Introduction                                         

 Historical Context

Thaus are historically cheated by state programmes and policies. There are few historical events which made them constantly from landlord to poor of the poorest. The King Mahendra collapsed the elected government of Nepal and held the state power himself in 1960. He initiated some important work for the name of development in his initial ruling period. The firstly he endorsed the land Reform Act 1964 under the Land reform program and started to land registration tax collection, the secondly he lunched the malaria eradication program in the entire Terai of Nepal and thirdly he released the East-West Highway(Mahendra High Way) in Nepal. After the unification of Nepal in the late 18th century, members of the ruling families received land grants in the Terai and were entitled to collect revenue from those who cultivated the land. Tharu people became bonded labourers, a system also known as Kamaiya. In 1854, Jung Bahadur Rana enforced the so-called Muluki Ain, a General Code, in which both Hindu and non-Hindu castes were classified based on their habits of food and drink. Tharu people were categorized as “Paani Chalne Masinya Matwali” (touchable enslavable alcohol drinking group) together with several other ethnic minorities.

In the late 1950s, the World Health Organization supported the Nepalese government in eradicating malaria in the forests of the central Terai. Following the malaria eradication program using DDT in the 1960s, a large and heterogeneous non-Tharu population from the Nepali hills, Bhutan, Sikkim and India settled in the region. In the western Terai, many Tharu families lost the land, which they used to cultivate, to these immigrants and were forced to work as Kamaiya. When the first protected areas were established in Chitwan, Tharu communities were forced to relocate from their traditional lands. They were denied any right to own land and thus forced into a situation of landlessness and poverty. When the Chitwan National Park was designated, Nepalese soldiers destroyed the villages located inside the national park, burned down houses, and beat the people who tried to plough their fields.

Before the success of above mentioned program, Tharus only, were enjoying in their motherland, Dang. Only a few Non-Tharus people use to settle in dang even they stay at Dang temporally because they couldn’t digest the malaria like Tharus. People use to come in Dang in the winter session to sell their herbs (like padamchal, Timmur, Bhake Chuk, Ginger, Tarming etc) and exchange it with food crops. The land was fertile and enough for Tharu people in Dang.Tharus used to plough land as per their choice. They used to say land is gift of God and no one has right to it’s ownership. They only used to serve the dry fishes to the Royal Palace as a ‘Walak’.

Malaria eradication program had been launched in Nepal in the nationwide basis since 1964, after that Terai become the healthier, attractive and accessible place for the hill people. Hill Tarai migrations became the trend. The indigenous Tharu people of Dang were forcefully displaced from their original place. Their rights on land, water and forest were snatched. They become landless and bonded labors. Not only did they lose their territory but also they lost their own Tharu language, culture, Religion (Pantheism) and arts. According to Mahes Chaudhary  Between the census period of 1961 to 1971. Within ten years interval near about 61000 Tharus were forced to migrate from Dang to outside (Banke, Bardia, Kailali, Kanchanpur and even in Indian U.P. border. The pushing factors were the state policy which made the landless for the name of Land Reform program and due to extreme exploitation of the newcomers over them. The pulling factors to migrate Budhan(Nayamuluk) were the Nepal Government had opened the project of clearing the jungle for new settlement. The propagandas of the policy makers were that anybody could get freely enough land after cleared the jungle. The link of the Mahendra Highway also did vital role to make migration success Tharus were experienced to occupy the jungle, as slogan attracted them they hurriedly migrated to Naya Muluk from Dang. They cleared the jungle, made the new settlements but they still culdn’t get the land entitlements, the land ownership was already had taken by ‘C’ classes Rana’s in the respective areas. Thus the Bhumi putra, Tharus gradually became sharecroppers, Kamaiyas and bounded labours.

Recognition of the word ‘Kamaiya’

The term Kamaiya descends from the dialect of the Tharu ethnic group. According to local wisdom, the word ‘Kamaiya’ originates from ‘Kam’, which refers to ‘work’. In a Tharu parlance, the term is used as a synonym for hard worker. There is the transparent truth that before the eradication of malaria in the Tarai (pre-1951 period), cultivable lands were abundant and population was relatively small of Tharus.

