Mandakini Devasher Surie on Civic Spaces in South Asia

Khushi: Namaste and welcome to Pods by PEI, a policy discussion series brought to you by Policy Entrepreneurs, Inc. My name is Khushi Hang, and in today's episode, we have PEI colleague Shuvangi in conversation with Mandakni Suri on civic spaces in South Asia, trends, challenges, and resilience. Mandakni is an international development consultant with more than 18 years of expertise in program design, development, and aid management in South Asia.

She has managed complex regional programs in South Asia focused on sustainable development with a strong understanding of governance systems, institutions, and political economy dynamics. In March of last year, she worked with the Asia Foundation to publish a report on how South Asian civic spaces are evolving.

Shuvangi and Mandakni begin with an overview of civic spaces in Nepal, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, highlighting the challenges amidst evolving political landscapes and exploring how South Asian civic spaces adapt with innovation and resilience. They emphasize on collaboration in addressing common challenges and strengthening civil spaces.

They also delve into the roles of donors in safeguarding civic spaces, offering recommendations for effective contributions, and promoting sustainability. We hope you enjoy the conversation

Shuvangi: Hi, I'm Shuvangi Borya.

Mandakni : Hi, I'm Mandakni Suri.

Shuvangi: Welcome to Pods by PEI.

Mandakni : Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here.

Shuvangi: It's a pleasure to have you. So I understand that you've been working in the civic society space as a practitioner for almost two decades now. How have you seen the civic space transform in these years?

Mandakni : Well, thanks, Shuvangi, for that question, and it really makes me think back to when I first started working in the civil society space in India, and it was in 2005. As a young student coming out of JNU, it was a very interesting time to start working because I started working with an organization called the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative that was working on access to information and access to justice in a number of countries in the Commonwealth.

At that point, the organization was very closely involved in advocating for a new law in India, which was looking at the right to information. I had the opportunity to actually work on some of the advocacy, the campaigning, and then subsequently, once the law was passed, to actually work on disseminating information about it within civil society.

So I think from that point of view, from 2005 to now 2024, it's been a long journey. But I think from working on Right to Information, I subsequently worked on India's National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, then working with the Asia Foundation in their office in India for many years, looking at issues of governance, accountability, women's rights, and also looking at regional issues in South Asia.

But I think the one current that was running through all of it has been not just looking at civil society but also engaging with a variety of civil society actors, state, non-state, private sector, government. And that's really what we're talking about when we're talking about civic space. It's a huge diverse set of actors. So yeah, there have been a lot of factors which have changed it, but I think some of the key factors which I would say really underpin a healthy, vibrant civic space are your ability to access information, your ability to ask questions, your ability to participate, your ability to ask difficult questions and to try and hold those in power to account.

So I'm not sure if I answered your question, but I think I would say that civil society and civic space is an issue that I'm very passionate about, and I feel like I've been a part of it for most of my career. So yeah, this is an exciting conversation to have.

Shuvangi: Thank you for a very candid response, Mandakni . You just mentioned that you have worked with the Asia Foundation for a couple of years in the past, and I believe you were also a part of a report that focused on civic spaces in countries like Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. So could you shed some light on their current state in South Asia amidst their unique social, political, and cultural landscapes?

Mandakni : Yeah, so thanks very much for that question and also for mentioning the report. Between, I think it was 2020 and 2022, somewhere around that, I was involved with a study that the Asia Foundation was conducting, looking at how civic space was changing in South Asia, but with a focus on three countries, which are Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal.

The report came out in March last year, so exactly a year ago, and it's called A Glass Half Full: Civic Space and Contestation in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. And I'd like to give a shout out to my co-authors, Sumaya Seluja and Dr. Srinivas, as well as the offices of the Asia Foundation that supported this team to really put this report out there.

The report was based on a survey that we did looking at civil society organizations in these three countries, as well as a series of key informant interviews with civil society organizations. The Asia Foundation also hosted validation workshops in these three different countries. We really wanted to try and situate the report in the context of broader trends around civic space, civic engagement, in some countries seeing trends towards much more closing of civic space and see what was happening. The conventional view is that civic space is closing.

If you look at the indices and a lot of the global indices around freedom of speech, expression, media freedoms, and ability to participate in political protests, etc., in this region, the picture is not looking so great, right? The map doesn't look very green. It tends to be slightly in the orange to red category, if I can say it that way.

But the report is really trying to understand if that is the only story, and the reason it's called A Glass Half Full is because, yes, half of the story is that there is a sense of civic space shrinking and closing in certain aspects. We can go into that. But the other half of the glass is full of stories of resilience of civil society, adapting to shifting sands beneath their feet literally, and of some really inspiring efforts on looking at how civic space and civil society actors continue to shift and change.

