Nepal’s Madhes-based parties, which came into the forefront of Nepali politics mainly after the 2008 Constituent Assembly elections, are now struggling to retain their strength and keep themselves relevant in national politics.
Madhes is the name for the flatlands of southern Nepal bordering India. The Madhesis are a diverse minority group in Nepal. The region covers one out of seven provinces and elects representatives for 32 electoral constituencies, under the ‘First Past the Post’ or FPTP category, to the House of Representatives.
Two major Madhes-based parties – Loktantrik Samajwadi Party (LSP) led by Mahantha Thakur and Janata Samajbadi Party-Nepal (JSP-N) led by Upendra Yadav – are contesting the parliamentary and provincial assembly elections tomorrow, November 20.
PM @narendramodi met a delegation of the Rastriya Janata Party – Nepal, which was led by Mr. Mahanta Thakur. Their discussions were fruitful and extensive. pic.twitter.com/q96HEsPnAV
— PMO India (@PMOIndia) May 12, 2018
The Mahantha Thakur-led party has joined the ruling alliance in some constituencies in Madhes, while the Upendra Yadav-led party has allied with Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) led by K.P. Sharma Oli.
C.K. Raut’s Janamat Party is the third factor in Madhes. Raut, who launched a secessionist movement in Madhes from 2011, returned to constitutional politics by signing an 11-point agreement with then Prime Minister Oli on Mar 2019. Subsequently, he registered a party with the Election Commission (EC).
Thakur and Yadav’s parties consider Raut as a threat to them. In turn, Raut has criticised the two other Madhes-based parties, stating that they have failed to take up and establish the genuine agenda of Madhes. Notably, Raut and Yadav are going head-to-head in the Madhes province’s Saptari 2 constituency.
According to the Nepal EC, the Yadav-led party is contesting elections for the House of Representatives in 79 seats, the Thakur-led party in 51, and the Raut-led party in 54 seats under the FPTP category all over the country.
Also read: Favourites, Alliances, Numbers: All the Questions Ahead of Nepal’s November Polls Answered
Madhes parties have fielded candidates in certain constituencies with the support of allies. In others, they are directly contesting ally candidates. In addition, there have been multiple splits and name changes for these parties in the last several years. All in all, the situation is confusing for voters and gives analysts plenty of reasons to conclude that the parties may not do well in Madhes this time.
Traditionally, Madhes is considered the bastion of the Nepali Congress or NC. Of late, Oli’s CPN-UML has also improved its position. CPN (Maoist Center) also has a sizeable presence there.
So Madhes-based parties, who remain divided into various factions, are competing in a crowded field and are less likely to perform well in the election, says Pranab Kharel, editor of the new book, Reading Nepali Transition (2006-2015).
“Over the past decade, Madhes-based parties, to some extent, have succeeded in ensuring the symbolic representation of Madhes, but substantive changes to ensure meaningful representation are not happening,” noted Kharel.
The first Madhes party, named Tarai Congress, was established in 1951. After the restoration of democracy in 1990, the Nepal Sadbhawana Party came into existence but suffered multiple splits between 1990 to 2006. But it was only after 2006 that Madhes-based parties emerged as a prominent force in national politics.
In 2007, Upendra Yadav launched the Madhes movement and later formed the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, which secured 54 seats in 601-member Constituent Assembly elected in 2008.
Veteran NC leader Thakur also formed the Tarai Madhes Loktantrik Party.
From 2008 to 2013, Madhes-based parties remained a key factor in the government formation and constitution drafting process. After that, there were multiple splits among them.
In 2015, Nepal drafted a new constitution, but Madhes-based parties snubbed it and resorted to a four-month-long protest. India, too, expressed displeasure with Nepal’s new constitution and imposed an economic blockade to press Kathmandu to address the concerns of the Madhes-based parties. Both the blockade and the Madhes movement were lifted after the first amendment to the constitution in 2016, which addressed some of the demands.
The unofficial blockade has led to massive shortages of fuel in Nepal. Photo: File
However, while India had earlier advocated for more equity for Madheshis in nation-building, it has maintained public silence on the Madhes issue in recent years.
Just before the 2017 parliamentary elections, six Madhes-based parties came together and formed the Rastriya Janata Party Nepal.
After the 2017 elections, then Sanghiya Samajbadi Forum, led by Upendra Yadav, won 16 seats, while Mahantha Thakur’s Janata Samajbadi Party got 15 seats – both FPTP and proportional representation categories, in the lower house of parliament.
The 2017 general election yielded a powerful communist government, which meant that Madhes-based parties lost much of their bargaining power as kingmakers. Oli, who became prime minister for the second time in 2018, rejected outright the Madhesi parties’ demand for a constitutional amendment.
After this election, Kharel observed, the number of seats obtained in Madhes would determine Madhesi parties’ role in national politics. Their ideologies will take a backseat, he says. Still, the issues on their traditional agenda, such as inclusion and citizenship, will continue to linger even after the elections.
“Madhes-based parties should be credited with establishing the agenda of federalism and inclusion, but of late, they are negotiating with Kathmandu on the terms of their personal benefits to ensure proximity to power,” explained Kharel.
To secure the support of Madhesi, janajati and marginalised communities, major parties such as Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Maoist in their election manifestos have pledged to amend the constitution to make it acceptable to all sections of society.
In addition, like other parties, Madhes parties are also dominated by older faces, such as Mahantha Thakur, Upendra Yadav and Rajendra Mahato.
The result of local elections held in May this year also suggests that the November 20 election is going to be tough for Madhes-based parties.
Also read: Timely Local Polls in Nepal Mean the Return of Grassroots Democracy
There are altogether 136 local governments in the Madhes province. Of them, Madhes-based parties, in total, won just 40 seats, while NC and UML became the first and second party, leading to a mass shift to the NC and UML by Madhes party leaders with an eye on the parliamentary elections.
Madhes-based parties, it is believed, have begun a bargaining process with Kathmandu and have not stuck to their demands agenda. The latest poll alliance of Madhes-based parties with the ruling coalition and CPN-UML demonstrates this.
There are projections that NC, UML and Maoist Centre will emerge as the first, second and third parties in the national parliament.
There are three possible scenarios of power-sharing after the elections. First, parties may form the government as per their pre-election coalitions. The other two scenarios are for Nepali Congress to join hands with UML, or for the two largest communist parties to support each other, just like they did in 2017.
For the Madhes parties, it is evident that the votes that they get in the election will determine their place in the larger power-sharing deal.
At the same time, whichever coalition forms the government will try to bring Madhes-based parties on board to avoid the next protest movement in Madhes. Though Madhes-based parties have become weak, major parties fear that there could be an eruption of a new movement in Madhes at any time, in a repeat of 2007-2008 and 2015.
Additionally, national parties want to increase the acceptability of any government formed by them in Madhes. For this, they need regional parties’ support.
When it comes to their agenda, Madhes-based parties are unlikely to make substantial gains. But they are sure to find some space in central politics.