According to historical fact, the large influx of hill migrants into the Tarai following the eradication of malaria in the Tarai region, marginalized traditionally landowning Tharu people by occupying their lands. The Tharus lost the land-resources they had nurtured to the migrants who used to maintain a close tie with the then power centre of the state. The Tharus had no records of the land they were cultivating. Using their political power, the new commers registered the land (the land of Tharus) in their name forcing the original masters to work for their newly captured land. According to a Tharu village elder, the Kamaiya system developed from a customary practice of obtaining a “helping hand for family business” that was gradually replaced by a ‘patron-client’ relationship as state-led land grants were intensified. This is how inequality became structured, with one person as the Jamindar and the other as Kamaiya bonded labourer. Gradually the social relations of production and reproduction helped develop the Kamaiya system.

Thus the system has evolved through landowner and agricultural workers relations which had been induced by state interventions on land ownership. That the Kamaiya system has a long history is no doubt, and it was not only limited to the Pahari (hill migrants)-Tharu socio-economic relationships developed after malaria eradication. The system instead had the legacy of various forms of forced labour systems that existed since the 17^th century and remained in the patron-client relationship as the Kamaiya system in western Tarai of Nepal. It may also be the case, as researchers argue, that the degree and forms of exploitation of Kamaiyas might have worsened after the eradication of malaria and the influx of pahari in the Tarai increased.

Family position of Tharus

Tharu were originally the farmers. There was a marked division of labour within the Tharu family, determined by a combination of traditional family relationships, production demands and the reproduction systems in western Nepal. The following table presents the nature of work and division of labour within the traditional Tharu faimily.

Source: SPACE (2000:13)

The responsibility of Chhegrahawa and Chhegrinya was to take care of goats . The role of Bardiwa and Bardinya is to take care of oxen and Bhaiswar/Bhaisarniya and Gaiwars is to take care of buffalos and cows respectively. Those who were in the ager group of 15-55 are considered fully economically active and called Kamaiya in case of male and Bukrahi or Kamlahri in case of female members. The eldest son or daughter (more than 16 years old) was called Ghardhuriya/Ghardhurinya. All the activities within the household of Kamaiyas were taken care of under the leadership of Ghardhuriya/Ghardhurinya. The responsibilities of the Kamaiyas who were more than 55 years old are the same as the role of children between 10-15 years old.

After losing the land, the life cycle converted that as young as 5-9 while taking care of masters’ children, who were normally called Ladkakhelaiya. As they grow, the assignment continues to change. At ten, they turn to Bhaisarwa or Gaiherwa. At around 15, they may be given responsibilities of taking care of oxen and other farm responsibilities. The role takes other forms when a Kamaiya becomes older, generally more than 50 years, assigned to take care of plants at the homestead and is called Badheruwa. Sometimes, older Kamaiyas are also assigned to take care of cattle and buffaloes, and are also called Gaiherwa and Bhaisherwa. Similarly, those older Kamaiyas (both males and female) who take care of masters’ children are also called Ladkakhilaiyas.

Women were given different positions according to their work responsibilities. Women involved in household work and other farm works were called Kamlahri. Women who were fully involved in agricultural and household work with male partners are called Bukrahi and the women who were totally involved in kitchen work are called Organiya. Whatever the position and names, all types of female Kamaiyas had to be ready for any kind of work their landlords/masters ask them to do.

Kamaiya children were required to work as animal herders and domestic servants. Female children generally work as domestic servants while male children look after the livestock as animal herders. It was working for the master amounts to appropriate training for children to ensure that they become effective Kamaiyas as they grow older. A large proportion of them was unaware of any wage payments system and did not get paid at all. They are not paid either due to debt incurred by the parents, or because their work is appended to the adult family labours or they simply work in exchange of food and clothing. The division of labour among the Kamaiyas depended upon the age and sex of the Kamaiyas.

