Author: Raunak Mainali
Hobson’s choice refers to a decision, where the alternative in a choice is entirely undesirable. This gives the illusion that the individual is afforded a choice even though there is only one viable option. Domestic migrants in Kathmandu valley are also given a Hobson’s choice during elections: vote in Kathmandu valley or vote back in their ‘home’ regions. A brief walk in Kalanki or Koteshwor in the days prior to the elections helps to deduce which among the two is the desired option. According to the data by the Metropolitan Traffic Police division, more than 160,000 individuals left the valley in just three days to vote in their home districts[1]. Most of these individuals were seen crammed into public transportation either arranged by themselves or by their respective parties and localities. Majority of them have lived and worked in Kathmandu for years or even decades and even their children have been born in the valley. This begs the question: Why do these individuals choose not to vote in the valley despite their extensive ties to the region? As this article will explain, this choice is merely an illusion as there are many factors that hinder domestic migrants from voting within the valley.
Nikhar Gaikwad and Gareth Nellis conducted a case study in India which posits three main factors that contribute towards the political exclusion of migrants in Indian cities[2]. Their case study focused on India; however, the findings can be generalised to the Nepali context, which this article aims to do.
“The reality of patronage politics in Nepal means that voters may have ties to candidates in their home areas and therefore will return to support them when incentivised by financial support, employment opportunities and more.”
The first factor explaining the reasons why domestic migrants prefer to vote at their hometowns is due to the fact they preserve extensive ties to their home districts. These ties include family members, properties, and in the case of elections: political connections and loyalty. The reality of patronage politics in Nepal means that voters may have ties to candidates in their home areas and therefore will return to support them when incentivised by financial support, employment opportunities and more. The financial and organisational effort put forward by political parties to organise transport for their Kathmandu-based voters back to their home areas is indicative of the importance of these voters to the party. It is pertinent to point out that there are still considerable sections of the electorate who are politically apathetic and therefore decide not to travel back to cast a vote. However, the reality is that many voters choose to uproot their lives for a few days to go back to their origin districts to cast a vote. This factor alone is not enough to explain this phenomenon as even in fully developed democracies, citizens sometimes tend to vote in their origin localities. For example, students in the UK who have moved cities are registered to vote in both locations, but many choose to exercise their vote in their home areas.
The second factor explored by Gaikwad and Nellis is the bureaucratic obstacles that hinder potential voters in their area of residence. In an ethno-linguistically diverse country such as Nepal, language often acts as a barrier to access opportunities. The bureaucracy primarily functions in the Nepali language thereby ostracising those who speak other languages as well as illiterate and disabled citizens. Additionally, domestic migrants to Kathmandu consist mainly of working-class citizens who earn a daily wage and therefore can afford little time to navigate the painfully slow bureaucratic process of registering to vote in a new locality. Citizens may be dissuaded by the lengthy process which could take multiple days- days which could be used to earn money instead. The dire financial situation that most domestic migrant workers find themselves in also means that they are more likely to reside in informal settlements. These settlements may not qualify as a permanent address and therefore obtaining documents that are required for voter registration becomes increasingly difficult. Therefore, the bureaucracy is also an impediment to those who desire to vote in their area of residence.
Finally, the third factor is described by the authors as social ostracism that are faced by domestic migrants from local residents and their elite-representatives. For local residents, the influx of new voters would mean a bigger strain on public resources as, figuratively, to them there would be more mouths to feed. They may also believe that the influx of new voters from outside the valley may dilute the ethno-cultural fabric of urban society. For example, the current Mayor Balen Shah has already faced discrimination from political opponents as well as the citizens of Kathmandu due to his ethnicity[3]. This happened even though Shah won with a comfortable majority and has avoided disclosing his ethnicity publicly. So, registration of new voters from domestic migrant groups may lead to changes in the political candidates which may not be welcomed by the residents. For example, it is not hard to imagine that a Madhesi candidate backed by Madhesi domestic migrants would face unparalleled hostility from residents in Kathmandu. Similarly, Kathmandu’s political candidates would likely oppose voter registration of domestic migrants as there is an uncertainty towards who they would vote for. It would disrupt the long-standing patronage ties and could lead to loss of votes for these politicians. Similarly, candidates in origin districts may also oppose voter registration as they would lose guaranteed votes which would jeopardise their electoral campaigns.
