civil society process and movements in each of the countries and the region in general. It is here that regional organisations and networks can play very important role in strengthening the capacities of civil society organisations, independent media and investing in a new generation of leaders within the countries and in the region. This can only be done with a new imagination for civil society, politics and solidarity within the countries and beyond the countries based on new efforts towards freedom, justice and human rights for all.
[1] John Samuel is the Executive Director of
FORUM-ASIA, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development. The views expressed
here are that of the author. This draft paper is prepared for the International
democracy conference in Jakarta on 21-12 of August 2017. The paper will be
further revised with detailed foot notes and reference.
[2] Those who are credited with initiating the Indian
National Congress were AO Hume, Dadabhai
Naoroji and Dinshaw Eduji Wacha. A detailed analysis of the Freedom Movement is
available in ‘ India’s Struggle for Independence ‘ by Bipin Chandra and also
the History of Modern India by Bipin Chandra
[3] In many ways the
Colonial reading of India denied the multiple diversity of India and reduced
these multiple diversity only on religious lines seen from a British
perspective. The first modern history of India was the well known work by James
Mill published in early 19th century - The history of British India ( 1818-23).
It is Mill who did the periodization of Indian history in to three periods :the
Hindu Civilization, Muslim Civilization and the British Period and such
periodization was based on ruling powers and the religious identity. This very
construct of Colonial history - based on religious identity, later on helped
the British to divide people on the basis of religion and also helped to form
multiple notions of nationalism based on religion. Hence paradoxically the
Colonial reading and writing of history also in multiple ways influenced the
multiple and often competing narratives on nationalisms in the sub-continent
including the two -nation theory propounded by religious nationalists on both
sides of the spectrum( Hindu Mahasabha- and later by RSS and Muslim League) .
[4] The Colonial government's
creation of separate
Muslim electorate under the Morley-Minto reform of 1909 was a catalyst for Hindu leaders
coming together to create an organisation to protect the rights of the Hindu community members, largely consisting of upper-caste
leaders such Madan Mohan Malavya, Lala Lajpat Rai and others.
[5] The Karachi Resolution of the Congress was drafted by
Jawaharlal Nehru. The Karachi session of the Indian National Congress was
presided over by Vallbhai Patel
No comments:
Post a Comment