Saunki, the debt incurred from the employer, bound Kamaiyas and deprived them of basic human freedoms, the freedom of mobility, freedom of choice and the freedom of decision making about their work. Excessive work, low wages, and the requirement of family labourers to be engaged with the same employer constrain the Kamaiyas making their exit from the system was impossible. The proportion of indebted Kamaiyas had increased substantially along with their average debt. Whatever food and cash crops the Kamaiya got as Bigha and Masyoura, it was not enough for subsistence, let alone any saving to pay back Khawohi (small but high-interest loans taken from lenders/merchants for occasional household starvation). This is how a poverty trap was produced and reproduced under the Kamaiya system.

Need and Compulsion for Tharuhat Movement

 Hamar Khetwa Hamar Khenwa Andolan

 In April 1951, Kamaiyas of Bardiya decided to initiate a collective action to capture Khetwa and Khenwa (land and barn) from Beluwa, a village of Bardiya district situated in Manpur Tapara VDC. The Beluwa Movement is the first known movement in the history of Kamaiya emancipation movement developed from ‘within’ to collectively fight against the oppression of landlords.

The poor people were motivated by the wider “land to the tiller” slogan of the 1950s democratic movement. Hence, soon after the political change, Kamaiyas of 11 VDCs of Rajapur areas of Bardiya came together and decided to claim their land rights and ownership over the recently harvested paddy. Approximately 1,300 Tharu Kamaiyas, including women and children, came together at the Beluwa village and moved towards the paddy barn of Mallha Rajwa (locally known as the second king), Mr. Bidur Narsingh Rana.

The main objective of the action was to claim Trikur Bataiya (one third of the product of rice) against the labour contribution they made for the cultivation of rice. Once landlords refused to accept their demand, on 27 April 1951 Kamaiyas captured the paddy barn and started to fill baskets and sacks at about 4 pm. As soon as they started to fill baskets and sacks, the police force led by chief of local police Khadga Bahadur Giri opened fire at the crowd of Kamaiyas killing Mrs. Koili Tharuni, Mr. Pati Ram Tharu, Mr. Laxmi Prasad Tharu, Mr. Dibuwa Tharu, Mr. Chapu Tharu and Solaria Tharu.

The Kamaiyas were made to surrender before the armed police and were forced to return back to serve their masters. The government provided security to the landlord in fear of Kamaiya reprisal. Some of the leaders of this movement started to work again as Kamaiyas with the same landlords immediately after the incident. This is because they did not have any other alternative for their livelihood and they did not have any support from outside.

Srikaina  Kabja Andolan

In an effort to get rid of the Kamaiyas system some time in 1980, 1300 Kamaiya families of various villages of Bardiya district organised under the leadership of Jangali Tharu and settled in Machad village of Dhodari VDC of Bardiya district leaving landlords’ farms and declaring that they were freed from bondage. After two and half years, they decided to move to Srikaina, a village in Sanoshree VDC of Bardiya, where the government was formally distributing land to the landless people hoping that the government would provide land and entitlements to them as they too were landless. However, as soon as they settled in Srikainda in 1984, the entire village was demolished by the police and forest guards using elephants and bulldozers (SPACE 2000:24).

 Dalla Kabja Andolan

In 1985, approximately 200 Kamaiya families left landlords’ farms and occupied 300 Bigha of public land in Dalla Phanta, which is situated in Suryapatuawa VDC of Bardiya, and declared they would no longer accept the Kamaiya-landlords relationship. But, this too ended up against them and their interest. Fearing a possibility of huge loss, the landlords formed an alliance with the government authorities to evict the Kamaiyas from the public land. In the ensuing government action, the police, landlords and forest guards looted cash and other assets of Kamaiyas. They were forced to go back to the same landlords and continue the Kamaiya system again.

Majhara Kabja Andolan

In November 1993, 150 Kamaiya families of Majhara village of  Khairichandanpur VDC in Bardiya district organised and occupied public land. They had also declared that they would fight against the Kamaiya system and not work for landlords on Kamaiya terms. According to Devi Prasad Ghimire, Chairman Khairichandanpur VDC, local landlords and forest officials manhandled and abused Kamaiyas and burnt their houses. They were evicted from Majhara and forced to live on the bank of Geruwa river. During the rainy season of the same year, the flood of the river displaced the Kamaiyas again. After the flood, all the Kamaiyas took the decision to occupy the Majhara’s public land again for their survival. This time they were much more organised than before and managed to continue to live there and earn their livelihoods from wage work and farming on occupied land.