So, yeah, there's a lot to unpack and discuss and digest just with this report itself.

Shuvangi: You mentioned the report, and I've read through it, and I see how it highlights several interconnected trends, such as challenges to freedom of expression and shrinking democratic spaces. I would ask you to now elaborate on the trends shaping civic space in South Asia, and what kind of challenges these CSOs are facing, and how it's affecting their ability to function.

Mandakni : So, thanks, and I think I'm happy that you read the report. That's great. It is an interesting piece of research because it is from a moment in time, but it's still, I think, an interesting moment in time. One thing we can say for sure is that across all three countries, though they may differ in terms of their socioeconomic and political context, the contours of civic space are changing in very specific ways.

One is that at a very formal level, many of the laws, rules, and regulations that govern the ability of civil society organizations to engage in civic spaces are being restricted, are being changed, which is making it very difficult for civil society organizations to operate. These changes relate to, for example, registration.

So how an organization is registered. Is it an association? Is it a not-for-profit? In many countries, civil society organizations are able to get tax exemptions for their activities. In some cases, those have been taken away. Or there is a restriction of other regulations, rules, etc., around the use of public space or the ability to talk about certain things on public platforms or in social media, etc.

One thing is definitely this kind of shrinking of that institutional space, the regulatory space. As a result, many civil society organizations talked about how they were spending a lot more time on administrivia. So having to actually spend a lot of time on paperwork to ensure that they were meeting the bare minimum compliance to stay operational.

The second thing is also around restrictions on fundraising. In many countries, civil society organizations have specific laws under which they're able to raise foreign funds, etc., and those have been restricted. With reduced donor funding, your ability to be able to operate on a day-to-day basis gets restricted.

So those are two trends, particularly around how the space itself is closing. In some countries, it's particularly more acute. In Bangladesh, the report talks about how freedom of association and speech has been more challenging. In Sri Lanka over the last few years, particularly around the moment where there was the economic crisis, there were instances again where freedom of speech and expression was under restriction.

But that's definitely one of the things. It's interesting to talk about Nepal because Nepal in many ways is in a slightly different position from these other countries. That has a lot to do with the youth of Nepal's democracy. By youth, I don't mean the young people. I mean, how young the democracy itself is. Whereas the majority of people that we spoke to in Nepal, and even in the survey, while there is a sense that civic space might be shrinking, or there might be some restrictions to it, there's still a sense of buoyancy and enthusiasm about Nepal's democracy in that sense.

The other thing to think about is that one is the ability to engage in the civic space through the ability to just stay operational. The other one is to what extent civil society organizations are able to participate in policymaking at the national level or be able to access information about government activities, etc. In both those spaces, we saw, particularly in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, that there were some changes happening, some restriction happening in that sense.

The third interesting area is looking at online space. In this new era, we're talking about how civic space has been changing. Civil society is now online as much as it is on the streets, right? A lot of restriction of freedom of speech and expression online and use of defamation laws against civil society actors has made it so that there is a strong sense that came through of civil society just being much more on alert and having to be much more careful about how they operate, kind of staying a little bit below the parapet, if you know what I mean, in order to continue to do the things that they do.

The other area I want to touch upon is it's not just the way in which civil society organizations can or cannot work, which is changing, it's also what they work on. The study found that it's increasingly becoming more challenging for civil society in Bangladesh and in Sri Lanka to areas like media freedom, corruption, access to justice, human rights, criminal justice. These are areas where it's increasingly becoming more politically complicated or more politically sensitive for civil society organizations to work on those issues. In contrast, areas which are still considered less sensitive are areas like women's rights.

Or children's rights or youth engagement, maybe, and climate change. So it's not just how civil society organizations operate, it's also what they work on and what they feel comfortable working on. And I think the stakes in some countries are obviously higher than others. I mean, the study found, for example, in Bangladesh, there's a real concern about security, safety, the likelihood of people being arrested, et cetera, based on what has been already, and what I'm saying is not new.

It's what's been reported in the media. It's been what's reported by civil society organizations in Bangladesh itself. So that's the study. I'll pause there because I think if I was to say in a nutshell, it's the regulatory and institutional space. It's the issues and areas that they work on. It's on their ability to be able to generate resources to continue those activities.

Shuvangi: Thank you for thoroughly laying out the ways in which civil society has been impacted, Mandakni . The next question is how civil society is now responding to these impacts.

Mandakni : I think that's such a great question. I think it's important for us to consider that civil society is always shifting. It's always changing. And I think also, you know, not to sound facetious, but when one door closes, another opens, and I think that's very much one of the things we learned from the study and in talking to people in all these three countries was that civil society continues to be very innovative and open to the idea of continuing to find new ways.

