Federalism-"Federal
Electoral System"
Advocacy
of federal political orders:
Under
the federal electoral system of state affair the state
is divided between sub-units and a center.
Unlike a centrally controlled state (such as
feudal oligarchic, proletariat, or totalitarian state)
sovereignty constitutionally depends on two
territorial units – regional and central.
Citizens
in the federal system have political obligations to
two authorities – the local and the center units of
the state. Electorates elect representatives for both
units’ legislative, executive and judiciary bodies
of the governments in one nationwide general election.
State
units at each level have final authority and can act
independently of the others in some area. For example,
a sub-unit of the state can exempt or increase the
property tax on its residents independent of its
central unit.
Many
regional socio-political, economic, cultural, ethnic
and other unique local issues can be accommodated
independently without the interference of the center
unit of the state with common political order.
The
allocation of the authority between the sub-unit and
center may vary. Typically center has the powers
regarding defense and foreign policy.
However, center unit generally mentors
sub-units on overall national policies under the
strict stipulations of the constitution of the nation
with the sub-units’ participations in central
decision-making bodies.
The
federal system is the confederation of sub-units of a
state in which a room for any form of dictatorship or
centrally controlled system can hardly prevail. It is
the keystone of the modern-day democracy. Its state
organization methodology can help put up functional
electoral governments systems. The simple analogy of
such an organization method is of office file cabinet
that has filing system for category and sub-category.
Federalism
inherently gives sub-units of the state the power and
responsibility with direct participations in the
overall state managements.
Decentralization of power is the built-in
process of the federalism.
The
fundamental of federalism is the electoral process. No
government positions are politically appointed without
the certain free competition of electoral process
direct or indirect.
Feasibility
of Federalism:
Democracy
has become a human need to live a dynamic
socio-political and economic life with guarantee of
the civil liberty and protection of the human rights.
People’s movements, political revolutions, civil
wars can bring the waves of democracy in a nation.
But, how to institutionalize the waves of democracy in
the government practice, it needs certain system or
structure where practice of democracy can be
inherently workable.
Therefore
the most of the developed nations’ democratic system
is based on federalism. Federalism under the
Parliamentary democratic practice has established the
direct election of the Prime Ministers by the popular
votes of the electorates in country like Canada,
Australia and New Zealand. To make federalism more
feasible in the government practice these nations have
eliminated the old Parliamentary system that allows
the political party in majority in the lower house to
nominate the Prime Minister. Such changes have given
these nations a stable government for a term of the
Prime Minister without the need of midterm elections.
If
contemporary politics see the urgency to adopt
federalism as the system to institutionalize democracy
in Nepal then the Prime Minister of Nepal need to be
elected directly by popular votes to form cabinet from
the political party in majority or collision to have
four or six years of stable government without the
need of midterm elections.
However,
the federalism system of democratic
institutionalizations can still be viable if the
contemporary Nepali politics like to adopt the old
fashioned Parliamentary practice provided each
sub-unit’s head of the cabinet or governor or
constituent administration chief is elected directly
by the popular vote for at least four years term.
It
is essential in the federalism that the sub-units or
local state governments must be stable to hold the
nation together for law enforcement, justice and
economic developments. In this case, whatever happens
with politics of the center the democratic
institutions of sub-units will not get adversely
affected.
Is
Socio-political Geography of Nepal Viable for
Federalism?
Nepal
is a country of diverse ethnicity spread over seventy
five percent of mountainous territory. There are
remote regions in the Himalayas and trans-Himalayas.
There are more mountain regions in Nepal than regions
with valleys and plains.
In
order to create sub-units of the state we must
consider the socio-political geography of Nepal that
can evenly distribute the natural and human resources
over all development of the nation. Overall human
resources are the most essential to build and sustain
the sub-units of the state with the functional
democratic institutions.
Each
sub-units of the state need a governor, a sub-unit
judge, a sub-unit attorney, a sub-unit sheriff or law
enforcement officer, mayors, members of assembly from
the permanent residents of each sub-unit elected
directly by the electorates of each sub-unit.
These
elected representatives are the individuals who may
come from different political parties will be
responsible to build and sustain the democratic
institutions of each sub-unit such as administration,
assembly, court, and police academies.
Each
sub-unit needs to have public school districts that
will manage public school in the sub-unit. The
electorates of the school district must elect the
members of the public school council. Each school
district council members in the sub-units of the state
ought to be responsible for the school to meet the
national standard of education.
Take
for example, the recently introduced metropolitan
police operation in the capital valley, which it seems
organized with the centrally controlled method of
governance by the Home Ministry.
Under the methodology of federalism it should
have sub-units determined with the density of the
population in each district of the metropolitan. The
electorates of the metropolitan’s each sub-unit must
elect the law enforce officer or sheriff to run the
police operation in each sub-unit. The sheriff and all
police personnel in the sub-unit must be the permanent
resident of the metropolitan.
Under
the federal method of structuring metropolitan
security system the elected sheriff of a sub-unit of
the metropolitan must take the security responsibility
of the citizens of his or her sub-unit as his or her
primary responsibility.
The
provision for such grass-root responsibilities in the
federal structures of the government must be
legislated in the constitution. The law enforcement
(police) districts in the sub-unit of the state have
security obligations to two authorities though
primarily police districts are responsible to the
police academy of the sub-unit.
This
means the need for the abolition of the police
headquarter of the capital valley with its centrally
controlled mechanism under the hierarchical orders
from the home ministry to the palace.
What
state’s capital needs to do with police headquarter
is to transform it to the national investigation
bureau under the federalism to manage nation’s
overall law and order, and national security
investigations with the profound record keeping
working structure.
This
is how federalism helps democratic institutions
develop pragmatic logistics in the sub-units of the
state or in the grass-root level of governance.
It can accommodate all diverse socio-political
or ethnical conditions of the sub-unit with
decentralized electoral democratic methodology for the
establishments.
|