Submit your Article

Exactly a year ago, the Oli government outlawed the Netra Bikram Chand ‘Biplob’-led Nepal Communist Party (NCP), in a move criticized in many quarters. Instead of talking to the renegade Maoist outfit and trying to usher it into mainstream politics, why was the government trying to suppress it with brute force? And why was Biplob’s party outlawed without a serious attempt at talks, at a time the outfit of CK Raut, another underground party, was being persuaded to shun its secessionist path?

The critics had a point. The price of trying to suppress the incipient Maoist rebellion in 1996 was high. In the end, a solution to the Maoist insurgency could be found only through talks. So perhaps Biplob could have been talked out of extremism too? Unlikely. The decade-long insurgency was possible in Nepal during a particular time. Things have since vastly changed, in and outside the country. Nor did Biplob, unlike CK Raut, appear willing to talk to the government team that had been formed specifically for the purpose. Instead, the outfit resorted to blatant acts of violence and killing of ordinary people. It was rightly banned.

On 11 March 2020, the first anniversary of the ban, the party detonated a bomb at the residence of ex-Minister for Communications Gokul Baskota, whom it blamed of robbing the country and of displaying fascist tendencies. Again, bombing public places is no way to make yourself heard. Since imposing the ban, around 1,500 leaders and cadres of the party have been arrested, and it’s on the verge of political irrelevance. Biplob is on the run, reportedly living somewhere along the Indo-Nepal border.

There can be no two ways about it: If the party is serious about finding a way out through talks, it should first abandon violence. Last year, asked by APEX what he was trying to achieve, Biplob had replied: “… we want an end to the way the crony capitalist class is impoverishing the people and bankrupting the country by capturing the economic, political and cultural arena and key sectors like education, health and real estate.” Apparently, he wants to achieve all this by ‘completing’ the ‘incomplete’ Maoist war that ‘turncoats’ like Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Baburam Bhattarai abandoned halfway. The growing marginalization of his party is proof that time is not conducive for another war. It’s also a message that Nepalis have had enough of politics of violence. 

Visit Nepal 2020 kicked off with the unveiling of the oversized yetis, the much-reviled campaign logo. No sooner had the year started, coronavirus hit China, from which Nepal expected at least 500,000 tourists this year. The number of Chinese tourists soon collapsed. With much of the world now under the grip of the dreaded virus, Nepal’s signature tourism campaign has been called off. The hospitality sector that had borrowed heavily in anticipation of the Visit Nepal tourist bump has been walloped: average hotel occupancy is barely 15 percent. Restaurants are deserted in the fear of corona contagion. Travel in and outside the country has slowed to a trickle, wrecking aviation.
As if that were not enough, the re-appointment of Yubaraj Khatiwada as minister of finance, despite his dismal performance in the past two years, has sapped any remaining confidence of businessmen and investors. The stock-market that witnessed an exuberant rise when the news of his exit surfaced has since the confirmation of his re-appointment seen a bloodbath. There are more signs of trouble for Nepal. India’s GDP growth is now under-6 percent. Even without the corona epidemic, the Chinese economy was similarly slowing, and corona has firmly put on the skids. The Oli government, which had been banking on developing Nepal as a ‘vibrant economic bridge’ between these two giants, seems to have run out of ideas.

It’s easy to panic in this situation. In fact, not one thing seems to be going right for the economy. Yet this is precisely when calm is needed. Khatiwada has always been a critic of ‘laissez faire’ capitalism, and a strong advocate of greater state involvement in the economy. That would not necessarily be bad for a country in Nepal’s stage of development. It has indeed become vital to secure the interests of the poor from crony capitalists. Yet Khatiwada seems to believe that most private actors are crooks and only by wielding a stick can they be brought in line.

Instead of supporting the economy and setting the foundation for a welfare state, in line with the government’s commitment, his measures have demotivated businessmen and entrepreneurs and scared away investors. Khatiwada has a second chance to redeem himself. The monetary policy is far too tight for these troubling times. How will he lay the foundation of a functioning welfare state if he doesn’t have any money to work with? Surely, he doesn’t believe the government can achieve its ambitious economic goals without the help of the private sector. In fact, right now Nepal needs all the help it can get, from all legitimate sources in and outside the country.