So one of the things that came through very powerfully was that, you know, even though civil society may be under pressure in some countries on working on specific issues, that on the one hand, civil society is either having to narrow the scale and focus of their work, or the visibility of their activities, so as I said, be a little bit more under the radar, but the other thing is also we spoke to people in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, who said, well, actually, we're going to follow a policy of over-engaging, so over-communicating, being much more transparent and accountable about their actions.

Because I think one of the things that came up very strongly in the study and in the conversations was also the importance of trust. Why do we have civic space? Why do we have civil society? The idea is that civil society is a space where individuals, organizations, entities engage with the state and create that space for civic activism, political participation, et cetera.

But civil society must hold itself also to account for being transparent, being accountable. And I think that is an area where, to be frank, there is a lot more work to be done across many countries. How accountable is civil society to external actors? And the fact that there needs to be a sense of trust building which must continue to happen. And so as I said, in both Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, and particularly in Bangladesh, we had civil society, the people we spoke to who talked about the fact that now no matter what activities they do, they will publish them on their website. They will engage with their government counterparts and try to also find windows of opportunity where they can keep that conversation alive because I think also when you read a report you say, oh, you know, civic space in X country is completely closed.

I think that gives a very one-sided impression of what's actually happening. Yes, on certain indicators a country may not be performing well, or there might be issues and challenges. But on the flip side, there are also stories where the idea has to be a healthy, productive, two-way conversation. So I think engaging with the government much more proactively and finding spaces where they can do so constructively is definitely one strategy for engagement.

The second one, as I said, being more transparent and accountable. So when it comes to compliance, et cetera, even though that has certain implications in terms of time, resources, et cetera. And I think the third area is also having to look at new forms of resourcing. So in many countries, I mean, I've seen that in India as well, that as you've seen a decline of donor funding, particularly for civil society activities, many organizations have shifted to being either, you know, for-profit entities or becoming registered as donors.

You know, their registration status has changed, or they're looking at engaging much more in CSR, etc. So, looking at new forms of resourcing to keep that conversation going. And I think, in many ways, these are not bad trends, these are healthy trends, because it shows that civil society continues to be resurgent, etc. And I think one thing I just want to say before we move on to the next question is, I think it's important to consider that these shifts and trends in civic space are like moments in time, right? So right now, not just in South Asia and countries in the region. Globally, we're seeing a much more shift towards the right, both in terms of the nature of politics, both in terms of the ability for citizens to engage in public protest.

You know, at the time that I started my career, we had a series of rights-based movements. We had the right to information, right to education, right to food, right to education. I mean, my early career was just seeing stalwart civil society leaders in India really coming to the fore and being part of the policymaking process.

That has changed significantly. I mean, the left much, not that I believe in left, right or center, but the view that you had a welfare state that had a space for civil society, that had a space for people's voices and not just urban elite English-speaking voices, right? Also the voices of grassroots voices of social movements of labor unions, et cetera, had a political space, et cetera, much more than you are seeing in many countries today.

And we can talk a little bit more about the new forms of social mobilization and engagement as we get to that. But I think the point I probably end on is saying is that yes, there are these trends which are making it harder for civil society actors to work on, but there are new actors and new forms of engagement and mobilization, which are also happening.

And it is a contested space. And that is how it should be in a democratic system. I think if there was no contestation, if there was no push and pull from both sides, it would not be a healthy situation. And I just want to add on one thing on the trends, which is if I look at post-independence in India, for example, you know, the idea of civil society has also evolved.

So I was just coming back to this point on the evolution of the role of civil society itself. I think we went through a phase where from civil society being kind of agnostic to the state to civil society being a key ally of the state in terms of delivery of public services and we saw that particularly during COVID, right, how particularly in South Asia, in the absence of the vaccines, because they came in much later, how the governments in many countries, India, Nepal, etc, relied on civil society organizations at the grassroots level to deliver the vaccine.

You know, deliver knowledge and information about COVID, et cetera. And so there is, and there are still examples, like I believe in Nepal, for example, under the federal structure, you do have a lot of civil society organizations working with district governments on frontline service delivery issues, right?

So there is still the space where both parties need each other in that sense. But it's about how do you build that trust, build the accountability, and continue to keep that space open for critical voices to come in and for that conversation to be a healthy one.

Shuvangi: Right. One thing that I found very interesting while you were answering was how non-traditional actors in the civic space have now emerged and are like key players in shaping the space.

And we've always generally had this very narrow view of civic space. We always think about like the traditional think tank or the research center, non-government organizations, but these civic spaces have taken new shape. Would you like to maybe talk about that a little bit?

Mandakni : I think that's a great question. And I think I'd start by talking about how the online space has really transformed. The ability of these new forms of social engagement, social mobilization, social interaction to take place and you know the data revolution in South Asia, right? The fact that cell phone penetration is one of the highest in the world, anywhere in a rural village in the region.

