When the debate on the land bill started in Kathmandu, I was in Madhesh. This is the summer month of this year. It was only natural to meet with the old Dautaris when they reached Sunsari, their home district for a short period of time. One of them was my acquaintance, Bhikhan Sada. He stopped when he saw me coming back from the district office of Land Commission. And said, "I went to meet the head of the commission, the leader is gone."

Bhikhan had no formal education. But the university of experience had taught him so much that he would answer any question 'correctly'. His specialty was always smiling. And, with that familiar smile, he used to mock people and make them laugh. 

'Tell me, Bhikhan, how is the land commission working in the district?' I sought to understand. He looked a little scared and said, "If you write the article, don't mention my name there, otherwise I will be 'blacklisted' by the Commission." I agreed on the condition of not mentioning my name (hence Bhikhan Chain name change). He laughed and said, "When I reached the commission, I met a broker at the door." It was said that there are two ways to get land. First, becoming a party member. Second, to please the leader. To make happy here means to offer donations.' 

I went to a tea shop in Inarua with Bhikhan. Pouring tea, he said, "All the leaders are trying to earn money." They have neither the heart nor the mind to solve the problems of the landless Dalits with a sincere heart.' Not even the grandson who has been waiting for a gift from his grandfather. To write, they have talked about giving land to squatters, dalits and landless in the constitution and law, but the result is zero. After listening to him, the question came to my mind, middlemen and brokers have reached from the door of the lion palace to the courtyard, generation and window of the commission, so how can fair work be done at such a time? Just recently, the 'lychee' scandal in Pokhara showed the picture of the minister, the ministry and the land commission, which was completely naked. 

The next day after meeting Bhikhan, I went to Koshi West. On that trip I wanted to meet some of the landless, squatters and Dalits. And wanted to ask, will the land commission work in Madhesh this time? In the same month, Koshi Tarnasaath met in Hanumannagar, Jhagru Ram (name changed). As soon as we met, he openly gossiped. Earlier with Jhagru 

It is the experience of applying to 5 land commissions. Narrating the same experience, he said, 'Every year, new commissions are formed, new promises are made, new disputes arise and they end. We need red parts, they need politics. We are like insects for the state, who understands our pain?' 

Sitting across from the Kankalini temple, we talked for a few moments. He was saying, "The fate of the poor is wrong." Sometimes it is hit by the flood of Koshi, sometimes it is hit by the government's brutality. There is neither a rope to support the poor, nor a branch to hold on to.' Jhagru was really disappointed. I asked, 'Why are we disappointed?' He said, 'What happens to a poor person who returned empty-handed after applying to the commission five times, but not disappointed, sir? Our politics has planted disappointment, so where should I hope?' Bhagru, who was once involved in the Chamar movement, was now disappointed not only with the government but with himself and the most disappointed with the leaders of Madhesh. He said, 'Now it is useless to hope with them.'

I asked Jhagru, 'What is the land commission doing in Saptari and Siraha? Have the municipalities collected the data of Dalits, squatters and landless people?' Hearing my question, he was lost for a moment and said, 'Nothing has happened since then. It is okay for the municipality to arrange the politics of big people, what is the concern of the poor? There is no coordination between the municipality and the Land Commission, nor are the parties serious about this matter. Those who have been waiting for Lalpurza here for decades, they do not even know that the commission has been formed.' 

Before reaching Lahan, on the right side of the road leading to Gaighat, we found a tea shop. Where local teachers to political activists and Dalit squatters were found gossiping. People were shocked when they saw me, because I was new. After the introduction, the conversation started. The subject was the same, land, commission, bill and politics. As soon as the situation came out, one of the slightly older people said, "I think, the way the Land Commission is trying to work now, there is a big conspiracy in it." That is why the Madhesi parties are against it. He is a teacher by profession. But he is a worker of a political party.

After listening to him, I felt that commentary has its own market in Madhesh. In which the best sellers, the same biases, conspiracies and suspicions of Pahad and Madhesh. Reminding my teacher friend, I said, "Sir, when communists cannot produce results, they create new imaginary enemies around them and blame it on them." They were called feudalism, imperialism and expansionism. I see the same in Madhesh since

. Darkness is within itself, shows the mountain ghost. Otherwise, where did this planned mountainization of Madhesh come from? The mountains also belong to Madhesh, Madhesh also belongs to the mountains. We are hilly, Madhesi people from the same country. Therefore, the question of who should be allowed to live where and who should not be allowed to live where is irrelevant. Nepalis have lived all over the world, but in their own country, some can only live in the mountains and some can only live in Madhesh?' 