Confirming months of speculation, the nine-member secretariat of the ruling Nepal Communist Party has nominated senior leader Bamdev Gautam as a member of the National Assembly, the federal upper house. Meanwhile, the party task-force to amend the constitution to allow even members of the National Assembly to be chosen as prime minister has been disbanded. Gautam had been insistent that he would decline the assembly nomination until his path to the PM’s chair was cleared through the amendment.

Gautam could now finagle the post of a senior deputy-prime minister in the Oli government, and from there he will steadily work towards realizing his long-desired dream of becoming the country’s executive head. Oli, in this reading, will be forced to give Gautam, a kingmaker in the secretariat, a powerful government post if he is to retain his hold on the party, which has been steadily slipping away as another co-chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal amasses power, partly with Gautam’s help.

Amending the national charter to clear the way for a single person’s political ascent would always have been tricky. The NCP bigwigs thus wanted to keep the proposal hush-hush. But when the word got out, there was an instant backlash, not just from outside the party but as vociferously from inside it. The proposal was dropped.

Yet this shocking development was the perfect illustration of how our senior politicians can easily trade away national interests for personal gains. While amending the constitution in Gautam’s favor, the majority members of the nine-member NCP secretariat were apparently also thinking of addressing some demands of the Madhesi parties related to the constitution—in return for their backing for the proposal for the election of PM via the National Assembly. In the same round of amendments, the ceremonial president would also be given more powers. In other words, senior ruling party leaders were bent on wrecking the new constitution by abusing the party’s two-thirds majority in the lower house.

No wonder the two-year record of the Oli government has been so dismal. Instead of embarking on the path to prosperity and implementation of federalism, ruling party leaders spent most of this time jockeying for power. Gautam, the wily old politician who miraculously lost in the last elections, will not let anything hinder his march up the political ladder. In the end, the fact that most members of the NCP secretariat see no problem in handing over the country’s executive powers to someone without public mandate speaks volumes about the party’s democratic credentials.

 The mighty two-thirds majority government of KP Oli has often been blamed for trying to curtail the freedom of expression. And rightly so. A set of bills it had introduced in the parliament could have potentially criminalized any factual reporting or even a social media post. A person or organization publishing an ‘offensive material’ would be liable up to Rs 1.5 million in fines, and/or jail for five years. Following widespread protests, these most draconian punishments were removed from the bills. Then, on Feb 20, Minister for Communication and Information Technology Gokul Baskota was forced to resign following the leak of an audio-record that has him asking for Rs 700 million in bribe. Again, unrelenting media pressure played a decisive role in his resignation.

The Oli government is allegedly tone-deaf to public opinion. There is evidence to support this too. Despite public uproar, the Nirmala Panta rape remains mysteriously unresolved. Cartels continue to flourish. Corruption is as entrenched. But the reality is more nuanced. Yes, the government does not look kindly at criticism. As the public opinion slowly turned against it, the government tried to stifle criticism through restrictive laws. But then the media went up in uproar. Members of the civil society hit the streets. The international community spoke out. In time, the government that had enjoyed such widespread support during its formation slowly came to be seen as intolerant and ineffective.

All these incidents suggest that despite the many deficiencies of Nepali democracy, today, it is nigh impossible to take away one democratic right: freedom of speech. People’s freedoms have been steadily expanding since the promulgation of the post- Panchayat constitution in 1990. The 2015 constitution guarantees universal basic freedoms. A belief has steadily taken hold that whatever else may be wrong with Nepal, people have the right to express themselves freely, and no one dares take away that freedom.

Besides the constitutional protection, Nepal now has a robust and varied media landscape, and an indomitable civil society. The involvement of foreign democratic actors also mitigates against curtailment of basic freedoms. Even if the Nepali citizens were yesterday ready to live with some restrictions, youths today won’t tolerate any cap on their in-born rights. Such a refusal to be silenced will help the democratic process that the young federal republic has embarked on.