The Occupation of the Kathmandu Valley and its Fallout
Documented history of landownership in the Kathmandu Valley shows that in the early centuries AD, the King or the State donated land to the temples and monasteries as well as to the communities to encourage settlement and reclamation of unsettled land. The King, as the lord of land, also granted land as means of livelihood in kind to his clientele and retainers. Land was primarily territory or means of livelihood rather than a piece of property bought and sold like a commodity in the market. There is no record of real estate transaction before the 12th century AD when the King himself sold land for gold. Such land had a different statusquite different from the land granted as royal favour. In the late 17th and 18th centuries, the Khas Brahrnins and Chetris began to settle permanently on the outskirts and the rim of the Valley though they were far and few between. Some mercenaries from the hills were also enlisted in the army of the feudal city-states to fight internecine battles that so often erupted among them. This relationship to land underwent a drastic change when a new ruling dynasty originating from the hilly principality of Gorkha conquered the Valley in 1769. With the capture of political power, not only did the land relations change, vast areas of landed property were annexed by the new ruling elite to their private property on the slightest pretext of incomplete documents or similar other flimsy grounds. The political instability and court intrigues that ensued for half a century in the 1800-1850s led to confiscation of land from one elite family and grabbing it by the next. Vast areas of landed estates were confiscated and appropriated to finance the expansionist military campaigns of the Gorkhali State and the Anglo-Gorkhali War which ended in a humiliating treaty with the British East India Company in 1816. Until 1769, the Malla rulers of the Valley did not allow any outsider to stay overnight within their walled cities. But with the collapse of their city-states, the Court of Gorkha moved to Kathmandu on March 10, 1770 and with the court also moved in the new ruling elite families and their army. Until 1950, only the army, the police, labourers and coolies were the permanent non-indigenous settlers in the Kathmandu Valley. The civil servants serving the Rana rule were far and few between. Among the non-Nepalis were a few thousand Muslim traders, some Tibetans and a few first-generation or second-generation Marwari families. Except during the festivals such as the Dashain or Shiva Ratri, even Nepalis coming from outside the Kathmandu Valley were not allowed in the city of Kathmandu without a kind of local passport called Rahadhani, a practice which was dis- continued only since December 23, 1956. But with the signing of the Nepal-India Friendship and Peace Treaty in July 1950, in less than four decades nearly 80% of business and economic life of Nepal is now controlled by the people of Indian origins. The new ruling familiesthe Shahas and the Ranasstarted to build Western-style palatial residences to house their fast multiplying progeny. Between 1900-1940, more than 50,000 ropanis (a ropani is 74 feet by 74 feet) of prime land in Kathmandu-Patan cities, stretching from Sital Niwas to Jawalakhel, were annexed and appropriated for personal use of 2 the rulers by paying nominal compensation. Some of these lands belonged to monasteries and religious trusts of the indigenous Buddhist populations of Kathmandu and Patan. During the same period a number of so-called public institutions and complexes were built, such as hospitals, schools, colleges, parade grounds, military barracks etcall of which were originally the lands belonging to the indigenous populationsmostly lower castes such as farmers, carpenters, small traders and artisans who were politically mute and dumb at that time of absolute Rana rule. During the 1960s the policy of the late King Mahendra, who was then an absolute ruler, was to encourage national integration. For all intents and purposes, this policy meant converting the indigenous populations into a minority and to politically castrate and marginalize them by cutting at the foundations of their economic and cultural life. The King encouraged the settlement of non-indigenous Brahmins and Chetris in the Kathmandu Valley so as to convert the local Newars into an ineffective political minority. Most fertile lands in the Kathmandu Valley were also converted into so-called industrial districts, project installations, brick factories, shoe factories, corporation offices, exhibition grounds, and office blocks of one sort or other by annexing private as well as institutional lands at nominal prices. The net result of all these organized activities of the State was to dispossess and displace the indigenous owners of land in the Kathmandu Valley and destroy their religious and cultural base. For example, when 360 acres of most fertile and prime land at the foothills of the medieval town of Kirtipur were appropriated for locating Tribhuvan University not only the life-style but also the life-line of the Kirtipur villagers was cut. No wonder that for a long time there was direct confrontation between the State and the villagers who would not give in so easily before the State showed its ugly fangs. Similar incidents punctuated the 1960s and 1970s when the dispossession of the indigenous populations and appropriation of their land for public enterprises went on at a ferocious speed. The major