The Five Percent

Voting rights for under 18 The right to vote is the most privileged form of power vested in the people in a democracy. Not only does it give people the opportunity to choose their representatives, it also puts them and their representatives in the cycle of responsibility and accountability. According to Nepali laws, an individual must complete 18 years of age in order to be eligible to vote, while the constitution guarantees citizenship at the age of 16. This means that even after holding a citizenship, a 16-year-old youth is deprived of voting rights for two years until he or she reaches 18. In this article, we highlight this contradiction and stress that anyone who holds a citizenship must be given the right to vote. Who are denied? National Youth Policy (NYP) 2010 of Nepal defines “youth” as those belonging to the age group 16-40, which is 42 percent of the total population of Nepal. The age group between 16 and 18 number about 1.1 million (5 percent of population). This five percent qualify for citizenship but are deprived of voting rights. ‘Youth’ is a highly discussed age group in the demographic studies of every country. Youth represent both benefits and challenges. Stakeholders respond to youth through different sets of policies and programs for development and social change. Youth population is different across counties and institutions. United Nations, for instance, considers youth as an age group between 16-24; according to the World Bank it is the population between 15-24; in India those aged between 13-35 are considered Youth; the corresponding figures for Pakistan and Japan are 13-35 and 0-24 respectively; whereas in Nepal, National Youth Policy 2010 defines it to be within the age bracket of 16-40 years. Policy eagles see youth as the cream of all age groups, because it is the time when an individual reaches his/her highest biological (bodily integration), psychological (intellectual ability, thinking, reasoning), social (responsibility, roles, values, marriage) and economic (income generation, career) maturity. Moreover, other age categories, mainly children and elderly, are also largely dependent on this age bracket. The youth are the drivers of development, and also integral entries in demographic listings. Despite all these national and international considerations, it is worth noting that this age group, generally referred to as the harbinger of change, is the most unfortunate age group in Nepal, as they are denied the right to vote. Isn’t curtailing the basic political right of a group with such high potential absurd? This is the common question that five percent of our population is asking today. Global practices  After World War I, most countries set voting age as 21 or higher. Later, many reduced voting age according to their convenience. However, by the beginning of the 21st century, in common practice 18 years became the most common voting age. But different countries have different voting ages. Cuba, Isle of Man, Nicaragua and Guernsey allow their citizens to vote at 16. In Cameroon, Fiji, Malaysia, Singapore, and a few other countries, citizens have to wait until they are 21 to vote.  A few countries have 17 or 19 as voting age. Surprisingly, a few countries have rationalized voting age on the basis of election. In Austria, general voting age is 16, but for European parliament elections it’s 18. Similarly, in Israel, general voting age is 18, but for municipal election it is 17. Citizens aged 16-18 in Bosnia, Serbia and Montenegro acquire the right to vote if they are employed. In a nutshell, voting age at 16 is generally not a new concept in the world. Given the political will, it can be adopted even in Nepal, considering that the government has already recognized the age group of 16-17 as ‘youth’ having citizenship rights. Demeny System Additionally, in global context there are organizations like Vote 16 and the Socialist Party of the US which have been advocating for lower voting age. But the idea of reducing voting age had been proposed even earlier. In 1986, it was demographer Paul Demeny who floated the idea of reducing voting age. His idea was later named “Demeny Voting system” by Warren C. Sanderson in 2007. The idea is to allow children to voice their political agendas through parents or guardians. Generally, in this system, parents would cast a proxy vote for each of their dependent children. The vote is considered a ‘half vote’; if parents’ choices are different, the child’s vote would be counted as ‘split vote’. This idea was discussed in Germany, Japan, Hungry, and the debate continues. In 2003 and 2008 parliament elections, Germany introduced the idea of Demeny voting system in parliament. Conclusion The debate of lowering voting age is not yet in mainstream political agenda in Nepal, and has not become a popular issue. When countries around the world are discussing ways to address children’s political voice through votes, Nepal is still constraining the voting rights of five percent of its population. It is high time we brought this issue to the table with necessary revision in our legal arrangements. Although the five percent cannot vote in the upcoming election, those who are eligible must exercise their right to vote, fully participate in the second Constituent Assembly election, and take the nation forward. The authors are youth activists upretipratyush@gmail.com kanchan@yuwa.org.np Published on The Republica, 12 November, 2013, http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=64433

Give Youth a Chance

- Surath Giri & Kanchan Pd. Kharel

The current state of Nepali politics has frustrated the majority, if not all Nepali youth. Youth response to current political developments has ranged from complacent indifference to active hatred. As a result, an important segment of the population does not find any stake in the ongoing political process. Will my vote really make a difference? Or am I better off not wasting my time by indulging in politics? These are pertinent questions beguiling the youth today. This is unfortunate because in addition to their vivacity and passion for progress, youth make up around 42 percent of the total population of Nepal, which makes them an indispensible component of the political process. Hence, it is imperative that their involvement in the process be actively sought.