Everybody's connected through the internet and everybody has WhatsApp, for better or worse, you know, and that, you know, data itself is so cheap, right? Like a data plan is so cheap. I think that really has changed the game for civic mobilization period. And I think it's not just for civil society, but also for any kind of society.

So the political parties utilize it. You know, we call it in India, WhatsApp University, like all these forwards you keep getting about some of it, you know, it has a positive side, but it also has a negative side of misinformation, right? So I think there is a civic space, which is an online space, which is a digital space, which is quite new.

And I don't know how much research is going on out there about that. But I think it's an area which is of real interest. I think you see a lot of youth engagement and youth mobilization then. And what I find particularly interesting about it is the potential it has for engagement in vernacular language.

So in India, for example, you have so many languages, right? I'm sure in Nepal also, there are different dialects, et cetera. So the ability for people at a local level to be able to communicate with each other and talk about issues, ideas, challenges in a language that is their own. And I think that is very powerful.

So I think one is this whole digital online space. I think the second constituency is definitely the youth. And I know that's an area that you're very interested in also. And I think we, and in South Asia, we are young countries in terms of democracies, but we're also very young populations. I think the average age is like somewhere between 18 and 25 or something like that.

And I think the issues of the youth today are very different from what the mainstream agenda is, right? So, but I also think that there's a disconnect because you have a very young population led by political parties where the average age of the politician is, let's just say in the late 60s, right?

So I think, and yet there is not enough political representation of those youth voices. So I think the youth is definitely a strong voice. And I think we saw this very much in Sri Lanka a few years ago, during the economic crisis where a lot of the mobilization happened online by the youth, what's called the Aragalya movement and how powerful that was to bring about social change and transformation in Sri Lanka.

And from what I understand, Nepal also is very vibrant, love to hear more about that from you about how you utilize that space? Now, as I said, there's a double-edged sword, right, which is on the one hand there is the ability to restrict that space through legislation, but equally to, you know, other actors and I really want to emphasize this point, other actors to also utilize that space for other purposes.

So we have this idea that civil society is benign. I think we all have this image of what civil society looks like, but there is the left-wing civil society, which is talking about a whole set of things. And there is a centrist civil society, and there is also a right-wing civil society. And I think it's important for all of those types of civil society to talk to each other because polarization happens when these different actors are not talking to each other.

So I think when we talk about shifting and shrinking civic space, I think often we forget about those other actors who we may not consider to be part of the mainstream because they are not political or socioeconomic voices or political voices that the mainstream may feel needs to have that space. But you don't engage with those voices is when I think the threads and fabrics of democratic space actually start to shred.

And for me, if I think about one of the interesting, I mean, I talked about the Aragalai movement in Sri Lanka, you know, the farmers' movement in India has been really inspiring, right? So we've had to see, I mean, recently, also, there have been farmer protests in India, asking for the government to pay a guaranteed minimum price for their crops, right?

And then we also had that a few years ago. And we had farmers on the gates of Delhi, sitting on the highway for over a year in the heat, in the cold, just refusing to budge on their demands. Now, one might argue that that's not a very constructive way of engaging, but it was actually physically occupying civic space and making a demand very public.

And it brought the issue, a rural issue, to the heart of Indian government, right, which is Delhi, and it forced people like me, like I'm an urban Indian elite person, right, let's not make no bones about that. But it made a rural issue, a very political, a very national issue. And eventually, the two parties had to come to the table.

So I think it's interesting also to look at how older forms of civic protest, civic engagement, like chakka buns or buns or, you know, fasts, going back to very Gandhian ideas, are being used today by today's civil society to argue for issues. Going back to the mid-2000s when, you know, Anna Hazare, a very well-known social activist in India, went on a fast asking for greater transparency, accountability.

That social movement led to the creation of a new political party in India, the Aam Aadmi Party. So I think it's interesting to see how different the online space, the physical space, are all spaces where the political space itself, right? So a civic movement becoming then a political party and then trying to influence government policy.

So yeah, I think there are a whole range of actors who are out there and that's what makes our democracy in this region so interesting, so vibrant and so contested and frankly, so challenging.

Shuvangi: So, you spoke about the more traditional forms of social movements in the past, and you know how it's always been very interesting to me how local communities have been involved, how the youth has been involved, and how those movements have always turned out to be very, very successful.

Would you like to expand on that, maybe?

Mandakni : Yeah, I think it's sort of that adage, which is, you know, the more things change, the more they stay the same. And I think it's interesting. One might say that, okay, you know, the forms of protest or social mobilization that we see now are very different from those in the past, but I think they actually draw on long traditions in South Asia of people's participation.