Damauli Kabja Andolan

In December 1998, about 500 Kamaiya families of Motipur VDC of Bardiya district came together in an organised manner and occupied public land of Damauli village in Motipur. They started farming the occupied land and raising livestock. But the landlords supported by the government (police and forest guards) damaged the houses of Kamaiyas by using elephants eventually forcing them to resume their works with the same landlords.

Manau Andolan

Sometime  in February 1988,  approximately 200  Kamaiya families gathered  in Bagiya  (mango orchard)  in  Manau  and decided  to stop all the  work  being  done   by Kamaiyas until landlords agreed to provide ten sacks of paddy as Masyoura and Trikur(one third of the Kamaiya produced) as Bigha. On the third day of their strike, landlords ‘invited’ all the Kamaiyas for negotiation on their demands. When all the Kamaiyas were gathered at Bagiya, approximately fifty police came forward and started to beat them indiscriminately.

By the time the Kamaiyas realised it was a conspiracy of their ‘masters’ it was already too late to devise strategies to deal with it. According to victims of the attack, seven of them were seriously injured and twelve of them were taken into police custody including three non-Kamaiya supporters of their movement. The collective action of the Kamaiyas was however forcd the local landlords to increase the amount of Masyoura from nine sacks to ten sacks.

Kanara Andolan

After the restoration of multi-party democracy in 1990, the above mentioned sporadic and isolated Kamaiya movements culminated in the Kanara Movement. Kanara was a big forest land area on the bank of the Babai River north of Sanoshri VDC in Bardiya district, commonly known as Kanara Phanta. In 1967, Chilla Tharu and Man Bahadur Khadka led a group of 148 Tharu families and settled in Kanara Phanta. In 1968, local landlords supported by state authorities displaced the settlers and Chilla Tharu and some others were arrested and released later on condition that they would leave the Kanara Phanta immediately (SPACE 2000:24). All these Kamaiyas moved to the Jodhipur village of Baniyabhar VDC of Bardiya and settled illegally on occupied land owned by Zamindar Harihar Upadhaya. In 1975, they were again evicted from this land. During the annual visit of the King, the leaders of the Kamaiyas submitted a letter of appeal to the King explaining their plight and requesting land entitlements. In 1979, following an order from the King, each Kamaiya was given one hectare of land.

After political change in 1990, the Kamaiyas realised the need for a central body that would co-ordinate the Kamaiyas squatting throughout the district. They formed a 15 member body under the chairmanship of Jagga Prasad Pandey, representing squatters of various villages of the district. Some time in April 1990, this committee decided to bring together all landless Kamaiya committee members’ families and resettle them in Kanara, starting from April 22, 1990. They raised flags of all political parties who played a key role in the restoration of multi-party democracy in Nepal.

Once they occupied the Kanara Phanta, the Samiti started to organise peaceful marches and various demonstrations both within and outside the Kanara Phanta. These activities threatened the local landowners and ruling elite who tried several times to drive these people out from Kanara with the support of the state authorities. During the monsoon in 1991, the government announced that it would drive the people out from Kanara by force. The Samiti leaders came to the capital and had a dialogue with the Prime Minister. They also met the chairperson of the Landless Peoples’ Problem Solving Committee on 3 November 1992. But, they failed to get support from the government. On 10 November 1992 at 8.30 am the joint team of Armed Police, Forest Guards, Royal Hunting Security Guards and employees of the forest department ordered the settlements to be destroyed. As a result, Kamaiya settlements both inside and outside Kanara were destroyed by bulldozers, elephants, army and police.

During the forceful eviction many women Kamaiyas were beaten badly and raped by the forest guards and policemen. Runche Tharu, one of Kamaiya settlers was beaten to death by Forest Security Guards. According Runche Tharu’s wife, Mrs Gongi Tharu, “he was beaten by the police with the gun while he was taking care of the crops cultivatedby Kamaiyas under their collective farming”. The role of women Kamaiyas was reported to be significant in this movement. The leading women were Kausila Tharu, Jagarani Tharu, and Patrani Tharu.

