Well, the problem as I see it as, even though the 8 parties are supposedly "democratic", they do not practice "democracy" within their organizations. I do not know about either the Indian case (read Nehru/Gandhi) or the Pakistani case (read Bhutto), but in the US (for those of you following the primaries) however much you disagree with the policies and governance of Bush, he was democratically elected. Bush had to go thorugh a gruelling primary (or caucus) in each of the fifty-two states before he could even contest the elections. We do not have anything of that nature in any of our parties be it NC, UML or the Maoists. Why are the Koiralas, Nepals or Dahals even leaders of those parties? They never in their life had to contest a fair election within their organization to get a party ticket (nomination) to contest elections. If one were to think of holding something similar to a primary within the NC, I bet Sujata would have lost it (or maybe have won it) but at any event, she would have more legitimacy than she has now. Qualifications aside, to be a legitimate leader, you need the permission (or at least a semblance of) the people who are being led. Isn't that the essence of democracy? At least the way I understand it.