Whether you think about the village assemblies or a system of village elders who convene and talk about issues, etc. I think, the democratic ideal is very deeply rooted in our culture in South Asia, and it is a shared culture, you know, history and colonialism may have drawn certain borders, but certain ethical values, I think, still exist.

And I think local movements are very adept at tapping into that strong cultural ethos that we have around civic engagement and civic space. And what do I mean by that? I remember early in my career, I talked to you about working on the right to information. So where did that demand for a law on right to information actually come from?

It came because there were these communities in rural, of men and women in rural Rajasthan who were working on public worksites. And they were putting in a day's work, but at the end of the month getting paid less than they expected. And when they asked for the muster rolls, they didn't get access to them.

So the demand started was Hamara Paisa, Hamara Hisaab. It's our money. We want the accounts for it. And that, it began as a rural movement for Hamara Paisa, Hamara Aisaab. And it was led by a grassroots organization called MKSS, Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sanghatan, which became one of the progenitors of the Rajasthan Right to Information Act, which then kind of snowballed.

But it was a very simple idea. As citizens in a democracy, we have the right, if we pay taxes, and we vote, we have a right to know how our money is being used. And so we need access to information. And with them, it started with access to master rolls, etc. But then it's, as I said, it kind of spun into this broader demand force.

And you know, I think democracy is a sum of its parts, right? And I think very often when we think about the state of democracy in a particular country, we think about just the national level politics, but it's actually much more complex.And I don't need to tell you that we're in Nepal. You have, you know, you have a federal structure.

Now you have district level governments and you know, there's a whole lot of mobilization and engagement happening there. And I think that's where the magic really happens, or really the potential for change really exists, because I think nobody has a better sense of what are the issues and challenges facing a community than those who are living in that community.

And I think traditional forms of social engagement, if I think about India, for example, you know, the village assemblies, the panchayati raj system, the local forms of decentralized government, which have now been formalized, but actually have a long history. trajectory. Those are systems by which local people get to participate and talk about what are some of the, you know, what are their priorities?

Like, do we want to build a well here? Do we want to bridge a bridge? Or, you know, our schools need the walls need to be painted, or they need a new roof, or we need to hire a, you know, a dispensary doctor because the local dispensary doesn't have one. I think people's engagement in those processes is really critical.

And I think, you know, Civic engagement, I think more and more what's happening also is that government has become so big, and yet it cannot reach many of these places. So I think civil society has a lot of role and scope to play in still engaging with those actors at that level. And I think in terms of modes of social mobilization that I think continue to remain relevant, and I think they're all relevant, but some that I've seen that I think are more relevant, is where you have, you know, people engaging in Jana Andolans or, you know, social movement.

Shuvangi: So, you mentioned how the urban youth has sort of checked out of politics and we're sort of laid back, not really doing anything, but really interesting social movement that I saw happening very close to me in Kathmandu. It was very much led by the urban youth. And although we do say that the urban youth has checked out of politics and, you know, they're very laid back and, but, but I've seen, you know, them be effective.

What happened is when we started to see the spillover effects from India. And the cases of COVID were rapidly rising instead of conducting PCR tests that can accurately detect a virus, regardless of how big or small the amount is, the government continued conducting antigen tests, which can only determine if you have an active virus in your body.

So it's for like surveillance purposes. And, you know, the youth of Kathmandu, they sort of mobilized and they started asking questions. Enough is enough movement, and they went and sat in front of the Prime Minister's office in Balwatar, and there was this big deal, you know, like the police came with trucks and they were firing water hoses at the youth and everything.

But it was a time where, you know, I had the same view. I was like, Okay, nothing's gonna happen. No one's gonna talk about this. But you know, the urban youth, they actually took a step. And then they ended up signing an eight-point agreement with the government, I believe the Prime Minister themselves.

That's so I have seen promising trends in Nepal as well. And that's why the youth engagement, I feel like it's it's that one space for Nepal where, you know, we can really tap into organizing and making a change.

Mandakni : Thanks for sharing that example, because A, I was not aware about it, and second, it's such a great example of how there is power in youth engagement and the extent to which, by physically occupying a space and making their protests very clear, there is that space for engagement and for change to happen, right?

I think it's very interesting that you brought up COVID because it's strange that it's not that long ago that we all went through that, but how much of it has actually shaped and changed the way we think about civic space has also changed quite significantly. And I talked earlier a little bit about how in the early stages of the virus being detected in the region, like, Nobody knew.

I mean, frankly, everybody was scrambling around the world to figure out how to contain it, right? And so I think a lot of governments in the region relied on civil society organizations, youth groups, women's groups, SAGs, etc., to put the word out about how do you control the spread. But when I was talking about, you know, So it also in sitting in Delhi in the middle of the Delta wave, I remember very powerfully thinking, Oh my God, this is what happens when the middle class checks out of the system.

