Submit your Article

In the bustling political landscape of developing countries like ours, where the journey toward progress and development is often fraught with obstacles, the blame for their misfortunes and under-development is regularly directed at politicians. The media, civil society, intellectuals, and citizens have found it easy to hold politicians responsible for the nation’s woes. However, amidst this blame game, few pause to ponder why the nature of Nepali politicians has evolved into what it is today. 

Historical progression of Nepali consciousness

Following the above proposition, we must wonder why do politicians seem immune to accountability for their actions? As we point fingers at the much-maligned ‘evil game of politics,’ we must introspect and question whether the blame solely lies with politicians or whether we, the citizens, intellectuals, civil society, and democracy-supporting taxpayers, also bear some responsibility.

The roots of this complex dilemma may be found in Nepali society’s long-standing predisposition toward acceptance, notably in the arena of politics. Throughout history, when dynasties changed hands or power shifted between ruling families, the people of Nepal largely accepted these transitions without much resistance. From the reign of Amshuverma in 605 to the complex rule of multiple kings during the Dark Ages, the populace often embraced political changes without questioning their legitimacy. Even when Nepal was divided into three kingdoms by the sons of Yaksha Malla, the citizens accepted this division. From the conquest of Kathmandu by Prithvi Narayan Shah to the tragic assassinations of Prime Minister Ranoddip Singh and the ruling monarch in 2001, the nation’s people have repeatedly surrendered to oppressive forces and violent upheavals. This distressing consciousness of acceptance has hindered their ability to challenge authority and demand accountability. While resilience is commendable, an excessive inclination toward acceptance has stifled progress and perpetuated a cycle of subjugation. Such historical examples of complacency with political events beg the question: does this passive acceptance still hold sway in modern-day Nepal and is it the cause of the lack of political accountability?

Scholars like Dor Bahadur Bista have argued that this seemingly pessimistic tendency to accept the status quo in Nepali society stems from a fatalistic thought pattern. This attitude may have become ingrained in the psyche of the people over the ages, influencing their approach to politics as well. 

Comparing this with a recent event in France, where the introduction of the Social Security Financing Act in 2023 sparked massive revolts, sheds light on the hypocrisy of democracy. While the French people are politically literate and active, the situation in Nepal reveals a different reality, one marked by political inaction and apathy. Three important revolutions stand out in Nepal’s history: the Revolution of 1951, the People’s Movement I, and the People’s Movement II. All of these movements were carried out under the auspices of political parties. Beyond these revolutionary moments, there has been a lack of significant leadership by the people themselves. This begs the question: why have the citizens not taken more initiative in shaping their political landscape? The answer lies in the lack of extremism among Nepali citizens, coupled with the two-faced role played by relevant professionals in the country.

Nepali citizens have often been politically inactive, yet they remain steadfastly critical of politicians. The historical backdrop and socioeconomic elements at work have influenced people’s consciousness. The lack of widespread political literacy, coupled with economic struggles, has contributed to this passive approach to politics. As a result, the blame is consistently placed on the politicians without fully understanding the underlying complexities and systemic issues. In other words, the public or even the national consciousness of Nepal, through historical evolution has failed to materialize into a unified voice. 

Surprisingly, despite widespread dissatisfaction with the political situation, the voter turnout in Nepal has been shockingly high in comparison with other countries. This apparent contradiction is a reflection of the larger problem at hand. Citizens are disillusioned and distrustful of the political process as a result of the distance. As a consequence, many Nepalis feel that their vote may not truly bring about any change, leading to voter apathy.

A modern retrospection of role of Nepalis

In the contemporary context, Nepal has made significant strides toward democracy, embracing the principles of representation and participation. People have the right to vote, to express their views, and to express their concerns. The evolution of democracy has opened avenues for more active political engagement, challenging the notion of fatalism in politics.

Despite these democratic advancements, the accountability of politicians remains elusive. Politicians may indulge in corrupt practices, break promises, and act in their self-interest without fearing the repercussions from the public. This lack of accountability has led to disillusionment and mistrust among citizens.

