Land Conflict in Nepal

                                          LAND CONFLICTS IN NEPAL

 

The problem of land disputes in Nepal is widespread and deep-rooted, tied up with the country’s historical, political, social, and economic orders. Such conflicts emanate from competing interests and rival claims to the territory caused by the feudal land tenure system as well as rapid urbanization and discriminatory practices that are prevalent among others leading to weak governance structures. For hundreds of years now, possession of land has been a signifier of riches, and power hierarchies resulting in the privileged class exploiting and owning such properties against the rest of the world population. This research work aims to provide an all-inclusive examination of land conflicts in Nepal considering various factors from political, social administrative and legal angles. It attempts to scrutinize these issues intricately by investigating their roots outflows and effects. Further, the research aims to assess the present processes for dispute resolution in Nepal and propose strategies for improving them particularly to address land-related disputes efficiently. The study is based on an extensive literature review including scholarly works, journal articles, conference papers, books and research reports that touch on the subject of land conflicts and their resolution. This analysis that extends further forms a basis upon which we can understand everything completely. Consequently, findings from this research expose multi-faceted dimensions of land conflicts in Nepal namely political issues that deal with legal aspects related to land tenure systems such as historical feudalism or feudal tenure ship systems; failure of land reform programs; lack of political commitment etc.; social factors such as rapid urbanization; traditional practices against women resulting into discrimination among other things; ethnic tensions between different communities; economic factors such as unequal distribution of lands leading to poverty among masses due limited access towards valuable natural resources. The issues are exacerbated by weak or nonexistent legal frameworks, failure to recognize customary land rights and obsolete or discriminatory laws. Other administrative challenges surrounding the land conflicts in Nepal are inefficient land administration systems, centralization of processes and lack of effective complaint redressal mechanisms as well as capacity constraints. To resolve the problem of land conflicts in Nepal, a comprehensive and multi-faceted approach is required which considers the root causes and the different perspectives of stakeholders involved. The study suggests political, economic, and administrative recommendations to improve upon these issues. Politically, it includes accepting past wrongs, political will for real changes and recognition of customary property ownership. Economically, such factors include; promoting access to resources by all citizens through policies like land redistribution; ensuring environmental sustainability while providing livelihood opportunities; and just a resource management system. Administratively, this involves improving the efficiency of land administration systems; decentralizing services to regional levels; and adopting new technology in keeping records concerning lands while putting in place platforms where people could solve their grievances amicably arising from disputed lands among others. On the other hand, engaging with citizens’ participation both locally and nationally can contribute toward inclusive decisions related to land use through awareness campaigns. In conclusion, if these proposals were followed then there would be a positive change in Nepal’s problems concerning its land tenure system or process that could take place over time.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Conflict is a fictional kind of disharmony that arises within a group when the views or actions of

one or more members of the group are either resisted or unacceptable to one or more members of

another group(15 Conflict Management | PDF, n.d.). Conflict is a natural part of social interactions, whether within a family, community, or society(Walker & Daniels, 2019).

Land conflict is a pervasive issue that arises from competing interests and claims to land resources. A land conflict occurs when two or more parties have competing interests in land ownership, including the right to use, manage, generate income, exclude others, transfer, and receive compensation for the land. Conflict arises when multiple groups perceive competing interests. Nonviolent conflict can drive social change and human interaction.
Nonviolent conflict resolution is possible when individuals and organizations trust their governing structures, society, and institutions to balance competing interests. When societal mechanisms and institutions for conflict resolution fail, it can lead to violence.

Figure 1 Root Causes of Conflict

Land conflicts have multiple causes, including historical, social, economic, and political factors. Land conflicts often originated from historical injustices like dispossession, colonization, or forced evictions. Rapid urbanization and industrialization can lead to land conflicts as governments and developers seek to purchase property for infrastructure projects or urban expansion, displacing local communities.

Conflict arises when tolerance exceeds a certain tolerable limit(D. Buckles, 1999). Feelings of unfairness, suspicion, and injustice often contribute to conflict. Anger, emotion, and mistrust further exacerbate the conflict. Every social context, including families, communities, and society as a whole, experiences conflict as an essential component of the social process(Walker & Daniels, 2019). In Nepal, land is the main source of livelihood. Most people depend on land for them either for livelihood or treat it as a source of wealth. Land has long been among the most politically contentious issues in Nepal. This stems from historical patterns of land tenure which, by concentrating land ownership on the wealthy and those close to the monarchy, were the primary channels through which authority was established and expressed these patterns have evolved, and access to land remains a key determinant of both social and economic status for rural Nepal (Upreti et.al.,2008).