And by that I mean, when you as a middle class, the urban elite in Delhi, for example, You can afford to manufacture your own air with air purifiers, you send your kids to private school, you can go to private hospitals, you can basically buy your way to better air, better quality education, better health, right?

But in the middle of COVID, when there were, you know, Delta was horrifying. I've never seen, experienced anything like that. Everybody was. And I think it's then when I realized that political participation by all individuals, all stratas, all socioeconomic strata in society is so important. And you know, Albert Hirschman is this political scientist, theoretician who wrote a book called Exit, Voice, and Loyalty.

And it had a big influence on me and my career when I was working. And he talks about the fact that, Within a political system, those who can afford to exit a system will do so with resources, etc. And some will stay loyal to it because they have a vested interest in it. And there are others who will remain, who will voice their protest against what's happening because they have a stake in it.

And I think in that sense, it's important to consider like what, what is at stake for for all of us as members of civil society, right? And I think your point around youth is so important because I do feel that in this era of TikTok you know, 10-second, 120 words on Twitter, that the ability and space for young people to realize how important it is to be politically active, be politically engaged, very often doesn't come through, right?

And especially at a time when you're seeing all of these shifts and trends that we've been talking about, right? So where will that next generation come from if they do not, if they do not have the opportunity to reflect critically on what is their role in civil society?

So I have to say that that example from Kathmandu is really inspiring because, you know, you had your youth come forward and say enough is enough.

And, and I think Sri Lanka was similar with Aragalya where they're like, We've had it, you know, our politicians are not being responsive. And what do we need to do? I would say there's a lot more scope for youth education, particularly around political participation, which is really important, because they are the next generation, you know.

Shuvangi: All right, so you spoke about Anna Hazare and Satyagraha, Gandhian movements, and we've had like glimpses, we've had reflections of those movements in Nepal. This activist, I forgot his name, but he went on a hunger strike for the same cause, until and unless you don't get PCR tests, you know, I'm not going to eat.

And then there were people who joined along with him. So Nepal has often taken inspiration from movements in India. And I probably wanted to ask, given how Nepal's case is different, considering its young and evolving federalism, maybe there are some models and examples that Nepal can learn from the process of India or its other South Asian neighbors in this space.

Mandakni : Yeah. So I'd say every, you know, every country's political history and it's where it is in a particular moment of time is so different. Um, so in many ways, I'd say it's, it's, it's difficult to, to say what Nepal could learn. And I think in many ways, Nepal itself is an inspiring and interesting case, right?

Because there has been a long history of. of civil war, of strife, and yet democracy has survived, and yet it remains vibrant. And I think one of the interesting things with the study was how compared to say Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, despite the perception within certain elements in civil society that yes, it was becoming harder to operate, there are all these issues, etc.

The general mood I think in Nepal around the space for civic engagement and political participation, you know, the coming on the streets and asking for and saying, you know, enough is enough. We want more from our government is very much present there. And I think one of the factors which in my view is, is been a factor in that dynamism in that Vibrancy is the fact that the whole federalism movement and the fact that that's fairly still fairly new.

And of course, you're going to tell me more about that than me because I'm not a Nepal expert. But from, you know, from being a neighbor in India, I think certainly it seems that way. And because there has been so much political transition, you Um, from one political party to the next in, you know, I suppose, more frequently than perhaps expected, but that has also created more space for civic activism.

So for example, you know, in Bangladesh, by contrast, you have a single party, what has become essentially a single party state with one political party, one political leader in power for a long time, right? That actually makes it much more difficult for other voices to come up. political alternatives. And I think the vibrancy of a democracy comes when there is, um, a lot more variety in a sense.

There's a lot more space for other actors to come in and engage. So in terms of what I think, what Nepal could, um, I think Nepal is doing really well for itself. So I, I'm nobody to give it advice. But I would say what it can learn from other countries is that there are strategies with civil society organizations in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka that they continue to, um, engage with even at times when one door closes, there's always another to open.

So I have to say that the example from Kathmandu is really inspiring because the youth came forward and said enough is enough. I think Sri Lanka was similar with Aragalya, where they're like, We've had it, you know, our politicians are not being responsive. And what do we need to do? I would say there's a lot more scope for youth education, particularly around political participation, which is really important because they are the next generation.

Alright, so you spoke about Anna Hazare and Satyagraha, Gandhian movements, and we've had glimpses, reflections of those movements in Nepal. This activist, I forgot his name, but he went on a hunger strike for the same cause, until and unless you don't get PCR tests, you know, I'm not going to eat. And then there were people who joined along with him. So Nepal has often taken inspiration from movements in India. And I probably wanted to ask, given how Nepal's case is different, considering its young and evolving federalism, maybe there are some models and examples that Nepal can learn from the process of India or its other South Asian neighbors in this space.