Since the last Constituent Assembly (CA) election, political parties seem to have at least acknowledged this fact. However, political elites still see youth participation merely as a way to reinforce the legitimacy of their rule rather than a way to involve them as decision makers. Even during the last CA discourse, voices of young parliamentarians was as good as non-existent and key decisions largely revolved around older and more prominent leaders of the parties, although increased youth participation in the Parliament was touted as a harbinger of change. Besides, there is an emerging misconception among state actors that confirming the ‘participation’ of frustrated voters in the election alone would safeguard democracy and legitimise their rule. In the long run, such a fallacy is likely to end up in another revolution and more political upheaval in the country.

As opposed to the economic marketplace, the status quo thrives in the political marketplaces. Numerous actors, often with vested self-interests, wield ideology, violence and power as weapons to safeguard and further their positions. In fact, the status quo in the economic arena too has its origins in the political marketplace. Therefore, although today’s youth clearly understand the needs of the nation better than the older generation and are poised to assume leadership of the nation, they have not been able to break the power chain of older political leaders and are languishing behind. Sooner or later, ‘creative destruction’ is bound to happen and defunct ideas and leaders are bound to perish, replaced by new ideas and new people that are more in tune with current needs and trends.

When countries around the world are discussing greater integration and interdependence among nations, there is little space for ultra nationalistic ideologies. When the world is racing towards prosperity through innovation and entrepreneurship, it is futile to dream of creating an autocratic society devoid of democracy and freedom. As freedom and equality are being celebrated around the world, it is foolish to think that feudalism will prevail and one can hold on to power through feudal institutions. As the world is turning into a huge heterogeneous melting pot, ethnic and regional politics are bound to be irrelevant sooner than one would like to think. There is an urgent need for Nepal’s political leadership to understand this. They need to realise that, in the end, freedom and prosperity are what people want above everything else. If they do not get it, in today’s world, young people can afford to vote with their feet—by leaving the country like the hundreds who do so everyday.

Longstanding ideologies within political parties deny young people access to decision-making levels. Elite leaders fear that allowing youth in key positions will not only be fatal to their political career but could also result in a gradual shift in their principles. Today, the youth are in favour of respect and the protection of individual freedoms. The spirit of these liberal notions is to provide them with alternatives in every other aspect of society. Contemporary thinking among the youth demands leadership that avoids parochialism and fosters pragmatic solutions to socio-economic transformation. It is high time that the youth take the lead and deconstruct the current political stalemate by accommodating divergent points of views regarding nation building. Power and responsibility should now be upon their shoulders to find a way to bring growth and prosperity to the nation.

The upcoming CA election will be a testing ground for whether our political parties and leaders have sensed the winds of change and whether they are ready to adapt to address the real needs of the nation. It will be an opportunity to see whether more youths will get a chance to assume leadership positions and have their voices heard in the process. Youth themselves have a crucial role to play in bringing about this change. They have an important role in demanding more than just cheap talk and sensationalism from leaders as well as demanding more roles and opportunities for themselves. There is an urgent need for us, the youth, to act.

(Published in The Kathmandu Post of September 10, 2013 )

Scrutinizing Nepal-China economic relation

According to Foreign Investment Opportunities 2009 Report, produced by Government of Nepal, Ministry of Industry and Ministry of Commerce and Supplies, the main objectives of Nepal economic diplomacy are to enhance the flow of foreign direct investments (FDIs) into the country, to promote Nepal’s export trade and attract greater number of tourists to Nepal. Therefore, there is a need to anatomize the Nepal-China economic relation and study to what extent Nepal has achieved in line with these objectives.

Scenario of Nepal-China Economic relation

The investment scenario of Nepal-China relation is marked by Foreign Aid and Foreign Direct investment (FDI). In the fiscal year 2011/12, Development Cooperation Report (DCR) suggests that China holds 12^th position out of more than 19 foreign partners contributing 2.8 percent of the total US$ 1.21 billion. In was 16^th in the chart with 1.7 percent share of US$ 1.21 billion in the fiscal year 2010/11.  

Today, China is the second largest country after India in FDI. The Industrial Statistics Report of the Fiscal Year 2010/11 says there were 69 Chinese industries with 1187.40 million rupees foreign investment creating 3066 jobs for Nepalese. In total, 209 foreign industries from 36 nations injected 10050.71 million rupees as FDI which collectively generated 10887 job opportunities. Chinese FDI, unlike other countries, are made in seven major Sectors (Industries) in Nepal which are Agriculture (10), Construction (1), Energy (1), Manufacturing (13), Mineral (2), Service (27) and Tourism (15).

Service sector is primary sector of investment for Chinese investors. 27 industries under this sector have been established so far creating 1143 job opportunities for Nepali labors. Manufacturing sector receives maximum foreign investment, 351.10 as compared to other sectors. Also, this sector is providing 666 job opportunities which is next big number after service sector.