Land is valuable in three main ways. When stated, they are obvious, but they are so rarely stated in political theory that they need to be reaffirmed. First, we live on land; we, our homes, our belongings, and the things we create individually and collectively all take up space. Thus, the physical extension of terra firma is a good whose distribution is important to everyone. Second, the land is made up of resources that we require to survive, prosper, and express ourselves; literally, the land is made up of both our physical bodies and almost every material good we can find or create. As a result, having secure access to good land on which to do the things we care about is critical to our ability to succeed in the world. Third, land and its properties - its location, material composition, and who or what lives on it - are critical to a wide range of global systems, including nitrogen and carbon cycles, water purification and storage, ecosystems, and oxygen production. Without them, we would not exist. All of the value of territory is based on these three foundations(Kolers, 2009).

 

1.2 Historical Background:

There are no reliable documents indicating when land disputes in Nepal began or the circumstances surrounding them. However, available research indicates that since the reign of King Prithvi Narayan Shah in the 18th century, who "granted" title to individuals he supported, land has been used as a political tool, a significant source of State authority, and a means of economic gain (Sharma Rawal et al., 2016; Upreti et al., 2009). Land issues became more prominent during the despotic Rana dynasty (1846-1951) when the land tenure system was largely feudal.

In the Terai region, the Rana Government developed the Jimidari3 system in 1961, which created a system that distributed land to political elites and took use of unpaid labour (beggars) (Muller-Boker, 1999; cited in Sharma Rawal et al., 2014). Similarly, during this time, several land use systems, including kipat, birta, jagir, rakam, and guthi 4, were developed. Similarly, during this time, several land use systems, including kipat, birta, jagir, rakam, and guthi 4, were developed. According to (Bhandari, n.d.) these systems "were the most corrupt arrangements of the system with a blatant misuse of power for self-preservation." With the aid of these systems, the Rana was able to seize more than two-thirds of the agricultural and forested land, while the remaining one-third was given to local functionaries and private individuals who then rented the land to peasants for high rents(Upreti et al., 2009). The fight for land rights grew more intense when the Rana regime was overthrown, and land reform was emphasized heavily in development discourse. In the 1960s, King Mahendra reorganized political power and established the Panchayat system.5 He launched a land reform campaign, abolishing the kipat, birta, jagir, and rakam systems and enacting laws to regulate and manage land in the country, such as the Agricultural Reorganization Act 1963 and the Land Reform Act 1964, which emphasised tenant farmers' security and set a limit on land holdings. The land reform program aimed to provide land to landless people, allowing them to secure a living. However, this program failed due to political corruption by Panchayat leaders and cadres who seized land in the name of landless people (Bhandari, n.d.). As a result, even after the Rana monarchy was deposed and a nationwide land reform program was implemented, feudalism persisted. King Mahendra was forced to relinquish ultimate control of the country in the 1990s, and multiparty democracy was introduced, raising public hopes for reforms in a variety of areas, including land. The Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) proposed several reforms, but they were never implemented due to a lack of political will (Sharma Rawal et al., 2016). Furthermore, despite being abolished by the government of Nepal, discriminatory land practices such as the system of bonded labour (Kamaiya, Haliya, Haruwa, Charuwa) and the lack of effective political action to address the issue of landlessness fueled resentment within the then-CPN (Maoist).

In the last three years, nearly 385,978 land cases have been lodged in formal courts, offices of land registration and reform(Pradhan, 2017).

 

2. OBJECTIVE

·       This study examines micro-level land conflicts in Nepal from various perspectives.
This article will provide a comprehensive overview of local land issues, including political, social, administrative, and legal aspects.

·      
This article aims to provide an overview of Nepal's dispute resolution processes and suggest ways to improve them for land disputes.

·      
To propose institutional, policy, and practical solutions to Nepal's land conflict.
This study explores how land contributes to conflict in Nepal and aims to improve understanding of the issue. The study can provide policymakers with the necessary tools to develop effective solutions.