A young man who was listening to me asked, 'Then what is the dispute over the land bill?' I explained the matter a bit and said, 'All aspects of the dispute are slowly unfolding, but there are mainly two disputes.

How to reconcile the conflicting things in the first Land Act and Forest Act? Second, how to use the demarcated land? For example, in section 52 (b) of the Act on Land, it is stated that 'regardless of what is written in the existing law, the landless squatters shall be provided with land not exceeding the prescribed area in the place where the Nepal Government has been providing them under sub-section (4) or any other government land deemed appropriate by the Nepal Government'. But this arrangement appears to be in conflict with Section 3 of the Forest Act, 2076.

Where it is said, 'The land use of the national forest area cannot be changed without the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers of Nepal, the right of ownership of the national forest can be provided to anyone, the rights can not be transferred by way of mortgage, lease or any other way. Likewise, there is another issue, that of limitation. In other words, when there is more land than the limit for industrial, agricultural or other purposes, the dispute about how to deal with the latter situation.' He was drinking tea and listening. He was a colleague of Baldev Ram, the leader of the famous land rights movement. He looked at me and said in a firm voice, 'The issue of land in Madhesh is very complicated, sir. It is therefore confusing that Madhesh is the place where there are the largest number of Dalits, who are landless.

Most of the poor are in Madhesh, who work in agriculture. Madhesh has the largest number of farmers who have no land. Madhesh is the only place where basic poverty ends once the land problem is solved. Madhesh is the only place where many peasant uprisings took place in history. And the essence of almost all revolts was land reform.'

But what happened? In the last financial year (2081-82), when 2 thousand 572 red parts were distributed across the country, Madhesh stood at zero. The Land Commission issued two 35-day notices for the agreement to work together with 753 municipalities of all seven provinces. But no one was interested in working in Madhesh. There are a total of 136 municipalities in Madhesh.

Out of which 88 municipalities have so far not collected data on how many landless and squatters are in their municipalities. Now, even when the commission issued a 35-day notice for the last time, if the process did not move forward, the problem of Dalits, landless people and squatters in Madhesh will remain a problem for the time being. This is a very unfortunate situation for the Dalits, poor and landless people of Madhesh. 

Statistics say that 3 lakh citizens are completely landless squatters in Nepal. The number of unorganized residents is around 1 million (families). These are two different problems. But we do not distinguish between landless squatters and unorganized residents. The victims are the landless squatters. Another thing, more than 80 percent of those who are completely landless here are Dalits and Madheshis. They have neither employment options, nor other opportunities to earn. As a result, their entire lives are spent enduring the exploitation of moneylenders. These are the people who have been caught in the trap of moneylending, moneylending and microfinance lately. 

facts make it clear that there is only one answer to the many problems faced by the Madhesi Dalits, land rights. Because land rights give dignified status to Dalits and the poor. Land ownership reduces economic exploitation. Only land rights will empower the Madhesi Dalits and break the feudal structure. Because, in Madhesh, land is the basis of life and is the basic means of dignity. 

Then, why are the political parties of Madhesh confused about this issue? Here I would like to 'quote' the same Jhagru Rama again, who was found on the banks of the Koshi. He says, "For the Madhesi party, the Land Act, Land Bill, Land Commission are all political issues. They think that we the people are stupid, we will believe anything. So they say, it is a conspiracy of all the hills. I wonder, why are they chasing the hungry people to find the nectar that is not available, leaving the plate empty? Even though their own citizens are deprived of their land rights, why are the Madhesi leaders busy with plowing and milking the bulls? Because, for them, politics is power, not the issue of the landless and Dalits.' 

Critics say, Madhesh politics today is entangled in big and abstract things. He is infatuated with words like identity, self-respect, authority, autonomy. Of course, identity, self-respect, rights, autonomy etc. are important issues of politics. But when talking loudly about identity, self-respect, rights, and autonomy, should the matter of the hungry be overshadowed? Is it politics to talk big and loud while ignoring millions of Dalits, poor and landless?