Yeah. So I'd say every country's political history and where it is in a particular moment of time is so different. So in many ways, I'd say it's difficult to say what Nepal could learn. And I think in many ways, Nepal itself is an inspiring and interesting case, right? Because there has been a long history of civil war, of strife, and yet democracy has survived, and yet it remains vibrant. And I think one of the interesting things with the study was how compared to say Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, despite the perception within certain elements in civil society that yes, it was becoming harder to operate, there are all these issues, etc.

The general mood I think in Nepal around the space for civic engagement and political participation, you know, the coming on the streets and asking for and saying, you know, enough is enough. We want more from our government is very much present there. And I think one of the factors which in my view is, has been a factor in that dynamism, in that vibrancy, is the fact that the whole federalism movement and the fact that that's still fairly new. And of course, you're going to tell me more about that than me because I'm not a Nepal expert. But from, you know, from being a neighbor in India, I think certainly it seems that way. And because there has been so much political transition, you from one political party to the next in, you know, I suppose, more frequently than perhaps expected, but that has also created more space for civic activism.

So for example, you know, in Bangladesh, by contrast, you have a single party, what has become essentially a single-party state with one political party, one political leader in power for a long time, right? That actually makes it much more difficult for other voices to come up, political alternatives. And I think the vibrancy of a democracy comes when there is, a lot more variety in a sense. There's a lot more space for other actors to come in and engage. So in terms of what I think, what Nepal could, I think Nepal is doing really well for itself. So I'm nobody to give it advice. But I would say what it can learn from other countries is that there are strategies with civil society organizations in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka that they continue to engage with even at times when one door closes, there's always another to open.

And I think, you know, in India, for example, as I've talked about before, what traditional forms of social protests have been very effective in some ways. We talked about the farmers protest, for example. I think in Sri Lanka, the Ara Galiya movement was very interesting in the way in which they used social media, etc. I think Bangladesh is still a very different case. I think there, I think it's more a story about how civil society has been very resilient in continuing to engage with the government even though the space is quite restricted and it's quite challenging, I think, to continue to work. One thing I did want to say is that I think it's also interesting to talk about the way in which civil society themselves can support each other in the region.

And so there are a lot of regional and transboundary networks and alliances that have been formed informally over the years by civil society actors and organizations, even between India and Pakistan, right? There's a lot of cross-border talk, dialogue, and I think the space with the online world has really opened that up, right? So you can now talk to somebody in another time zone on another side of the world, and COVID made it even easier. So I think the kind of networks and alliances, so I think I'll probably end with that by saying that there is strength and power in networks and alliances, and particularly in regional networks and alliances on issues where it's becoming more challenging to work on, such as human rights, such as climate justice or other issues where it's more sensitive for an organization to work alone.

I mean, it was interesting to see, for example, In, I think it was in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh that we, Sri Lanka around, we spoke to, you know, we were talking to different organizations and they were saying particularly around issues of transparency and accountability. If a report can't be released in the country, perhaps it can be released somewhere else by other actors, right? So there is this idea that even though the space might be restricted in the country, there are other allies, Globally, who can raise that voice. And I think that's quite transformative, like I think 10 years or 20 years ago, where was there space for, for example, I cannot talk about Gaza, right? It has been, I mean, it's hard to even talk about that. But I think the fact the mobilization, the kind of power that has been mobilized through social media, unfortunately, in a very visceral way, it's a shame it has come to that. But the kind of transnational coalition and its allyship that we're seeing for a cause which is so far away from all of our lives and realities. I think that's very powerful and I think there's a lot to draw from that in terms of strategies for civil society, not just in Nepal, but across the region who are dealing with issues that are very often beyond the control.

Shuvangi: This episode is also about connecting civic spaces, and I really resonate with your idea of regional networks and alliances and how we're stronger together. And it's, I've also noticed that, you know, while countries like you mentioned India and Pakistan on the political or diplomatic level, they're struggling to get along, but how civil society has found a way to connect meaningfully even. So my question A question for you would be, how can we strive for a more meaningful collaboration of civil society in the region?

And you know, given the various political and diplomatic challenges, and how can we leverage this growing partnership for better cooperation in the region to maybe achieve mutual goals and things like that? Something that we've not been really able to do through high level interactions.

Mandakni : Yeah. So I think I've spent a lot of, you know, perhaps a decade of my career when I was at the AsiaFoundation, looking at regional cooperation issues in South Asia.

It's one of the least integrated regions in the world. Trade is a very, you know, percentage of trade for the region is very low compared to many others. And, ironically, this region has many shared issues and challenges around climate change, where in Nepal, you know, you have ISIMOD based here, which is looking at mountain issues and climate change issues in the HKH region, which affects the whole region.

