Experts Respond to Election Commission’s Recommendation to Designate One Electoral Constituency per District
Image Source, RSS
The Election Commission’s recommendation to amend the constitution to assign one electoral constituency per district has drawn criticism from experts to opposition parties.
At the end of last week, the commission submitted the proposal to the government-formed task force preparing a discussion paper for the constitutional amendment.
However, experts and opposition parties argue that the proposal is not appropriate according to geography, population, proportionality, and inclusion principles. They have criticized the commission’s recommendation as insufficiently studied and not well-reasoned.
Suggestions from the Commission
Image Source, Getty Images
The Election Commission suggested reducing the number of MPs to lower the financial burden and proposed designating one electoral constituency per district.
According to the current constitution, the House of Representatives has 275 members—175 elected under the first-past-the-post system and 110 under the proportional representation system.
The commission also proposed lowering the minimum age for National Assembly members from 35 to 30 years.
For candidates running for the House of Representatives, the commission recommended reducing the minimum age from 25 to 21 years.
To reduce economic burden, the commission suggested having only a chief commissioner and two commissioners.
Currently, the commission has a chief commissioner and four other commissioners.
The commission also put forward various other suggestions related to elections from the local to the federal levels.
‘This Was the Approach During the Panchayat Era’
Image Source, ECN
Commissioner Sagun Shamsher Jabara said the proposal came in light of the heavy economic burden on the country and to facilitate quicker decision-making.
“During the Panchayat era, each district had one MP. Since there are now 77 districts, having 77 MPs seems appropriate. Additionally, the proportional representation system could also have one MP per district. Why is there a need for two MPs from a single district?” he stated.
“The concern is that the situation looks cumbersome. Even if there are many people, if three can do the job, why involve seven?”
However, some argued that due to significant population differences among districts, this proposal is inappropriate.
How can a district with a few thousand people and one with millions both have just one MP?
Regarding this concern, Commissioner Jabara said, “Migration may occur in the future. Population in Kathmandu may decline. If decentralization enables people to return to their hometowns, villages will become populous and cities may get emptier.”
The commission also recommended that each province elect four members to the National Assembly, totaling 28 members.
Additionally, it suggested amending the constitution to reduce the number of presidential nominated members from three to two.
Expert Opinions
Federalism expert Professor Pitambar Sharma said he could not understand the rationale behind the commission’s method of determining electoral constituencies.
According to him, since population is declining in hill areas but increasing in the Terai and urban areas, establishing such constituencies may complicate the electoral process and reduce supervision effectiveness.
“Such an arrangement may work in some hill districts, but many parliamentary constituencies exist in one Terai district. This weakens supervision and does not conform to electoral laws,” he noted.
“Therefore, while the number of constituencies in 34 hill districts with declining population could be reduced, this approach may not be suitable for Terai.”
While arguments exist to allocate fewer constituencies in districts like Humla, Jumla, Manang, Mustang, and Dolpa due to low population, Professor Sharma opined that assigning only one constituency per district is not logical.
Although the current allocation of 275 MPs in the House of Representatives is sufficient, reducing the number would fail to reflect the constitution’s principles of proportionality and inclusion.
He agreed with the commission’s rationale that lowering the number of local levels from 753 to roughly 500 could be appropriate to reduce the financial burden.
Responses from Opposition Parties
Nishchal Rai, spokesperson for the main opposition party Nepali Congress, called the commission’s recommendation unsuitable.
“According to Article 84(1) of the Constitution, the selection of MPs is based on population, geographical suitability, and diversity. The concept of ‘one district, one constituency’ does not align with these criteria and contradicts the spirit of the constitution in terms of geography, society, and demographics,” he said.
“Comparing the population of Manang/Mustang and Kathmandu/Morang districts shows significant difference. While adjustments could be made to numbers, sticking firmly to 77 constituencies is negative,” he added.
He noted Congress is preparing to formulate an official stance on this matter.
Similarly, the other opposition party, the Communist Party of Nepal (UML), claimed that the commission made this recommendation without sufficient study.
“Suggestions should not be given without proper studies and preparations because population balance is uneven. Diversity must also be considered,” said Padma Aryal, Deputy Leader of the UML parliamentary party.
“Reducing the number of MPs by applying a single formula without study and consultation appears ill-advised. It is impossible to have 77 constituencies across 77 districts,” she added, clarifying that her party has yet to adopt an official position on the issue.
This news can also be followed on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. The BBC Nepali Service radio program airs Monday through Friday at 8:45 PM.