While democracy is celebrated for empowering citizens, it can be disheartening when elected officials betray the trust bestowed upon them. The blame for this hypocrisy cannot solely rest on politicians; the onus is also on us, the citizens. As democracy-supporting taxpayers and development-wishing individuals, we must recognize our role in the system. Our responsibility doesn't end with casting our votes during elections; it extends to holding elected officials accountable throughout their term. We must actively participate in the political process, staying informed about policies, demanding transparency, and questioning decisions that affect our lives.

Apart from the citizens, the responsibility of checking politicians also lies with relevant professionals and organizations in Nepal. These individuals and groups are often found to play a dual role, pledging to support the common people but also maintaining close ties with the political elite. This collusion not only perpetuates the status quo but also erodes public faith in the possibility of positive change. Hence, in an atmosphere where the populace are cultivating skepticism toward its political establishment, the civil society and other professions, to prevent their reputation from getting tarnished, applied a path of neutrality and inaction. In a paradoxical manner, the citizens increasingly turn to civil society organizations, hoping to find a voice that echoes their concerns and aspirations in politics. While some civil society groups indeed work tirelessly to address public grievances, the broader landscape reveals that they are equally intertwined with political parties.  

To comprehend the situation better, it is essential to consider Nepal’s unique historical context. Nepal was ruled by monarchs until 2008, with limited political space for ordinary citizens. The transition to democracy brought hope, but it also introduced its share of challenges. 

A complex web of political interests and power struggles emerged, hindering the progress of the nation. So, democracy, while celebrated for its principles of equality and representation, can sometimes become a bitter pill to swallow for developing countries like ours. The demands of democracy require political parties to appease different groups and garner support, leading to compromises that may not always align with the broader interests of the nation. 

The recent incidents such as the passing of MCC has added yet another layer of doubt in the minds of the public toward their political leaders, further intensifying their distrust in the political system. This raises concerns about Nepal’s progress toward becoming a fully democratic nation. Evidently, the Nepalis seem to be unaware of the potential power they possess in shaping the government’s decisions. Centuries of living under monarchy and autocratic rule have seemingly ingrained a sense of suppression, preventing the realization and utilization of their inherent influence.

Nepal’s struggle with political apathy can be mitigated through increased political literacy. To be able to make wise judgments, citizens must be equally informed on the complexities of governance, policy-making, and the duties of elected officials. This will enable them to close the gap between expectations and reality and make politicians responsible for their actions. Similarly, civil society, intellectuals and other concerned professionals must proactively distance themselves from political affiliations to regain the trust of the people they aim to represent. Hence, Nepal’s path to genuine democracy and effective governance is heavily reliant on striking a harmonious balance between political leaders and civil society. 

Conclusion

Politicians are a product of our society, despite the fact that we often blame them for the problems our country is facing. Nepali politicians are woven into the very fabric of our culture, values, and aspirations; they do not exist in a vacuum. Therefore, we must rise above the blame culture and collectively work toward building a more accountable political system. The blame placed solely on politicians for the challenges faced by developing countries like Nepal reveals the hypocrisy of democracy. While politicians undoubtedly hold a share of responsibility, the citizens, relevant professionals, and organizations also have vital roles to play in shaping the nation’s destiny.

A thriving democracy requires political literacy, improved civic engagement, and increased responsibility. If Nepal can recognize these factors, we can move past its current state of political indifference and toward a more affluent and egalitarian future. The trip may be difficult, but with teamwork and accountability, we can create the way for genuine progress and development.

It is believed that a nation is reborn by adopting a new constitution. And it really became true with the adoption of a new constitution in Nepal when its Constituent Assembly-2 declared it a secular, inclusive, federal, democratic republic on 20 Sept 2015. These are the cardinal features of the constitution. 

Looking back, we find that the three words, ‘democratic federal system’ were incorporated in the Interim Constitution (Article 38) in addition to the terms ‘inclusive and restructured’ through its first amendment on 13 April 2007. It has its basis in the Comprehensive Peace Accord (Clause 8.2) signed on 21 Nov 2006 by the then PM GP Koirala and the Maoist Chief PK  Dahal, which provides for making a ‘a high-level  Recommendation Commission for the Restructuring of the State.’ 