Why then, despite these difficulties, should domestic migrants vote in Kathmandu valley? Firstly, in any strong democracy, citizens reserve the rights to choose which residence to vote in with minimal difficulties. As mentioned earlier, whilst migrants do possess this right to do so in Nepal, the existing obstacles means that they are unlikely to vote in their area of residence and if Nepal wants to commit to democratic ideals, these are issues that need to be addressed.
“If they had the ability to vote in the valley, we may have seen a rise in candidates that take interests of these domestic migrants into their campaign.”
Secondly, domestic migrants in Kathmandu form the backbone of the city’s working class, acting as labourers, vendors, domestic help and more. Despite their importance to the development of the city, they face terrible working conditions and financial destitution which leads to a far lower standard of living compared to the elites of the valley. This shows that Nepal’s wealth inequality is not subtle, as especially seen in Kathmandu. This is a city where Tesla shares a road with pushcart. Also, in democracy, political candidates seek the vote of the electorate by promising progress which will benefit them. However, candidates in Kathmandu valley do not have to cater to needs of domestic migrants as they will most likely not vote in the area at all. This is part of the reason why the situation of domestic migrants in the valley is grim. If they had the ability to vote in the valley, we may have seen a rise in candidates that take interests of these domestic migrants into their campaign. Nevertheless, this article does not even delve into a larger crisis where workers who are abroad essentially have no way of voting in elections. Exclusion from political representation is a major reason for their sub-par living standards.
“Voter registration drives in migrant communities could also serve as an efficient strategy targeting specific groups and electoral reform is also necessary as there is a need to take the considerations of domestic migrant workers.”
Still, how can this issue be addressed? As with economics, there is a supply and demand aspect to this phenomenon. On the supply side, the government must reduce the obstacles related to voters’ registration in their respective area of residence. For this, bureaucracy in general needs to be reformed to be more efficient and for representatives to serve the population better. Voter registration drives in migrant communities could also serve as an efficient strategy targeting specific groups and electoral reform is also necessary as there is a need to take the considerations of domestic migrant workers. For example, a more flexible definition of “permanent residence” may lead to more voters from informal settlements registering to vote.
On the demand side, internal migrants also should be willing to vote in the valley over their origin districts. This can be done by carrying out campaigns outlining the potential benefits of voting in the valley. However, increase in voter registration would naturally lead to candidates who will co-opt their struggle into their campaign which could potentially attract more voters. Even if these issues are addressed and registering to vote in the valley can be done with ease for domestic migrants, a significant proportion may still choose to vote in their origin areas. However, this is a far more desirable situation as these migrants have the agency to choose where to vote as opposed to being forced to vote in a specific area due to difficulties. This would go a long way in further establishing democratic norms in the country and improving the lives of many who form an integral part of the valley.
The views and opinions expressed in the piece above are solely those of the original author(s) and contributor(s). They do not necessarily represent the views of Governance Monitoring Centre Nepal and/or Centre for Social Change
References:
[1] https://kathmandupost.com/valley/2022/05/11/people-leaving-valley-in-droves-to-cast-votes-in-local-polls
[2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/overcoming-the-political-exclusion-of-migrants-theory-and-experimental-evidence-from-india/7EACC7F5656A7981B5D6D39142DE90FA
[3] https://himalsanchar.com/madhesi-commission-interested-in-raising-slogans-against-balen-shah/
Raunak Mainali is a researcher with a focus on governance and peacebuilding. He has a postgraduate degree in Defence, Development and Diplomacy from Durham University as well as a BA in Politics and International Relations from the University of Kent. He is currently working on a book project for Routledge titled “Nepal’s Peace Process: Issues and Challenges”.