You have issues around air pollution, you know, I'm from Delhi or from Kathmandu, we're both got allergies today. So that's clearly, you know, things cross borders, even though the borders are closed, right? And I think one thing that has struck me through a decade of working at TAF, because we used to do a lot of work on particularly around transboundary water governance and on regional trade and on women's empowerment, is just the strength of the number of organizations, each of the countries working on these issues, is that and the willingness and the, you know, the desire to collaborate on transboundary issues, on projects, on initiatives, on research.

And I'll just give you a couple of examples. So one of the early projects that I worked on at the Asia Foundation was one called, which was a coalition of civil society organizations in India, Nepal, Bangladesh, looking at water governance issues and it was called Water Beyond Borders and it was a very, it was a very small initiative but it had some of the leading experts from India, from Nepal and Bangladesh who would meet sometimes, you know, twice a year, thrice a year to hash out and talk about what were some of the issues around water, whether it was about Water Beyond Borders.

You know, a particular dam being built or about a river, etc. And I think there was a power in that coalition, a power in that convening. Because when there's an issue like transboundary water, which is a deeply political, deeply nationalistic, highly sensitive issue, it's about water sharing. And many of the treaties exist.

I mean, you could have a whole podcast with me on water. Not today. Where, you know, where do you get those alternative voices? And how does somebody who lives downstream in Bangladesh get to understand what are the upstream issues? in India or upstream issues even further up in Nepal or upstream that in China, right?

Because very often I think the political narratives take charge when you are talking about South Asia and boundaries and, you know, very nationalistic positions, hard positions. You forget you're talking about people, right? And I think that's just one example of many projects that I worked on which had these kind of either two or three organizations working across borders.

We also did a study which was looking at how the right to information was being used in these three countries. Very interesting findings there. This study is another example, this DAF study on civic spaces. And I just want to kind of bring in there that other point, which is, you know, there is a role for external actors, for donors, for private foundations, for think tanks, for CSR funding.

To really invest in these spaces because these spaces do not sustain, and they're not self-sustaining. They can sustain themselves to a point through, you know, core funding or from, you know, goodwill, but people also need to put food on the table. They need something more than air to breathe. So I also want to touch upon the fact is that this ecosystem, this space needs to be protected.

And it's not just the role of civil society to do that. It is the role of the private sector. It's the role of. To the extent that, you know, donors or other development actors are continuing to be active in these countries to put their resources towards alliance, coalition building, leadership building, you know, who are the next generation of civil society leaders, civic education.

These are areas where even where it may be politically sensitive for development actors to put their resources or because resources are increasingly scarce because, you know, there are other issues. There are two wars happening in Europe at the moment. We get that. But I think it's important to not completely exit that space because, you know, civil society actors need support and I think they need support from people like you and me.

They need support from their peers in the country and also the region and they need support from the private sector, from government and others because without civic space I think we would, we stand to lose a lot.

Shuvangi: All right. Thank you so much. This was an amazing conversation, Mandakni . I felt like I was in one of those, you know, university lectures.

That's very interesting. And it was my favorite teacher. And like you said, it's it's a mixed bag. And as long as we don't check out of the system, as long as we continue to care and speak out and do things for things that are beyond us, more important than us, we should be fine. So thank you so much.

Mandakni : Thank you so much.

And I also just want to say that, you know, it's always a pleasure coming to Kathmandu, coming to Nepal. And I have to say, it's also been  where I've actually had the opportunity to engage with a lot of people from civil society in South Asia. So I think, you know, That's something that Nepal has really to be proud of that it serves as the hub to connect people hearts and minds in the region.

And so as long as we have Kathmandu, there's hope for South Asia civic space. Let this be a message for our youth. 

Shuvangi: Absolutely. Thanks so much. Thank you so much.

Khushi: Thanks for listening to PODs by PEI.  I hope you enjoyed Shuvangi's conversation with Mandakni on civic spaces in South Asia, friends, challenges, and resilience.

Today's episode was produced by Nirjan Rai with support from me Khushi Hang and Hridesh Sabkota. The episode was recorded at PEI studio and was edited by Hridesh Sabkota. Our theme music is courtesy of Rohit Shakir from Zindabad. If you liked today's episode, please subscribe to our podcast. Also, please do us a favor by sharing us on social media and leaving a review on Spotify, Apple podcasts, Google podcasts, or wherever you listen to the show.

For PEI's video related content, please search for Policy Entrepreneurs on YouTube. To catch the latest from us on Nepal's policy and politics, please follow us on Twitter, at Tweet, and Facebook.  That's T W E E T, followed by the number two and P E I, and on Facebook at Policy Entrepreneurs, Inc. You can also visit PEI.

Center to learn more about us. Thanks once again from me, Khushi. We'll see you soon in our next episode.