 |
| |
VOL. 27, NO. 27, March 14, 2008 (Chaitra 01 2064 B.S.) |
|
"ADB Is Focused On Spreading Peace Dividend" -
Sultan Hafeez Rahman
Asian Development Bank (ADB) Deputy Director General of the South Asia Department, SULTAN HAFEEZ RAHMAN recently visited Nepal. Before leaving the country after completing six day visit to Nepal, Rahman, who previously served as the Country Representatives to ADB's Mission in Nepal, spoke to the press.
Excerpts:
What is the focus of Asian Development Bank in Nepal?
Our main focus is on development agenda of the country and on the need to bring the peace dividend to the people and spread that across the country. We feel that it is extremely important for the benefit of the peace process, lasting peace should be felt by the people at the grass root level. We are pleased that the government is committed to address on these main issues.
How do you see the elections for CA?
We know that the Constituent Assembly election is now scheduled and the country is in the grip of election fever leading up to the 10th of April. We all hope it will be historic day for Nepal and that new era will have begun during which Nepal will be able to adjust some of the long standing issues which have held Nepal back both economically and in some ways politically. We know that in a situation like this, the whole country is very hard pressed. It will go through a very difficult test.
What is the position of ADB regarding the development projects?
From ADB's side as a development institution, we have always been on the side of Nepal to try to be reliable partner and we have been trying to continue our assistance at this difficult period and to give meaning to the political process in economic term. So from our point of view, we will be working closely with the government and we will be watching very closely as well on what happens.
What is your impression about the government?
I am very pleased to say that the government is committed on the issues and trying to protect whatever gains there have been made in the developmental process till now. The gains in the reform process that is taking place in very difficult circumstances.
What is the performance of ADB assisted projects?
In fact, the performance of our project has increased in the last two years very significantly. We are very pleased to say that we are doing well in most parts. We are also pleased that ADB assisted projects are doing well throughout the country. We are urging all stake holders in Nepal's development process to understand that as a development organization, we are committed to development and we should be allowed to implement our development projects unhindered so that the people across the country from east to west and north to south continue to get the benefits of our projects.
What is the status of country strategy program?
We prepared the country strategy program - which basically governs our assistance to Nepal for five years period - last time in 2003. Actually, it was approved in 2004. Given that, there have been a lot of changes in Nepal including a historical political change; we feel that we need a review of that strategy.
How ADB sees its relations with Nepal?
ADB attaches very high value relationship with Nepal. We know that the country is going through a major transition. In February, our vice president visited Nepal for donor consultation meeting and now I am here. This is an attempt on our part to try to keep abreast as much as possible on the changing situation in Nepal and to see how it is evolving and also to keep assessing our projects. We want that there will be more such high level visits in the remaining parts of this year.
How is the ADB supporting the Interim Plan?
Interim plan is in most way meant for development during interim period. Of course, according to proposal, the funding for interim period is very large. We are doing our best to continue assistance. I believe other development partners are also looking very closely at various parts of the plan. One of the key purposes of the donors meeting you had in February was precisely to discuss these kinds of issues. Asian Development Bank provided technical support in the formulation of interim plan.
What role the ADB is playing in the development of West Seti Hydro power project?
We have involved much more on West Seti hydropower project over the past year or so. The bulk of this work is done by our private sector department. The details of the financing thing has not yet clarified or worked out. To bring the project of this magnitude and to get going closer, it will take time. After all, a very large foreign investment is involved in the project. As far as I can tell you, our involvement in this project is just over one year old. We are still facilitating the project and we are helping the financial issues to make it possible. Without the support from the organization like ADB in the picture, it would be difficult in the environment especially at this stage to attract that kind of foreign investment.
How does the ADB link Melamchi and Kathmandu Valley Water Supply Project?
Melamchi and Kathmandu Valley Water Supply Project are twins and interrelated. They cannot be separated.
How is the progress on Melamchi Project?
Despite lots of ups and downs over almost seven years period, Asian Development Bank has remained with the project and the only reason for that is because we feel that this is an important project. We feel that this is the only economically viable long term solution to solve Kathmandu valley's acute water crisis. We don't want this water crisis to further deteriorate. ADB wants to be forward looking. We are reasonably pleased with what we are seeing at this stage.
Have you met with the government officials?
I have had productive discussions with the Ministry of Physical Planning and Works on the recently restructured Melamchi Water Supply Project. The Government has shown strong commitment for and ownership of the Melamchi project and we appreciate the fact that a major part of the sector reforms has been achieved despite the challenges.
How flexible has the ADB been on this?
ADB has shown flexibility at several critical stages during project implementation given the importance of bringing increased water supplies to the Kathmandu Valley. However, now that the ADB Board has approved the restructuring, it is vitally important that the project be implemented in line with agreed principles, and in particular that the newly created water institutions are allowed to operate independently and free of political interference. These principles will have to be strictly adhered to for ADB to continue supporting the project .