On 17 November 1992 a relay of fasting started to pressurise the government into solving this problem and taking action against those responsible for the eviction. But these peaceful demonstrations were dismissed by the government. This campaign was supported by all communist parties of Bardiya but the leaders of the Nepali Congress (the then ruling party) openly stood against the Kamaiya movement. This is because most of the larger landlords were members of Nepali Congress. After this, the government constituted the Sukumbasi Samasya Samadhan Aayog (Landless Peoples’ Problem Solving Committee) and entered into a dialogue with Kanara Samiti. In this dialogue they reached an agreement that the entire farm produce of the area should belong to Kamaiyas and the government should provide medical services to all those injured during the Kanara Movement. The Aayog also assured that all landless Kamaiyas would get temporary land entitlements and within two months the process of allocating land to the Kamaiyas would start (Karki 2001:101).

According to SPACE (2000:28) “In 1993, the new UML government started to provide land titles to these Kamaiyas and movement leaders spent a lot of time in expediting the process of obtaining land titles to all the Kamaiyas involved in Kanara Movement. According to records available at the district land reform and district Aayog office, only 350 landless people received land during three and half years of Nepali Congress government period, whereas, within nine month UML government period 6,985 landless Kamaiyas received land entitlements.

 Kamaiya Mukti Andolan

 The movement against various forms of forced labour has a long history in Nepal. However, none of the literature published so far documents Kamaiya resistances and uprisings that were held before 1950. Movements against the Kamaiya system started after political change in 1950 and intensified only after the restoration of multi-party democracy in 1990. Many organisations have been involved in the campaign against the Kamaiya system: United Nations agencies, bilateral donors, international and local Non-Governmental Organisations (I/NGOs), Trade Unions, Political Parties, Government departments and Kamaiyas themselves.

Increasing protests against the kamaiya system, organized by the “Kamaiya movement”, led to its abolition in 2000. On 17 July that year, the Government of Nepal announced the Kamaiya system be banned, all Kamaiyas be freed and their debts be cancelled. Although most Kamaiya families were freed, the system has persisted. Many Kamaiyas were evicted by their former landlords and released into poverty without any support. Others received land that was unproductive.

To alleviate the poverty of the affected people – the main cause of the system – rehabilitation and distribution of land were promised to ex-Kamaiya families. To put action behind the attempts to discuss the land issue with the government, the ex-Kamaiyas started occupying land in Kailali and Bardiya districts in the winter of 2005-06. But a decade after being liberated, the freed Kamaiyas are forced to live a very difficult life as the government has still not fulfilled its promises of providing a proper rehabilitation and relief package.

Anti-kamlari organisations launched new campaigns and protests to demand the government to comply, which in 2009 resulted in financial compensation for freed kamlaris.^[8] The system was still not abolished, however, and thousands of girls served forcefully for several more years. Various charitable organizations have mitigated the kamlari practice by offering grants larger than prospective masters to families who promise not to sell their daughters, as well as funds for the girls’ education.

The next year the Freed Kamlari Development Forum (FKDF) was formed by former slave girls. The suspicious death 12 years old kamlari Srijana Chaudhary in March 2013 revived the movement and saw mass protests taking place to demand the practice’s immediate end. After images of police hitting the protesting girls were seen in national and international media, outrage against the Nepalese government soared. In June 2013, the government finally gave in and officially abolished the kamlari system and agreed to a 10 point plan involving compensation, rehabilitation and justice for victims of abuse.

Tharuwan Mukti Morcha

 The Tharuwan Mukti Morcha (Tharu Area Liberation Front) was founded in 1998 for the liberation of Tharus from the various forms of exploitations, such as Kamaiyas. The main objective of Tharuwan Mukti Morcha is to liberate Tharus from Kamaiyas, Kamlahar, Betha, Begar and other feudal exploitation. It is believed that this Morcha is associated with the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and operates as an underground peoples’ organisation. Members of Tharuwan Mukti Morcha have taken action against feudal landlords as revenge against the exploitation of Kamaiyas and their sisters, daughters and wives. According to one of the members (who wants to be anonymous) of Morcha, they have support from the large majority of Kamaiyas in Bardiya who had experienced various forms of oppression (both physical and mental) by the landlords and state machinery.

