Monday , September 24 2018
Home / Political News / Editorial / Only the obvious

Only the obvious

editHow Nepal’s flirtation with secularism has defeated the very purpose of secularism is evinced from the official blackout of recent events which are religious but officially treated as political or else they would not have deserved to be blacked out. For the current political establishment, the religious observation in Jagannathpuri, India has become a juggernaut by itself. The Nepalese Monarchy was given its due religious obeisance in that sacrosanct address where some doors are only open to the Nepali king. The current constitution is a republican one and none are more aware of this than Indians who had a president acknowledge their role in the summary deposition of the Nepali king. It is the Indian religious establishment that has seemingly asserted that deposed king Gyanendra remains worthy of ceremonies reserved for the constitutional Nepali monarchy and the language used and treatment for the king during his visit at the religious ceremonies there were remarkably official. The king was constitutionally king under the 1990 constitution which was unconstitutionally torn by our current political overlords but that Indian religious institution has seemingly neglected to observe the political anomaly compelling a political blackout of what is essentially a religious event. In other words, secularism in Nepal has, for the first time in Nepal, brought religion into politics.
All this, of course, has been done in the name of constitutionalism. But the events in India are significant in this matter too. Despite the fact that the current dispensation is a republican one, powerful religious and political elements have made it a point to demonstrate that Nepal has a king who has a cultural and religious role not just historically but also in the present. This gesture may be belittled politically by our republicans but the statement of fact in the Puri demonstration has made both religion and monarchy in Nepal political. The king has not only been unconstitutionally dislodged, but the politicization of the monarchy’s religious significance has already defeated the principle of secularism and an apolitical monarchy. Much of what has happened in the name of constitutionalism somehow emanates from mere unquestioned emulation of what is thought to be modernism. The ‘educated’ political leadership sold the idea of constitutionalism without first delving into the sources of constitutionalism in Nepal. There is no intelligentsia as yet simply putting the question: ‘When was the king unconstitutional in Nepal?’ It is only while seeking answers to such fundamental questions that the redundancy and surfaciality of Nepali constitutionalism is exposed. What is currently happening in the name of constitutionalism is actually crass partisan one-upmanship that is nothing less than impudence backed by the moneys and muscle of organizational monopoly. The gradual erosion of this monopoly would seem mandatory simply because this monopoly cannot continue to claim legitimacy given that news blackouts may be political domestically but such cannot be externalized. Indeed, such politics will continue to expose the farce and cannot but undermines the modicum of trust which is the basis of external relationships.

Check Also

Nepal: Partying

The Nepali population has found the decade expensive. Our leaders have long run out of …