turning point, the beginning of the end, as it were, came for the indigenous populations when an apparently progressive Land Reform Act, was promulgated by King Mahendra in 1964 instituting a ceiling of 25 ropanis on the size of the private land and insuring the tenancy rights of the tiller, creating a sort of dual-ownership not only on private land but also in institutional, religious and cultural holdings. This proved to be the ultimate blow to the indigenous populations as a whole. Initially, the tenants were apparent beneficiaries of this reform. However, in the long run, they were the greatest losers. Because of the establishment of their legal rights to a share of the property, it led to fragmentation and ultimately alienation, dispossession and transfer of the land rights to the non-indigenous populations who were already flocking the enchanting and temperate valley from all over the Kingdom in search of social, economic, and above all political opportunities. By now a majority of peoples representatives from the Mechi to Mahakali have permanently sealed in posh areas of the Kathmandu Valley. In 1968, out of the total 76,4050 hectares of land in the Valley 4,60,700 (61.12%) was still cultivated green rice-fields. In 1994, the cultivated land is less than 52% and the non-agricultural land has increased from 5.6 in 1984 to 14.5% in 1994. Thanks to many development activities, including the disastrous Ring Road, and the 3 State-sponsored Property Development Plans in the sub-urbia like Tahachal, Dallu, Kuleswar, Golphutar, Sainbu, Gongobu and Balkhu areasall of which have enriched the unscrupulous speculators and impoverished the environment of Kathmandu. In 1981, the average density of population per one square kilometre in the Kathmandu Valley was 963; in 1991 it is 1277. Compare this with the national average of 102 in 1981 and 126 in 1991. The undeclared settlement policy of the Government also led to the temporary boom in the Real Estate business and the thriving business of speculation and investment in land. Real Estate developers began to buy land at throw-away price, and after some nominal investment in passages and marginal utilities they began to sell these lands at soaring prices, particularly during the l980s. To this category of enterprises also belong the Government sponsored Settlements for Civil Servants who comprise mostly non-indigenous populations of the Valley. According to the Report of the National Commission on Population, 1983:
(In 1981) out of about 19,571 in-migrants, Brahmins and Chhetris constitute 44 per cent of in-migrants. Other Hill ethnic groups account for 26 per cent while Newars constitute another 4 per cent of the in-migrants. The magnitude of in-migrants has increased considerably within the last 10 to 15 years (Report of the National Commission on Population 1983, p.5).
The magnitude of in-migration is alarming, and the pace can be guessed from the following data. The total urban population of the Kathmandu Valley in 1981 was 363,507. In 1991, it has risen to 598,525, out of which 36,134 were foreign-born and 98,543 were in- migrants from outside the Valley. Among the in-migrants, 43.37% came from the Mountains, 17.24% from the Hills, and 44.80% from the Terai. (See Bal Kumar K.C., Trends, Patterns, and Implications of Rural-to-Urban Migration in Nepal. Kirtipur: Central Department of Population Studies, Tribhuvan University, 1998, pp.27-28). Once they leave their villages, the ambitious Nepalese have two options: to go to Lahur or to go to Nepal. All roads, thus, lead to Kathmanduor Nepal, as it is known to the people from the 4,000 odd villages of the Kingdom. People come here for education, medication, litigation, and fortune-hunting, particularly political, cultural, and economic opportunities the capital city offers them. A dramatic change in the ethnic structure of the population of the Kathmandu Valley has taken place in the meantime, leading to the marginalization of the local Newars. This will be evident from the following tables:
Table 1 Gradual Marginalization of the Indigenous Population in the Kathmandu Valley, 1952/54 to 1991
The rise of the tourist industry is not an unmixed blessing either. It is yet another factor responsible for the dispossession of the indigenous populations in the Valley. The growth of resorts, hotels and tourist industry has robbed the natives of their prime land in one way or another The deliberate government policy to locate dubious industries such as garments as well as carpets in the Valley has irreparably polluted and disfigured the city-scape, to say the least. Because of the influx of the settlers from all over the Kingdom the construction industry went on at a ferocious speed for nearly 30 years. On an average, about 7,000 new houses were built a year in Kathmandumostly by those who come from outside the Valley and had made political fortunes here. Although the number has now come down to about 3,500 new houses a year, even then this is a headlong speed, sufficient in itself, not only to destroy open space and greenery but to dispossess and throw the indigenous populations from their own land and habitat. The immigrant camel is not only driving the indigenous Newars out of the tent: the Newars have become aliens in their own home. The population in Nepal grows at the average rate of 2.l to 2.5 % per annum. This has been the national average since the 1950s. However, the population of Kathmandu is grow- inc at the rate of 7.5% per yeara demographic zone where child born