“Knowing federalism as a concept is one thing; but devising it as a workable model for Nepal is quite another” – Bipin Adhikari
A consulting lawyer and constitutional analyst, Bipin Adhikari is a keen observer of the ongoing transitional process in Nepal. The Commentatory on the Nepalese Constitution that he co-authored with other constitutional lawyers in 1998 remains an outstanding piece of work on the 1990 Constitution and Nepal’s experiment with constitutionalism. A doctor of constitutional law, Adhikari spoke to SPOTLIGHT about the issue of federalism that Nepal has been confronting in recent months. Excerpts:
How do you see the rule of law situation in the country?
It is undoubtedly pathetic. There is lawlessness, wariness and lack of due process everywhere. The concept of legality seems to have become a fairy tale.
Why is the situation like this?
There are many reasons. But this situation mainly owes to the system of unlimited government that has been installed in the country. It is bringing changes through means that are not legal or legitimate.
Some lawyers argue that there is already an interim Constitution and a representative legislature, although not elected, to check the government?
If constitutionalism merely meant having a written constitution, then virtually every country could claim to be constitutional, as every country that has a written Constitution does. The main question is – ‘does the interim constitution check anybody?’ ‘does it restrain exercise of power, protect our freedoms and safeguard our national interests?’ Constitutional institutions work when there are separation of powers, checks and balance, rule of law, judicial review, periodic elections, ombudsman and effective and independent constitutional bodies. The interim constitution is devoid of these institutions. It does not seek to prevent the government from abusing the power of the state. Everybody knows that it is not the legislature which decides; it only rubber-stamps what has been brought to it from outside.
What type of federal system you recommend for Nepal?
I don’t think there is any perfect model. Perfection is a goal. Even the countries like Canada and the United States, which have built on federalism as forerunners in this area have outstanding problems to be resolved. What India has achieved by now has also been achieved with continued dedication and commitment. It takes years to develop a workable system. You need sincerity and genuine commitment.
Do the 7-party government, the Maoists and other political constituencies have that sincerity and commitment …?
Is it not clear to you that the idea of federalism has come in Nepal not as a development tool, but as a strategic prescription from outside?
Ours has been a small unitary state since long. It has already developed enough historical, political, geographical, and emotional ties among our people. There are geographical, environmental and infrastructural realities behind the unitary character of the state. Our natural and cultural eco-system is so closely connected. Equally strong is the aspiration of our people to continue living as an independent and indivisible country, and with distinct national identity. This is not to deny the problems that we need to address. They are there. But it is not necessary to build on wrong arguments to establish a right case.
What is the right case then?
We need to continue with the unitary character of the state. The demand of the time is to identify the problems the unitary state has created in all subtleties, and then discuss whether federalism is what is necessary to deal with the situation; or there are other efficient ways to handle them. One must understand that federalism cannot be a remedy for all ills of our society. Especially, it is a hapless tool when the politicians are vile and have little national interest to protect.
What makes federalism different from the ‘devolution of power’ in your opinion?
There is nothing in words like ‘federalism’ and ‘devolution.’ The real issue is what do you want? What is your purpose? Do you want to take the country back to the 17th century Malla and Khas principalities in order to deal with issues that are smaller than the size of the remedy being prescribed? Or your purpose is only to bring those people and areas in the mainstream, which are still left behind in the process of our political development.
How do you see the British experience with devolution of powers? Can we learn something from them?
Well, we can always learn from those who have more experience and skills. The United Kingdom has historically been a unitary state with efforts to devolve power to its different territories according to the necessity. The powers of the central government have been devolved to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London and Elected Mayors according to their specific requirements. But there is a strong unitary character even now.
Can you elaborate further?
What I mean is devolution was not a part of a grand constitutional design in the UK; rather the approach in each case needs to be understood in relation to their situations. In fact, the devolution legislation has produced an asymmetrical distribution of powers in the country. For example, the extent of powers given to the Scottish Parliament and the Assemblies to Wales and Northern Ireland are different. The Northern Ireland Assembly has also lawmaking powers, but over more restricted policy areas. The form of London-wide government is different that both these types. By way of contrast, Wales has been closely integrated with England for the purpose of law and administration. They were very clear about their problems; and the solutions they fashioned were also case sensitive. Each devolution statute includes elaborate safeguards to prevent sovereignty from being undermined.
How is the relationship between the centre and the units coordinated in this scheme of devolution?
As far as I know, the coordination of administration between central and devolved government has been managed to a large extent without resort to legislation but by means of a series of informal agreements. But the system has been underpinned by a secure financial base. Each of these territories has been able to count upon a consistent overall level of funding. That has helped devolution significantly.
What is the alternative for Nepal then?
Knowing federalism as a concept is one thing; but devising it as a model that can satisfy all constituencies and can also work in practice is quite another. Therefore, it is good to build on our own experience as a unitary state. It has always been a functioning system. There are some lessons learnt; and efforts could be made to reform it. Some interventions at the constitutional level to respond to some of our problems could be necessary. But most of the problems of devolution of power could be handled through an enhanced local self-government system. It can not only restrain exercise of power and protect our freedoms, but also make the transition manageable and safeguard our national interests. There is wisdom in the proverb – “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.”