 

·       The study can assist policymakers in developing effective policies and programs to address current and future land conflicts by providing a comprehensive understanding of their causes.

3. METHODOLOGY

      A review of the literature has been done in preparation for this work. The study starts with a thorough analysis of scholarly works on land conflicts and their resolution. Scientific literature was used for this study; it is cited in the reference section and includes journal articles, conference papers, books, and documents such as research/project reports.

4. DISCUSSIONS

The nature and causes of land conflicts in Nepal are covered in this section. Five categories of land conflicts arise from different factors. These are:

·       Conflict between the people and the government.

·       Conflict among two or more communal groups.

·       Disputes among friends or relatives.

·       Tenants and landowner’s conflict.

·       Squatting on unregistered land can lead to conflicts with government agencies or land owners who own registered land.

A list of the land conflicts discovered all through this study is provided in this section. Land conflicts are divided into groups based on their nature and characteristics: political, social, legal and administrative.

 

 

     4.1 Political Causes:

1.   Historical legacy of feudal land tenure systems like Jimidari, Kipat, Birta, Jagir, Rakam, and Guthi instituted during the Rana regime, concentrating land ownership among elites.

2. Failure of land reform programs, such as those initiated by King Mahendra in the 1960s, due to corruption and lack of political will.

3.  Lack of political commitment to address landlessness and discriminatory land practices,   which fueled the Maoist insurgency.

4.   Government policies and development programs that displace local communities without proper consultation or compensation for land acquisition.

5.   Political instability, power struggles, and the influence of powerful interest groups hindering effective land policies.

4.2 Social Causes:

1. Historical injustices and grievances related to land dispossession, colonization, or forced evictions, particularly against marginalized communities.

2. Rapid urbanization and industrialization leading to displacement of local communities for infrastructure projects or urban expansion.

3. Discriminatory traditional land tenure systems and lack of recognition for customary land rights, particularly affecting indigenous communities.

4. Social tensions and conflicts between different ethnic, caste, or religious groups over land ownership and access. Gender discrimination and lack of secure land rights for women, especially widows and female-headed households.

      4.3 Legal Causes:

1.     Land rights are weak or not obvious in the legal frameworks concerning property ownership and usage, making us confront ambiguities and conflicts in this sphere.

2.     Non-recognition of customary tenure systems or Indigenous community rights to traditional lands by law

3.     Current laws on land that are discriminative or outdated where there is concentration of ownership by some groups or perpetuation of historical injustices

4.     Lack of strong implementation of property rights; no clear provisions on compensation, resettlement or acquisition for displaced families regarding their lands taken away from them.

 

4.4 Administrative Causes:

1.     Inefficient and corrupt land administration systems, including poor record-keeping, lack of transparency, and undue political interference.

2.     Capacity constraints within government land agencies, hinder effective implementation and enforcement of land laws and policies.

3.     Centralized land administration processes, making it difficult for local communities to access services or resolve disputes efficiently.

4.     Discriminatory practices or staffing within land agencies that favour certain groups over others in land matters.

5.     Cumbersome and lengthy administrative procedures for land registration, transfers, or dispute resolution, allowing conflicts to fester.

6.     Lack of effective mechanisms for public participation, consultation, and grievance redressal in land-related matters.

.

 

CONCLUSION:

The multi-dimensional and deeply-rooted nature of land conflicts in Nepal are products of complex interactions among historical, political, social, economic, legal and administrative factors. These conflicts have been perpetuated by different elements which include the legacy of feudal land tenure systems, failure of land reform programs, lack of political commitment, rapid urbanization, discriminatory practices and weak governance structures. There is an astonishing pendency of land cases against this background marked by a dearth in alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, inadequate land information systems and biased social norms. Questions such as paper-based record systems hampering agricultural productivity continue to worsen conflicts including landlessness, dual ownership etc. Settling these disputes necessitates a holistic approach that encompasses addressing the underlying causes and includes varying perspectives as well as interests from all stakeholders.

This should involve the implementation of progressive property rights policies especially for women, fast-track courts for lands, and promotion of contract farming to enhance increased productivity on the lands. Another thing is that strengthening local-level land governance is pivotal because it acts as the entry point for effective reforms in lands. To achieve this, local authorities would be empowered and there would be collaboration with international partners, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and society groups to find out who the landless people are as well as help them recover, safeguard their tenancy rights and come up with integrated online land information systems.