Tharuhat Andolan

Minority ethnic groups including Tharus have been demonstrating across Nepal, saying the new constitution, which would divide the country into seven federal states, would discriminate against them and give them insufficient autonomy. On 24 August 2015, armed protestors affiliated with the Tharuhat Struggle Committee conducted an attack on security forces in Tikapur, Kailali a western city of Nepal. Protestors attacked officers attempting to enforce restrictions with axes, scythes, and spears killing eight, including seven police officers and a two-year-old baby..

On March 7, 2019, Kailali District Court sentenced 11 people including a member of parliament from Rastriya Janata Party Nepal, Resham Lal Chaudhary to life in prison for their roles in orchestrating and carrying out the massacre. The families of the victims expressed relief, whereas Rastriya Janata Party-Nepal objected on the grounds that the incident was political in nature, not criminal. Legislator Chaudhary is set to be stripped of his position following the sentencing. He has already begun serving his sentence. Others, 12 were sentenced to 10 years in prison and one accused was sentenced to six months. One of the convicts facing life sentence is due to only serve 10 years since he was a minor at the time of the incident. Three of the tried have been acquitted.

The Pahadis, most of whom have come down the hill districts after the scourge of malaria was brought under control in the 1960s, seemed to feel safer within the confines of the town where their number is high and with the security forces and local administration close by. The Tharus, on the other hand, felt safer outside the town, away from the security forces, and in the villages where they outnumbered the Pahadis.

The Tharu protests that led to the eight deaths (one more person died in hospital later) was described by local Tharus as spontaneous while others called them “well planned” and “deliberate.” The Tharu population, meanwhile, described the subsequent retaliation against them as “deliberate”, an act that happened on the watch of the local administration and the police. The police and non-Tharus, on the other hand, insisted that the violent outrage against the attacks on the police was spontaneous, and hence could not be immediately contained.

The Tikapur incident and the larger issue of Tharu identity and representation in the new federal setup continues to influence the way the Tharus in the region view the current elections. Granted, the raw energy and anger that fuelled the Tharu protests across the mid- and far-western Tarai in 2015 has lessened substantially. But it would be a miscalculation to assume that the Tharu population has either forgotten the protests or abandoned their agenda altogether.

Still many Tharu leaders urge for ‘pragmatic politics’ that look for long-term political solutions so that the region doesn’t again see the kind of violence and disruption in economic activities it witnessed more than two years ago. Nonetheless, there have been changes. “The Tharuhat Andolan unified all the Tharu groups regardless of their political persuasions and subtle geographical differences but now the Tharus, who belong to economically lower class seem to be attracted towards the left alliance. And those who had enjoyed closer ties with power centres to the Nepali Congress, or the democratic alliance.

Bardiya and Kailali districts are home to both Dangaula Tharus, those who moved here from Dang or further east, and Desauri Tharus, those who are indigenous to the region. Tharus are the largest ethnic group in Kailali district close to 44 percent (43.70pc) and adjoining districts of Bardiya (52.60pc), Dang (31.86pc), Kanchanpur (23.33pc) and Banke (16.42pc).

Even many other issues of day-to-day practical realities seem to be more important during that election than ethnicity. People want to see the parties address their long-term problems, such as flood control, irrigation, education and health. They want to get on with their lives. But the issue of identity is not dead. New political dynamics was emerged as an evident on the ground. Never before have so many Tharu candidates been fielded by the major parties. In Kailali-3, both the major alliances, the Left and the Democratic Alliance, have put up Tharu candidates the regional heavy weight Ramjanam Chaudhary by the Democratic Alliance and Gaurishanker Chaudhary by the Left Alliance; the latter was a member of the Maoist party during the war. Meanwhile, the Upendra Yadav-led Sanghiya Samajbadi Forum-Nepal has fielded Dhaniram Chaudhary, a stalwart of Tharuhat Andolan in 2015.

