| dc.description.abstract | As Nepal is a pluralistic country, it’s believed
that power-sharing through federalism can bring
sustainable peace to Nepal society. Nepal political elites
believed that implementing Lijphart consociationalims
model, may reduce the ethnic tension and discrimination
between majority and so-called minority groups and
indigenous groups. Indeed, it could able to transform
Nepal monopoly over political power to democratic
mainstream.
The main objective of the research was to find the status
of power-sharing, war termination and peacebuilding in
Nepal and specific objectives were to find how did powersharing contribute to war termination in Nepal? And does
the theory of consociational power-sharing apply to Nepal?
The research conducted in both qualitative and
quantitative research methods. The secondary data based
on Lijphart conscoiationalism model and other scholarly
articles also have been reviewed. As a primary data, the
researcher used personal experiences living in Nepal. The
data analyzed using qualitative data analysis tool.
Even though Nepal has met the featured elements which
suggested by Lijphart by his theory of consociational
power-sharing which is mostly suitable for multi-ethnic
societies, there is no any significant changes in social,
economic and political sectors due to major political
parties’ disagreement on the model. They haven’t come to
an agreement on which kind of federalism going to
implement and what are the next steps for durable peace.
Nepal is far away from achieving durable peace through
sharing power and adopting federalism due to its failure to
eliminate all kind of discrimination against humanity
through the practice of caste, race and ethnicity-based
decimation. It is concluded that this federalization process
went ahead promoting peace, development and the
absence of threat of peace and jeopardize the stability of
the peace in the future | |
