There have already been staged protests against the recommendation of the committee. All Madhesh based parties like MJF, TMLP, MPRF have protested division of Terai in two parts and non-inclusion of Narayani including Chitwan in Madhesh. The Madhesh based parties are in favour of a single autonomous unit for the entire Madhesh.  MPRF has threatened to start agitation on this issue. (Republica, 22/1/10). Similarly, there are protests against non-inclusion of Terai parts in far western federal republic named Khaptad (Annapurna Post, 21/1/10). Some groups in the eastern hills included in Kirat Autonomous Region have protested as they should have been made part of Khambuwan. Several Tharu organizations which had struggled for a Tharuwan in Parsa and Bara districts in eastern Terai have protested the non-inclusion of Tharu areas in Tharuwan (Kantipur, 22/1/10). There have been disputes in areas supposed to be parts of federal states even before recommendation by CA committee.

The town of Banepa inhabited mainly by Newars was declared part of Tamsaling, autonomous region of Tamangs by the Maoists.  Some Newar ethnic organizations wanted it to be part of Newa autonomous region.  So, there was a dispute between those who wanted it to remain part of Tamsaling and those who wanted it to be part of Newa autonomous region.  The Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai has written that there are several Newar majority clusters inside proposed federal autonomous state of Tamsaling. He has proposed these be made autonomous areas within Tamsaling or to settle the issue by referendum.

 The districts of Jhapa, Morang and Sunsari were named by the Maoists as Kochila autonomous region although it was made part of Madhesh in eastern Terai in accordance with recommendation of CA committee. These districts were claimed earlier by Limbuwan mainly on historical grounds.  The largest group in proposed Kochila is speakers of Nepali language who make up 37 percent of the population. They make up more than half of the population of Jhapa and Morang districts (Gauri Nath Rimal, Infused ethnicities). The Federal Limbuwan Council has protested non-inclusion of territories of all nine districts it had claimed and inclusion of part of its territory in Sherpa, Kirat, Narayani and Sunkosi states. Nepal Tamang Federation has objected to inclusion of Tamsaling territory in Narayani and Sunkosi states.

There is no doubt that federalism in Nepal has received mandate from the people during constituent assembly elections in 2008.  However, such mandate was not for creating federal states based on ethnicity. Most of political parties that participated in the elections favoured federalism but not on the basis of ethnicity. No such mandate was given for forming fourteen states as recommended by the State Restructuring Committee. Actually, the famous Swedish economist Johaan Galtung has written that Swiss model of federalism is not suitable for Nepal as ethnic distribution in Nepal is not as orderly as in Switzerland. Besides, there is a mixed population in most parts of the country. Actually, there is only one district out of 75 where Magars make majority of population. Similarly, there is one having Gurung majority (Manang), one having Tamang majority (Rasuwa), one with Newar majority (Bhaktapur) and one with  Tharu majority (Bardia) (Raj, Prakash A, Crisis of Identity in Nepal). Is it justifiable to declare federal states on the basis of ethinicity where a particular ethnic group does not make the majority of population? Gerrymandering is a term used in the US to describe a process to change constituency in an election favoring a particular party.

2.7 Proposed Model of Federal States by Re-Structuring Committee of CA

The Constituent Assembly has formed a Re-structuring of the State and Power Sharing Committee (RSPSC) in accordance with the by law of C.A., rule 66-930 in order to regulate and regularize thematically to promulgate the constitution, a 43 member restructuring of state and power sharing committee was formed in 2065/08/30 B.S.  (November 15, 2008). It was reorganized twice in two month times. It was chaired by Lokendra Bista Magar of C.P.N. (Maoist). RSPSC was given the mandate of preparing of draft report including a concept paper. CA has given the following responsibility:

1.   Re-structuring of the state,

2.   Determination and naming of each federal unit,

3.   Division of power of federal governments among executive, legislative and judicial,

4.   Determination of concurrent power of different levels of units,

5.   Determination of interrelationship of executive, legislative and judicial power among different federal units,

6.   Body to resolve disputes among the federal units,

7.   Other pertinent factors related to functioning of committee.

There are two types of fundamental principles in according to the Committee as follows:

1.      Identity

2.      Capability

1       Identity: A person has plural identity at the same time in Nepal. There are class, social, political, cultural, linguistic, gender, and regional identities. The primary emphasis should be own identity. Identity may be a) ethnic group, b) cultural group, c) Geographical and regional continuity and d) Historical Continuity.

2       Capability:

a)      Interrelationship with capabilities and economy,

b)      Conditions of development infrastructure and possibilities,

c)      Availability of natural resources,

d)      Accessibility

Proposed by Re-structuring of State and Power Sharing Committee of CA

Source: Draft Report of Re-structuring committee of CA.

CA committee has proposed three tiers of government and fourteen states. The committee has proposed 14 states on the basis of identity and capabilities which are as follows:

1 ) Khaptad –Capital Dipayal,  2)  Jadan – Simikot, 3) Karnali –Birendranagar,            4) Lumbini Abadh – Tharuwan – Ghorahi, 5) Magarat- Tansen, 6) Tamuwan- Pokhara, 7) Narayani – Bharatpur, 8) Tamsaling-Chautara, 9) Newa-Kathmandu, 10) Mithila-Bhojpura-Koch- Madhesh –Janakpur, 11) Sunkosi, 12) Sherpa- Kamalamai, 13) Kiranta-Triyuga, 14) Limbuwan-Ilam.

Proposed Federal States for Sherpa is viable or not?

A federal Nepal containing a number of states which would be economically viable, would not be a burden upon the central exchequer and would have potential for economic development should be the primary criteria. On the other hand, such factors as geographic compactness, addressing concerns about ethnic and linguistic identity and complementarily of economies of three major regions of the country such as mountains, hills and the Terai should also be taken into account. Most people in Nepal have more than one identity.  Just to give one example, more than half of Magars in Nepal speak Nepali as mother tongue.

The blueprint of fourteen states presented by Committee on State Restructuring of constituent assembly (CA) in early 2010 included four based on geography (Khaptad, Karnali, Sunkosi and Narayani) although people speaking Nepali as mother tongue make overwhelming majority of population. On the other hand, the states named after ethnic groups such as Tamuwan, Magarat, Tamsaling, Jardan, Sherpa Autonomous region, Newa Autonomous Region, Limbuwan do not contain these groups forming majority of population. The Maoists have already declared these states from the street during 2009 and early 2010 when CA was either in session or was being interrupted by the Maoists. They have also declared that the ethnic groups after whom the federal states were named would get preferential treatment for some time, a concept which is against democratic norms. The Maoists also declared their own constitution on 15^th May 2010; the day after the elected CA would have completed its own tenure but did not.  There are twelve federal states in this draft Constitution.