Interestingly, in Kailali-1, (Tikapur belongs to this federal parliamentary constituency) neither of the two major electoral blocs have fielded a Tharu candidate. As a result, the pro-Madhesi RJP is in a strong position, according to pro-identity leaders. To them, the RJP stands as the last remaining vanguard for identity politics. To many analysts, nowhere will the electoral race be a bigger test for identity politics than the parliamentary race in Kailali constituency-1 and Tikapur. The Democratic Alliance has fielded Nepali Congress leader Ishwari Neupane and the Left Alliance UML leader Garima Shah-both Pahadi candidates and both women.  The RJP, meanwhile, has fielded Resham Chaudhary, a local Tharu leader who had filed his nomination in absentia and he was elected with huge votes.

Popular among the local Tharu community, Resham ran an FM station in Tikapur which was burned down when the Pahadi population retaliated against the police killings. For their part, Tharus want an investigation and prosecution of people involved in the attacks on Tharu homes and property. “Why had only Tharus who took part in the protests been booked while those who attacked Tharu property had gone scot free?” it is the big question of Tikpur incident.

 Conclusion

 The political economy is so deeply rooted in the feudal history of Nepal. It is resisting abolition as it is beneficial to a certain group of people. Unfortunately, it is this group that has a say in the governance and governing structures of the country. And the group and the system dominated by them do not act until they are forced to by a decisive pressure. The concerted and focused movement by Tharus themselves will only be decisive.

The Tharus movement before the 1990s can be seen as amorphous, poorly organised, and spontaneous collective behaviour and action. These were the basic characteristics of social movements in the beginning. The strategies used by the Tharus in the pre-1990 era were essentially ‘primitive’ in their outlook. When they shouted slogans against exploitation and oppression by their masters/landlords, they also very often shouted for the long life of the King and Queen, holding the traditional view that if the King and Queen knew, they would not tolerate the situation. Most of these movements met a tragic end suppressed by government forces with the support of local ruling elites and feudal.

The movements after the 1990s are better organised with alliances with NGOs, INGOs and progressive political forces determined to fight against the whole system. One of the factors stimulating a concerted Kamaiya movement is the restoration of multi-party democracy and the open political environment that existed in the country after 1990. Kamaiyas managed to get external support from NGOs, INGOs and some party politicians. As a result, the government was forced to ban the whole system although the heinous tentacles of the system are yet to be finished

I still argue, if a movement fails to address structural issues of the problem, bans and formulation of laws, the historical problem like the loosing land ownership will continue to survive and structural conditions may reproduce chronic inequalities. The ban only on the Kamaiya system did not address other associated issues such as alternative livelihoods through a proper rehabilitation package and proportional representation in the entire level of government bodies and right to other fundamental rights which the Tharus have been demanding for the last six decades.

References

Bista, DB (1991, Reprint 1996) Fatalism and Development: Nepal’s Struggle for Modernization.Patna: Orient Longman

BASE (1995) Kamaiya Report, 2051 Dang: Backward Society Education (BASE)

Chaudhari, SR (1996) “Kamaiya Pratha Ra Kamaiya Haru Lai Herda” (Kamaiya System: An Observation), The Bikash (Development) Vol.4, Issue 8, pp 38 – 42.

GEFONT (General Federation of Nepalese Trade Unions) (undated report) Aanalysis of the Efectiveness of Interventions for the Release and Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour in Nepal Kathmandu: GEFONT (Unpublished)

INSEC (1998) A Revisit to the Kamaiya System of Nepal, Kathmandu: Informal Sector Service Centre-INSEC.

Karki, AK (2001) The Politics of Poverty and Movement from Below in Nepal. Unpublished PhD Thesis submitted to the School of Development Studies at the University of East Anglia, UK.

Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare (1984) (unpublished) A Study on Bonded Labour, A Report of HMG/N Study on Bonded Labour, Singhadabar, Kathmandu. (This Report is available at the author’s library).

Regmi, M.C  (1972 reprint 1999) A Study of Nepali Economic History 1768-1846, Delhi: Adroit Publishers.

Dhakal, S and Others (2001) Kamaiya System; Kanara Andolan and Tharus in Bardiya, A Research Book, Kathmandu: SPACE

UN (United Nations) (1994) A Compilation of International Human Rights Instruments, Volume I (First Part) Universal Instruments. New York and Geneva: United Nations .