Full Proportional Representatio (FPR) in CA election

The issue of FPR (full proportional representation) in the election went so impregnable that it brought indefinite postpone of the proposed nov'07 CA election. Less is clear and much is to find out what actually this FPR is, how it operates, and how it assures advantage (and disadvantage) to various interest groups.

For now, general understanding is that FPR would shatter Congress' dream to occupy a clear majority in CA. Congress has approx. 35-40% vote share, enought for its marginally winning candidates in a direct election, which would bring a landslide victory in the election. The same vote bank could have been divided into aprox 25% and 20% between its earlier two factions resulting heavy loss. Hence it would pay for the unification of splitted Congress at the cost of some internal party-rebells. UML has approx 30-35% vote share, which was dreaming to have comfortable win through direct election keeping the Congress divided, but it is not sure of the result after Congress is united. Maoist is believed to have 15-20% vote share, which needs tactful election campaign to win needed number of seats. Otherwise it may face a huge loss in the direct election.

Earlier, Girija Congress and Maoist favoured direct election. Deuba Congress and UML were talking about FPR. UML, by its timid nature, wants to avoid risk, so, it was for FPR system since the very beginning, but they were unable to convince others in this issue and ended up in a note of dissent to keep self-esteem.

When Maoist was against FPR, I was thinking either Maoist might have estimated their support base wrongly, or they are not serious on the election. Few days ago, Sahana Pradhan told, in a program at DC, that Maoist told they were not aware of advantage of FPR system when they were supporting Congress and were bullying UML against their "note of dissent". Maoist want to correct that mistake and want to have FPR at any cost. But UML played just a soft ball again. They supported FPR but they didn't go for direct confrontation with Congress on this issue.

The political environment went so bad for Maoist these days. I feel, even Prachanda will not get a seat in the CA election if he has to win a direct election. We can see how Bamdev Gautam lost his election from his own constituency. No one from the maoist party, who could play vital role in elected CA, could actually get elected. Except Krishna Mahara, none of maoist leaders do have a strong hold in their home contituional region, be it Baburam Bhattarai, or Dev Gurung, or Ananta or Baadal or Pasang, forget about Hisila, Pampha bhusal, kiran, et al. So, to keep them politically alive, they MUST rely on FPR not in direct election.

If votes are to divide as 40% (Congress) 30%(UML) and 20%(Maoist) etc, then under FPR system these parties will get 192, 144 and 96 seats out of 480 seats in CA. Party leaders will be very powerful within their party. There will be very tough competition to snatch powerful positions in party. Party leaders will be able to have a lot of YES MANS so that s/he could get nominated.

The above discussion is common understanding among most people. However I am not sure in following issues yet.

A. how can an independent candidate get elected in FPR system? If a citizen wants to appear in the election, but he does not have any party, then should he go and create a party first? Can he be there as an individual candidate or not?

B. Does a party require to submit its candidates before the voting begins or after the vote counting ends? Some people say, a closed list of candidates should be submitted to election commission (EC) before the voting process begins. Afterward, the EC declares winning candidates from the list picking up the name listed in higher rank. If so, does a party require to publish its hierarchy or rank before the election?

C. Is is possible to assure full proportional representation in the hierarchy system, where people from particular class or cast are dominant in all parties. Otherwise how can we attain full proportional representation from the parties having huge biassed domination?

D. Is it mandatory for parties to keep proportional representation from demographic statistics to assure equal right of each community, region, gender, religion, and so on?

If so, lets think how congress should pick up its 192 CA members for assuring FPR. they should be
1. 98 from hill (himal and pahad) and 94 from terai
2. approx 38 from eastern, central, mid western, western and far west development region
3. approx 23 brahman, 32 Chhettris 10 newars, 55 madheshi, 40 janjati etc.
4. apporx 130 hindu, 30 budhdhist, 14 muslims, etc.
5. 96 male, 96 female
6. The above crieteria should also consider the party seniority, favorite of the party president and people from his faction in his party
is not it too confusing and complex?

Now, with this all complexities and confusions, how the FPR election will ensure a smooth and successful transition in Nepal?