Ultimately, resolving land conflicts in Nepal requires a sustained commitment from all stakeholders, including the government, civil society and the international community. It necessitates addressing historical injustices, recognizing customary land rights, promoting transparency and accountability, and fostering an environment of trust and cooperation. Only through a comprehensive and inclusive approach can Nepal pave the way for lasting peace, social cohesion and equitable economic development.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

In Nepal, land continues to be one of the most divisive, political, and complex issues. The following suggestions are made to resolve lengthy land disputes and reduce conflicts over land in Nepal.

 

Political Recommendations:

In the context of land conflicts in Nepal, here are some key political recommendations along with relevant laws and acts:

 

1) Strengthen and empower the Land Revenue Offices and Land Revenue Courts under the Lands Act 2021 to effectively resolve land conflicts and disputes through fair and timely proceedings.

 

2) Review and amend the Lands Act 2021 and Land Acquisition Act 2034 (1977) to address ambiguities and gaps that have led to conflicts, such as issues related to land ownership, tenancy rights, compensation mechanisms, and acquisition processes.

 

3) Implement the provisions of the Local Government Operation Act 2074 (2017) to establish and strengthen Land Revenue Coordination Committees at the local levels for resolving land conflicts through community participation and mediation.

 

4) Ensure effective implementation of the Guthi Corporation Act 2033 (1976) and the Trust Corporation Act 2036 (1979) to prevent and resolve conflicts related to Guthi (trust) lands, which have been a contentious issue.

 

5) Adhere to the provisions of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 2029 (1973) and the Buffer Zone Management Regulations 2052 (1996) to address conflicts arising from the creation of protected areas and buffer zones, including issues of displacement, compensation, and access to resources.

 

7) Ratify and effectively implement international instruments like the ILO Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to safeguard the land rights of Indigenous communities and prevent conflicts.

 

8) Strengthen the institutional capacity and resources of relevant government agencies, such as the Ministry of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation, to effectively monitor, prevent, and resolve land conflicts across the country.

 

Economic Recommendations:

1)     Promote land reform programs and fair allocation of land among the people to address landlessness and reduce poverty.

2)     Develop sustainable livelihood options and alternative sources of revenue to avoid overdependence on land resources by people who have none or own very little.

3)     Encourage contract farming and other agricultural projects aimed at increasing the productivity of land thereby contributing to economic growth and ensuring food security.

4)     Facilitate marginalized communities’ access to credit and finance that allows them to invest in productive assets such as lands.

5)     Establishing mechanisms for good governance over these resources will ensure that benefits are shared among all stakeholders without causing conflicts due to resource exploitation.

Administrative Recommendations:

1)     Capacity building and transparency need to be improved in land administration systems through better record keeping and management through LRIMS, NELIS etc., less corrupt practices with limited political interference from the administrators.

2)     Decentralize Land administration services at the local level to make it easier for local governments to deal with issues related to land while making sure that they are accessible by locals.

3)     As of now cadastral maps and deed registration are digitized Implementing digitization and integration of land information systems as well as online service delivery can help mitigate paper-based risks.

REFERENCES:

15 conflict management | PDF. (n.d.). Retrieved June 14, 2024, from https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/15-conflict-management/12171773

Daniel Buckles. (1999). CULTIVATING PEACE.

Kolers, A. (2009). Land, Conflict, and Justice: A Political Theory of Territory - Avery Kolers - Google Books. Avery Kolers. https://books.google.com.np/books?hl=en&lr=&id=_-YDpLbATwwC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=land+conflict+&ots=Tv-Dp3c_C_&sig=sXNbUa-4oo4vVh2x2fvria5nFuw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Pradhan, S. (2017). Land conflicts in Nepal: the origin, present and prospects - Samriddhi Foundation. https://samriddhi.org/news-and-updates/land-conflicts-in-nepal-the-origin-present-and-prospects/

Upreti, B. R., Sharma, S. R., & Basnet, J. (2008). Land Politics and Conflict in Nepal Realities and Potentials for Agrarian Transformation Editors.

Walker, G. B., & Daniels, S. E. (2019). Collaboration in environmental conflict management and decision-making: Comparing best practices with insights from collaborative learning work. Frontiers in Communication, 4, 420447. https://doi.org/10.3389/FCOMM.2019.00002/BIBTEX