The Maoists were calling for restructuring of the state, however, it was not mentioned in the 12-point agreement signed on 21 Nov 2005, in India by the Seven-Party Alliance and the Maoists. Perhaps, the most pressing need at that time was to throw out of power the absolute monarchy and other demands were considered secondary.

The entire country celebrated as usual the eighth ‘Constitution Day’ on Sept 20, save the Madhes-based parties, which celebrated the day as a ‘Black Day’ for them, as  more than 100 Madhesi youths had sacrificed their lives for incorporating federalism with one Madhes Pradesh for 20 districts in the Tarai region in the forthcoming constitution. However, the constitution adopted provides for seven provinces out of which a province consisting of only eight districts was carved out of 12 districts. 

The other 12 districts of the Tarai were made part of the five provinces.

It was the thorny issue of federalism that failed Constituent Assembly-1 as consensus was impossible among the parties on the one hand and the strength of the Maoists and the Madhes-based parties in the CA was 

significant which could be ignored, on the other. 

In the CA-2, the number of representatives of both the parties, the Maoists and the Madhesi outfits, was reduced; it was possible for the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML to adopt the constitution with support from some other parties. And realizing the position, the Maoist party also supported the NC and the UML’s proposals and gave up its demand for making identity and resources as the bases 

of federalism.

It was obvious that while adopting the constitution most of the top leaders of all major parties apprehended that federalism would weaken the nation, as it would affect the existing central control over those areas which would be brought under different provinces. 

They also apprehended that since local populations will have control over their areas, they may go for division/bifurcation of the territories. 

Their main concern was regarding their control of the bureaucracy, the permanent government.  If power was divided, their complete say over it would decrease, if not end.

These are the reasons that even after the passing of eight years and three tiers of government duly elected, they are not allowed to function as per powers delivered by the constitution. Important federal laws are not framed as yet to enable them to use their rights to govern the administration and discharge day-to-day duties. 

It seems that many laws, including those related to the civil and police administrations, have not been enacted by the center deliberately to prove that the provincial tier of governance is superfluous and redundant. It is evident from the facts that the frequent transfers and postings of high officials hinder the government’s functioning seriously, as there have been frequent complaints to the center. There are cases filed by the provincial governments in the Supreme Court for the protection of their constitutional rights.

It can be assumed that before taking the decision for carving out seven provinces, they made the local tiers of government more powerful and kept it outside of the overall supervision and control of the provinces to make the second tier weak and worthless. 

The constitution has provided for three tiers of government—central, provincial and local. 

However, the central government has made it a four-tier government by adding one more tier by way of district government, which is controlled by the central government. 

Chief district officers are in charge of peace and security of the districts. It has been made so that the central government will prevail ultimately over provincial and local governments. There are many more obstacles created by the center to prove that federalism is only an unwanted child of the constitution, which is not allowed to grow properly so that its life gets shortened for want of nutritious food to survive by not providing sufficient support.

In recent years, population and sustainable development issues are increasing priorities of the governments, political parties, development partners, youth-led civil society, media, private sector and communities at large. Looking back at history, the landmark International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) was held in Cairo in 1994. This conference enormously transformed the global thinking as well as narratives of population and development with a bold political and development agenda. More importantly, placing people’s dignity and rights are at the heart of sustainable development.

While 179 countries including Nepal adopted the key strategic priorities of the ICPD, there is increasing recognition that inclusive sustainable development demands a clear focus on  human rights, including reproductive rights, empowering women and girls, and addressing inequalities as well as the needs, aspirations and rights of people. Therefore, the national commitments of the ICPD have been highly relevant to adapt to inclusive development policies, strategies, plans and programs, which help promote people-centered development.

Almost 30 years after the ICPD conference, among many others, there has been remarkable progress in the health and population sector. Despite significant health gains, there still are challenges to ensure the rights and choices of women and girls, mitigate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and the full realization of the sexual and reproductive health and rights agenda. The ICPD agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are closely aligned to eliminate poverty, achieve gender equality and secure the health and well-being of all people.

