Submit your Article

CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli feels aggrieved that the media does not do enough to rein in the excesses of the Sher Bahadur Deuba government. In a meeting with editors on September 28, he said the previous government he led had benefited from the media’s scrutiny. It is thus incumbent on the media to similarly hold the new government to account. He was particularly unhappy about the ‘little’ media coverage on the Deuba government’s undemocratic ordinance brought with the sole purpose of ‘splitting’ the UML party.

But the mainstream and even smaller media outlets have mostly condemned Deuba’s bypassing of the parliament in his introduction of an ordinance that made it easier for political parties to split. The common theme in these reported pieces and editorials is that the Deuba government appears no better than its error-prone predecessor. Post-1990, Nepali media have always been critical of the incumbent government, irrespective of the parties in power. And rightly so, as the rulers over the years have invariably trampled on democratic norms in the pursuit of personal goals.

Also read: Editorial: PM Deuba, missing in action

Frankly, given the excesses of the Oli government—including its disbanding of the parliament on dubious constitutional grounds, twice—Deuba’s mistakes seem benign by comparison. It’s common knowledge that Deuba as government head has many failings. But while people had high expectations of the two-thirds government Oli led, they expect little from Deuba. Doubts are already creeping in about whether Deuba can successfully conduct the three-tier elections, which was his only mandate.

Oli crying wolf at Deuba’s wrongdoings would have been more credible had his own government heeded the media’s voice. Whatever the opinion-makers and media houses said, PM Oli was determined to have his way. So rather than asking the media to do its job, Oli, as the leader of the main opposition, should play a more constructive role in ensuring that the parliament resumes its business and this government successfully conducts the elections. Dissolving the parliament now, which Oli seems intent on, would only invite more uncertainty, and make timely polls less, not more, likely.

Sher Bahadur Deuba has given a poor account of himself in his two months as prime minister. The holder of 17 ministries has even failed to give a full shape to his cabinet. CPN-UML, the main opposition, has been an obstreperous foe, and yet Deuba too has failed to play his part to clear the parliamentary logjam. Devoid of a foreign minister until September 22, his government bungled on key foreign policy issues like the MCC Compact and the drowning of a Nepali national by Indian border forces.

During his four previous tenures as prime minister Deuba was reputed as a consummate wheeler-dealer who could do just about anything, including distributing expensive SUVs, to keep his coalition partners happy. In his latest stint as prime minister, there is nothing to suggest he has learned from his previous mistakes. On the contrary, he seems determined to regain the Nepali Congress presidency by misusing the PMO.

Dozens of bills are pending in the legislature, government spending has come to a halt, and the economy is crying out for a stimulus. No one knows what the prime minister is doing to improve things on these fronts. Having been appointed prime minister by the Supreme Court, things were never going to be easy for him. Even so, it is hard to give a better example of incompetence than his continued failure (reluctance?) to expand his cabinet and get the ministries up and running.

Many are starting to doubt whether Deuba can successfully hold the constitutionally mandated elections by the November 2022 deadline. They also worry about his lack of commitment to federalism as dozens of bills to make it functional continue to languish in parliament. Six years since the promulgation of the new constitution, the implementation of the federal project has been woefully slow, including under this government.  

Even if there are to be elections soon, Deuba, as prime minister, is doing Nepali Congress no favor whatsoever. In its current form, anti-incumbency could weigh heavily against the party. Moreover, his demonstrable incompetence—following hot on the heels of another unsuccessful prime minister from the main opposition—will add to the appeal of the political forces arrayed against the post-2006 progressive changes. 

The House deadlock that threatens to freeze government spending perfectly highlights the irresponsibility of our major political forces. The Sher Bahadur Deuba-led government kept delaying the parliamentary endorsement of its budget bill fearing that it didn’t have the requisite numbers.

The government decided to press ahead with the bill only when it became certain of a majority. On the other hand, CPN-UML, the main opposition, has been disrupting house proceedings accusing Speaker Agni Prasad Sapkota of bias as he refused to dismiss 14 renegade UML MPs. UML has also boycotted Sapkota’s initiatives to reopen the house. This is not a battle that appears ripe for an early resolution.

As a result, for the first time in the democratic history of Nepal, government spending could come to a halt, even as the country is neck-deep in the Covid-19 crisis and an urgent outlay is vital for timely procurement and distribution of vaccines. All development activities will stop. Meanwhile, the ruling as well as opposition parties, seem determined to tire each other out.

The previous government of KP Oli was much maligned for playing fast and loose with democratic norms before the Supreme Court ordered its ouster. Yet the current Deuba government seems no better in terms of misusing state offices and coffers. Oli, at the same time, continues to cross new frontiers every day by using the most disparaging language against his political opponents and by encouraging his MPs to act violently inside the parliament.

Deuba’s time in office should have been used, first and foremost, to clear the way for the three tiers of elections which must be completed before the November 2022 constitutional deadline. Yet it is hard to see the country head to elections in such a toxic political climate. Given the course of events over the past year or so, there is a possibility of a constitutional vacuum, come November 2022. Hopefully, our major political actors will pull back from the brink while they still have time. Their current strategy of smashing democratic norms to smite their opponents is self-defeating. 

A strange logic seems to have taken hold of some investors in Nepal Stock Exchange (NEPSE). So long as the stock indices keep increasing, they are happy to pocket the gains. But, when the market self-corrects and declines, they cry foul. They knock on the finance minister’s doors to intervene. They rally against the central bank, asking it to ditch measures to limit speculative spending in the stock market. This is not how things work in a functional economy.

Nepal Rastra Bank is perfectly justified in capping the amount (Rs 120 million) that a person or institution can get by holding their share certificates as collateral in banks—if they are to reinvest the loan in stocks. Some blame this provision in the latest monetary policy for recent market corrections. But it’s the right step and will help the market emerge from the clutches of a handful of cunning investors who thrive on fanning wild speculations. The argument that the government shouldn’t intervene in an incipient stock market is also flawed: It is an open secret that NEPSE is under the virtual control of a handful of big investors and stockbrokers who have gamed the system.

The allure of stock investing greatly increased during the pandemic as there were few other investment avenues. Many got in, believing it was an easy way to make money. Soon, they were addicted. They forgot it is just as easy to lose money, especially in a rigged system. Thus the central bank must keep NEPSE on a tight leash and continue to limit big speculative investment. These measures will also help make the stock exchange safer and more reliable.

The 2007-2008 global financial crisis was a cruel reminder that when financial bubbles burst, they can have a devastating impact on people’s lives and livelihoods. Meanwhile, such types as the loan sharks, inside traders, and sellers of dubious financial instruments either disappeared or used legal loopholes to go scot-free. Again, it was the governments that had to ultimately come to the rescue of their citizens. Only thoughtful and timely regulations can forestall such a travesty of justice.