More than political or ideological reasons, political parties in Nepal split because of economic reasons, claim the political analysts.


By Akhilesh Tripathi


Splits seem to have become the norm rather than exception for the political parties in Nepal. The six Madhesh-based parties which participated in the Constituent Assembly (CA) polls in 2008 are now fragmented into more than three dozen outfits. Three parties – Matrika Yadav's Nepal Communist Party (Maoist), Bijaya Gachchhedar's Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (Lokatantrik) and Prachanda-led UCPN (Maoist) which was the largest party in the dissolved CA – have split over the last one month.


Another split looked imminent in the ruling Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (Ganatantrik) with the party expelling its Acting Chairman Raj Kishor Yadav from the post when we went to the press on July 1. What is triggering this series of splits in the Nepali political parties?


The breakaway factions invariably cite "ideological differences" or "political deviation" in the leadership of the mother party as the main reason behind the splits. According to political analysts, however, these justifications don't apply to the series of splits seen in the Nepali political parties over the past few years. Parties have been splitting more because of economic reasons than political ones, they claim.


"Gone are the days when parties would split on ideological grounds in Nepal. Money, the lack of it or the want to make quick money like the rival faction are at the root of all these splits," observes political commentator and analyst Mumaram Khanal, a former politburo member of the Prachand-led Maoist party.


Former government secretary Dr Dwarika Nath Dhungel, who has done several researches on the transparency of funds in political parties and written a book, Inside Out – The Political Parties of Nepal, says, "Leaders of the new political parties seem to be thinking that the Ranas looted the nation for 104 years, the Panchas for 30 years, and other politicians in the post-1990 democratic period; so why should we let go this opportunity to make big buck now. And they are ready to even split their party to cash in on this opportunity." According to Khanal, politics in Nepal has become a lucrative business which doesn't need much financial investment.


He explains, "If you are the leader of an influential political party, you have access to many financial avenues including exploitation of the state coffers and hefty sums of donations from private sector businesses at regular intervals. All the splits that you have seen over the past few years in the country are more or less guided by these two motives. Ideological or political differences which are cited as the reasons behind the splits are nothing but a hogwash." What Khanal says rings true when one considers what UCPN (Maoist) Chairman Prachanda said only a couple of days after the long-awaited split in his own party. "I should have agreed to the demand of the Baidya faction to give them the plum ministerial portfolios such as the finance ministry etc while forming the current government," a regretful Prachanda was quoted by the media a few days after his party split.


On the other hand, the Baidya faction had long been accusing Prachanda and a few leaders close to him of exercising complete monopoly over party funds without maintaining even the slightest form of transparency. According to CP Gajurel, former secretary of the UCPN (Maoist) and an influential leader of Baidya's new party, extortions from the casinos and other industries, donations made directly to the party headquarters, levies collected from the ex-PLA fighters and salaries and allowances drawn from the state coffers in the name of the non-existent fighters went directly to Prachanda.


"When put together, all this becomes several billions of rupees. Prachanda has never bothered to furnish the expenditure details of this huge amount," Gajurel has gone on record, accusing his former chairman of massive financial embezzlement.


Khanal thinks these accusations are not baseless. "Look at the lifestyles of Prachanda and the leaders close to him. Prachanda's new home at Lazimpat is worth at least Rs 500 million, not Rs 50 million as reported by the media. It's legally registered in somebody else's name. But almost everybody knows that that's not true. Such things must have hastened the split in the party," he says.


Journalist and political commentator Chandra Kishor, who has been observing the Madhes-based parties from up-close says the seemingly never-ending series of splits in the Madhesi parties is guided solely by the financial benefits associated with ministerial berths. "The Madhes-based parties have split whenever there's a strong possibility of a change in government. Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, Tarai Madhes Loktantrik Party, Sadbhawana party all have split many times just for power and money," he comments.


Lack of Transparency


The Nepali political parties fear transparency. Membership fee, levies from public position holders from the party such as parliamentarians and ministers, contribution and donations from individuals and business community are the main sources of income of any political party in Nepal. But most of the parties, including the big ones, don't maintain a clear record of their income and expenditure details.


Only a few "key" leaders know how much money the party got from where and how it was spent. "The lack of financial transparency is a big shame for the parties which claim to be the vanguards of democracy," says Dr Dhungel," The parties which want to create a new Nepal want to continue with their same old, non-transparent ways." The Political Parties Act 2002 clearly states that the parties registered at the Election Commission (EC) must submit their annual reports of income and expenditure to the EC within six months of the end of each fiscal year. These annual reports must include the name, address and profession of person and the name of the company which has provided them a donation of more than Rs 25,000, according to Section 12 (2) of the same Act.


"After repeated requests, the major parties did submit their annual financial reports a few months back. But all of them continue to violate the Act's provision on submitting the details of donors providing more than Rs 25,000," EC's Legal Officer Arun Kumar Jha told The Corporate.