Considering the emerging needs of advancing the ICPD agenda in the context of formulating 16th Periodic Plan which is led by the National Planning Commission, the Ministry of Health and Population recently organized a national conference on population and development with support from UNFPA and other partners. The conference provided a unique opportunity for governments, political leaders, development partners, youth-led civil society, media and communities to share the country progress of the ICPD and discuss critical issues, challenges and opportunities for actions.

More importantly, among many others, Nepal’s commitments and progress in the health and population sector were reviewed and discussed at the conference. These include integration of comprehensive sexuality education in school curriculum, legalization of safe abortion, ensuring availability and accessibility of safe abortion services and adolescent-friendly health services. There has been remarkable progress in improving access to sexual and reproductive health services, advancing gender equity and women's empowerment, and integrating population dynamics in development policies, strategies and plans.

While reviewing some health and population indicators, the maternal mortality ratio has come down from 281 per 100,000 live births (2006) to 151 (2021). The births attended by skilled health personnel have gone up from 9 percent (1996) to 80 percent (2022). The total fertility rate has decreased from 4.6 (1996) to 2.1 (2022). The adolescent fertility rate has decreased from 127 (1996) to 71 (2022). The modern contraceptive prevalence rate has gone up from 26.0 percent (1996) to 43.0 percent (2022), whereas the unmet need for family planning has slightly dropped from 24.6 percent (2006) to 20.8 percent (2022).

Nepal has given priority and respect for international human rights treaties and signed political commitments that recognise reproductive rights. The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 guarantees the right to safe motherhood and reproductive health as fundamental rights. Over the years, the government has adopted several policies, strategies and plans to guarantee women’s access to reproductive health services. In 2018, the government enacted the Safe Motherhood and Reproductive Health Rights Act, which defines the right to reproductive health and provides the necessary foundation for safe, accessible and quality reproductive health services.

Despite these significant gains, it is necessary to strengthen health systems so that they can deliver equitable health outcomes on the basis of a comprehensive approach. There are increasing needs for health financing, human resources for health, strengthening procurement and distribution of medicines and vaccines, infrastructure, information systems and service delivery at the local level.

On the other side, governments should focus on universal access to comprehensive and integrated quality sexual and reproductive health services for all women, men and young people to reduce the unmet need for family planning. Particular attention is needed in ensuring access for adolescents and youth for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care and support.

More notably, the Nairobi Summit on ICPD+25 took place in Nairobi, Kenya from 12 to 15, November 2019, to mark the 25th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD+25). During the Nairobi Summit, Nepal made important national commitments to advance the ICPD agenda that largely focuses on universal access to sexual and reproductive health rights, women’s empowerment and their rights in order to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs).

The commitments largely aim to end violence against women and children, early and forced marriage, ending preventable maternal deaths and ending unmet need for family planning. We need significant investments in young people including their health and well-being by ensuring that they are able to exercise their reproductive rights through upscaling of adolescent-friendly services and comprehensive sexuality education.

There are critical needs to ensure the basic humanitarian needs of affected populations, including sexual and reproductive health care and gender-based violence prevention and response, are addressed in humanitarian contexts. Moreover, health financing policies, instruments and structures are essentially needed to ensure effective implementation of the strategic priorities of the ICPD agenda in the changed context.

In order to accelerate the progress of the ICPD agenda in the federal context, Nepal has prioritized  poverty reduction, health, sexual and reproductive health rights, education, gender equality and women empowerment, adolescence and youth, international migration, urbanization, data and evidence for policy-making.

Population aging is also a matter of concern for development. At the implementation level, there are increasing needs of capacity enhancement of provincial and local governments to mainstream the ICPD priorities in their policies, plans and budget. Meaningful participation of adolescents, youth, people with disability, migrants, sexual and gender minorities, media and civil society representatives from poor and marginalized communities can ensure the inclusive population and development policies at all levels.

Additionally, there are emerging challenges of climate change, pollution, food insecurity, increasing risks of non-communicable diseases, health emergencies, pandemics, disasters and migration for foreign employment. In order to effectively address these issues, multi-sector coordination mechanisms or platforms are needed to harness the partnerships and collaborative actions to create synergies at all levels.

