In Nepal’s case, decentralisation and devolution of power were not implemented properly and as a result the state in its different levels could not become inclusive, which led various ethnicities and nationalities and marginalised and backward people felt the necessity of a federal structure, and the decision to restructure Nepal into federal units from its unitary state was included in the Interim Constitution 2007. However, such a decision with far-reaching consequences to society was taken by the Constituent Assembly in a single seating through a declaration. There are people and parties which have demanded that such issues be decided through a referendum. Former royal home minister Kamal Thapa-led RRP-Nepal, which has four members in the CA, has been demanding a referendum to decide on federalism.

There are others who think the country does not need federalism. Chitra Bahadur K.C.-led Rastriya Janamorcha Nepal is leading a movement against federalism arguing that federalism will lead to ethnic and regional tension and violate the national integrity. They reason that a true decentralisation will avert the need for a complex situation like federalism.

Our society has been divided between “federalist” and “anti-federalist” discourse. During drafting of the US constitution, there was a huge difference of opinion between “federalist” and “anti-federalist” camps, and “papers” from both sides were included in the discussion. In the end, the views of “federalist” were included while writing the constitution of the United States of America.

The Interim Constitution has legally paved the way for federalism, and at the same time, the Committee for State Restructuring and Distribution of State Power has already submitted a draft of federalism. Therefore, there is no alternative to take the “anti-federalists” into confidence without prejudice and anger to go for federalism to build an equitable and developed Nepali society. The demands of Madhesi, indigenous and Janajati, women, Dalits for “recognition” denied to them by the previous state is the main factor behind going for federalism. Therefore, constitution-drafting process will not be complete by bypassing the voices of backward ethnicities and communities.

Though federalism will happen, a few things needs to be clarified because two models of federalism are in practice in the world today. One is centred on the dictatorship of the people, for example, as in former USSR, former Yugoslavia and other communist countries. The other is democratic federalism as in the USA.
The model under the communists has already collapsed, which will be the same road if we do not learn anything from that fact. Therefore, “dictatorship of the people” and autonomous states are two antithetical. This is the biggest fallacy, and perhaps it does not reflect the people’s wish also because people are guided by the goal of democratic and equitable society. This has been proved by the frequent people’s movements. Therefore, it has become imperative that Nepal should proceed towards pluralism-based democratic federalism. This is the fact regarding political reality of federalism. However, there are other confusions regarding federalism.

People associate federalism with progress and development. They believe federalism with fulfil their wishes which the previous systems could not. People are under the illusion that children will go to good schools and will get employed after completion of studies; there will be incomes sources; drinking water in dry areas; roads to inaccessible areas after federalism and leadership has been happy to spread this illusion. They have not been given the message that federalism is a process which will deliver development gradually. Instead there is a general belief that all problems will solved overnight in federalism. This is the greatest delusion, which has seen the rise of negative and deluded mentality within three years of the CA elections.

This will only affect federalism badly. If the “federalists” are not serious in their activities, people will lose their faith in federalism, which has already started. Therefore, the “federalists” should engage with both “federalists” and “anti-federalist” and get rid of the feeling of revenge based on the activities in the past. The “federalists” should ensure that everyone is duly respected, no one is oppressed or neglected and feels injustice in their programmes.
On the other hand, the restructuring of states based on recognition ignoring the capacity/viability is another case of delusion. The states will not function without capacity, for which a thorough mapping of natural and human resources and existent infrastructure for development.

One of the most criticised issues in federalism is ethnic federalism. Society is divided between “ethnic federalism with the right to self-determination” and others. While some fear that ethnic federalism will lead to pain of disintegration of the country like the former communist-controlled Yugoslavia, Nigeria, former USSR, others believe that ethnic federalism will provide recognition for those demanding it.

There is no cause for concern when the states are named after a particular ethnic group. The only important issue is the guarantee of democratic rights of citizens living in the states, which no citizen should be deprived of. If that is the intention, then federalism will not thrive. The right of any citizen regardless of caste or ethnicity to practice politics through votes from adult franchise should not be restricted. What will be the democratic rights of the minorities in a state when the majority population seeks prior rights? Without adequate and serious thought on this issue, no discourse and discussion on federalism will have any meaning. Therefore, instead of ethnic states with prior rights, it is advantageous to have states of that guarantee the democratic rights of all the people.