per woman is only 1.6. This is not a natural growth rate, certainly not due to the growth of indigenous popula- tions already settled here in the last fifty or so years. The influx of non-indigenous populations from outside the Valley, including the Tibetan refugees (estimated number (6.090), the semi-skilled Indian labour (estimated to be more than 50,000) from across the border, have destroyed the fabric of life in the city of Kathmandu converting it into a living hell. In a city where, until the 1950s, there used to be less than 1.25,000 people, there are now more than half a million inhabitants! The cultural heritage of the Kathmandu Valley, with seven monument zones in the World Heritage List, is under direct threat and their environmental homogeneity is nearly destroyed. The public utilities have nearly all collapsed, including water supply, sewerage, solid waste management, and public transport. The city is 5 now rated one of the most polluted spots on the earthwith more than 115,766 vehicles, including 650 Vikram tempos which are emitting pure carbon monoxide, running within a stretch of less than 10 kilometers of metallic and narrow roads. The footpaths are all occupied with shops, the river banks are fully colonized by shanties and squatters (the so-called land- less). There are nearly 60 such settlements of more than 1,000 each all along the once holy rivers of the city of Kathmanduthe Vagmati, the Visnumati, the Tekhu, the Sama Kusi, and the Dhobi Khola. Every inch of open public spacebe it a temple terrace, the public resting place, or a monasteryis occupied by unauthorized squattersabout whom no public authority wants to do anything becausehe or she might have been a precious voter brought all the way from God knows where by ambitious political leaders. One has only to quickly move around the so-called Hong Kong Bazaar beneath the Singha Durbar Road or the Bagh Durbar area or the Exhibition Grounds to guess about the possible health hazards and the possible disasters (such as fire), raised by the unscrupulous official sponsorship of such mass occupation of public space in Kathmandu by immigrants from outside the Valley. The impact of all this on the social and cultural life of the city of Kathmandu is growth in all forms of degradation in the quality of social life, from crime and prostitution to drug pushing and delinquency among the youth. The indigenous populations of the Kathmandu Valley are, thus, paying a very dear and heavy social, cultural and economic price for alienation from their roots in land and other natural resources. They were dispossessed from these resources, primarily by the State and its various arms of power and jurisdiction, through declared or undeclared measures which are seemingly progressive and developmental. The indigenous populations of the Kathmandu Valley themselves may have been doing a serious injustice to their posterity as well as their history by selling land and houses to the non-natives. They may be doing so now unwittingly by renting their shops, land and homes to the non-natives at the false attraction of soft life and renter culture or out of sheer material greed. More than 29% of houses and shops in the Kathmandu Valley are on rent. Their respite and affluence are, unfortunately, both temporary whereas the costs may have been too dear and permanently damaging to their past as well as their economic and political future. Undoubtedly, there is no dearth of the social scientists who passionately deny that there is such a social category in Nepal called the indigenous population or people. They say that everyone has come from somewhere. The only question seems to be how early or how late have you arrived here? However, lately organized groups and advocacy campaigns have come up with this fundamental issue of the relation of the indigenous populations to land. Each of us is, of course, legally a little owner of our share of the earth. Upon this plot of the earth we may have the so-called individual property rights to dispose it or sell it like a commodity to anyone we like or to someone who is willing to pay the most. But in doing so we might be robbing ourselves collectively as well as our posterity of the right to live as our ancestors had done until not long ago. Once you are dispossessed from land you are cut off from the roots of your society and culture which feeds on land. Therefore, advocacy and po- litical education may need to be intensified at all levels. But what is more urgent is action both at the national as well as international levels, particularly in the United Nations forums. Organized political action at home and abroad is the topmost agenda for survival of the 6 indigenous populations, their culture and way of life. The only and ultimate way out for most of the dispossessed and displaced indigenous populations of Nepal is, of course, the right to self-rule. The excellent and lucid draft paper, Indigenous People and Their Relationship to Land by Mrs. Erica-Irene Daes, dated 20 June 1997, prepared for the Forty-ninth Session of the United Nations Economic and Social Council, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, is a trail-blazing document. The document should be studied, circulated widely and debated intensely among all activists fighting for a common cause for the survival of the indigenous populations in Nepal.
This is a summary of a much longer paper written as a comment on Mrs Daess Paper by Kamal P. Malla, Professor of English, Tribhuvan Kathmandu, Untversity, Nepal.