While population and sustainable development are inextricably linked, it is also necessary to consider the population distribution, socio-cultural and political dynamics, ethnic and indigenous diversity, religion and sustainable livelihoods of communities across the country. With a holistic people-centered approach, the essence of ICPD agenda and SDGs can be further harnessed.

The author is Health and Population Consultant at UNFPA

Constitutional experts, legal professionals, and students of constitutional law have consistently emphasized that the Constitution of Nepal 2015 was rushed and lacked the necessary time, thorough deliberation, and extensive discussions during its drafting and promulgation. Consequently, it required subsequent amendments, with the first set of revisions made just four months after its promulgation.

Nevertheless, it’s essential to recognize that a constitution is a living document, subject to modifications as societal needs and circumstances evolve over time. In order to ensure its effective functioning and broader acceptance, amendments become a necessary step.

However, it is crucial to approach any constitutional amendments in a manner that aligns with the fundamental principles of the constitution itself. Deviating from these principles can disrupt the constitutional framework and put the entire system at risk.

It is imperative to understand that no one is exempt from the authority of the constitution, and this responsibility extends to every citizen of Nepal. Safeguarding the constitution is a collective duty that falls upon all shoulders, from laymen to politicians. 

The constitution stipulates that in order for it to operate effectively, existing laws and acts must be regularly reviewed, modified, and supplemented. However, necessary legal revisions have not been undertaken. Take, for example, Part 3 of the constitution, which outlines Fundamental Rights and Duties and comprises 33 articles. It expressly states that the Parliament is responsible for enacting legislation to enforce these fundamental rights, yet no such laws have been enacted. This issue is pervasive throughout various sections of the constitution. Despite the nation celebrating the ninth Constitution Day, it is evident that the constitution has not been adequately put into practice.

The ruling coalition appears to be asserting authority above and beyond the constitution itself. Their decisions during meetings are treated as the final word, regardless of legal stipulations. A clear example of this is when the Supreme Court opened a way for an investigation against former Prime Ministers Madhav Kumar Nepal and Baburam Bhattarai regarding their involvement in the Lalita Niwas land-grab. But the ruling coalition decided that such a probe was unnecessary, contending that the former PMs were not culpable. It is the responsibility of the Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of Nepal Police to conduct the investigation and the court responsibility to determine guilt or innocence. As a result of the ruling coalition’s decision, despite the apex court’s ruling, no case was filed against them, and even the investigators involved were transferred, in accordance with the coalition’s directives. This demonstrates the governments and political parties’ apparent disregard for established legal procedures.

On Aug 22, President Ram Chandra Paudel called a meeting of representatives from all political parties to address the deadlock in the federal parliament. Has the constitution given the president the right to call an all-party meeting with specific agendas? No. President, being the protector of the constitution, didn’t follow it. Was there any national emergency that the president had to get mobilized for a national consensus? No. Or, the president should have justified his move.

According to Sub-article (2) of Article (1) in Part 1 of the constitution, it is the duty of every person to uphold the constitution. Additionally, Article 48 in Part 3 outlines the duties of citizens. The duties, according to our constitution, are: (a) To safeguard the nationality, sovereignty and integrity of Nepal, while being loyal to the nation; (b) To abide by the Constitution and law; (c) To render compulsory service as and when the state so requires; (d) To protect and preserve public property.

However, it raises concerns as to why the prominent leaders of the government and other political factions are not adhering to these constitutional duties and are seemingly disregarding the constitution. Is the constitution meant solely for citizens to adhere to?

Therefore, if the parliament had enacted laws clearly defining the rights and obligations of citizens, government officials, ministers and political leaders, it could have significantly reduced the issue of not adhering to the constitution.

Isn’t it pathetic that those political parties and leaders who drove the citizens for a new political system and new constitution, are not following it?

The prevailing competition among various parties and individuals in disregarding the constitution has led the public to question its durability. These actions are undermining the longevity of the constitution, prompting people to contemplate alternative options to this constitutional and political system, which definitely is not a good sign for anyone.

On the occasion of Constitution Day, I urge all individuals, organizations, political parties and the government to adhere to the constitution. It’s high time to grasp the significance of upholding the charter.

The author is a member of the Supreme Court Bar and has been practicing corporate law for around three decades