for diminishing the traditional
methods of discriminations which affect almost all spheres
of social lives of the people of Nepal. Changes in the
macro political structures, thus, have no significant
consequences for the social and economic lives of the
people.
If democracy is to be considered an environment which
allows people to participate in the process of social
and economic transformation for social progress and
prosperity, it can be said that Nepalese people are
yet to experience this environment. The political parties
of Nepal as well as the governments seem to be less
serious about involving people in political processes.
Political parties have a tendency to equate politics
with the election and power with the government. Even
after the re-establishment of democratic system, no
political party has spent serious efforts in listening
to the people about their desires, choices and priorities.
The governments, too, seem to have alienated people
from the system of governance by not providing them
with enough information. People are, thus, ignored by
almost all political institutions including the governments
and the political parties. As a result, majority of
the population seems to be highly reluctant about the
activities of both governments and political parties
creating for them a serious crisis of legitimacy.
In these circumstances, the authors
argue that Bhaktapur Municipality (BM) is different.
The BM presents a unique case in which democratic system
of governance is actuated by the active participation
of people in the process of social and economic transformation.
Unlike many other parts of Nepal, the local government
of BM stands on the basis of the choices, aspirations,
and priorities of its real beneficiaries, i.e. people.
Bhaktapur is perhaps the only municipality of Nepal
where its leaders are the mediators, and the people
make most of the decisions about what course should
their society take and how. As a result, the BM has
achieved significant developments in a number of areas
including the living conditions of its inhabitants.
This study attempts to explain a story
of partnerships, communities, political leadership,
and management practices to show how with a political
will good governance is possible even in a polity that
is undergoing significant governability crises and an
erosion of political institutions.
For this purpose, the authors have
chosen to situate the history as well as current dynamics
involved in the management of fohor (dirt/waste/garbage)
in the centre of their analysis, which will lead them
to progressively contextualize the role of the local
government in the social, cultural and economic transformation
of Bhaktapur and her inhabitants.
Issues raised:
| • |
There is a chasm
between political processes and the conditions
of the Nepalese societies with the traditional
structures of poverty and deprivation continuing
irrespective of the macro political system in
place. |
| • |
The political institutions
of the democratic system are less than enthusiastic
to include the common man in the system as anything
other than a person who casts his vote. This virtual
exclusion from the system has created a crisis
of legitimacy for the institutions of democracy
in Nepal. |
| • |
In Bhaktapur Municipality,
with political will, popular participation if
effected and good governance brought about even
in a polity that is undergoing such a crisis. |
| • |
The transformation of the
environment of a city has led to a change in the
perceptions of the residents towards themselves,
the city and in their relations with outsiders. |
| • |
The local people’s
participation in the safai abhiyan (cleanliness
campaign) resulted in the creation of a strong
public sphere which could be effectively utilized
for social and economic transformation. |
| • |
Bhaktapur Municipality elevated
garbage collection and similar tasks to being
‘pure’ in order to eliminate the association
with untouchability and revulsion that was attached
to these tasks. |
| • |
Grassroots participatory
democracy has to build on indigenous political
traditions that are rooted in voluntarism and
self-help if it is to succeed. The programmes
that are initiated through this effort should
be compatible with the problems and opportunities
that people face in their daily existence. |
| • |
‘If good politics and
good governance are synonomous, then development
is possible through good governance and good governance
is possible through good politics.’ These
in turn arise from participatory politics or what
is called deliberative democracy. |
|
|
|
