By Our Political Analyst
Today, all the Nepalis are aware that the present loktantra is just a foreigners’ agenda and it is non-functional in the Nepali context.
Noted journalist and political analyst Dhrubahari Adhikari, in his recent article published in the Nagarik vernacular daily, has remarked that the present system cannot function, therefore, he has suggested returning to a system with monarchy without any further delay.
Adhikari, to prove his argument, has quoted senior journalist Bhairav Rishal, who, at a programme aired by the Radio Sagarmatha, had said that Ganatantra (republicanism) has been experienced by the monarch only.
Rishal, above 90 by age, had said that the general public has not been able to experience the taste of republicanism!
“The King has experienced it as he lost the throne, otherwise, other people have not experienced republicanism in the country,” Rishal had remarked.
Similarly, Adhikari, in his piece, has quoted noted critic of monarchial rule, Khagendra Shangraula’s tweet:
“There is republicanism in the country but it is unable to function. This is the plight of the nation!”.
Again, Adhikari has quoted C.P. Gajurel’s remarks, “The movement for lokantrik republicanism has been limited within the removal of the institution of monarchy. The movement’s ultimate goal was not limited to remove the institution of monarchy only!”
Gajurel is one among the senior warriors of the Maoist “people’s war”.
Adhikari has described, “Nepal’s political system can neither be like a Chinese nor like a North Korean nor an Indian”.
“A governance friendly mechanism with a disciplined livelihood based on democratic values can only be a stable system”, Adhikari has argued. A tiny country Nepal cannot take the burden of a large number of provincial structures. It was earlier estimated that the country cannot manage the expenditure for functioning those provinces. Presently, we are experiencing it visibly, he has remarked.
Perhaps, Prachanda had not felt that commoners have been fade-up from the republicanism in the country! Rajendra Lingden’s remarks and the floor’s response might have forced Prachanda for a self-review on the issue.
Baburam Bhattarai and Prachanda should not undermine the present reality, wisdom and conscience among the people. People having a reach on the information and technology, are aware of everything, he has argued.
There are examples of reinstatement of the dethroned institution of monarchy in global history. Cambodia is the burning example of it.
To end destruction and violence, the UN played a decisive role and dethroned king was reinstated there.
The contemporary Nepali political parties, despite discarding RPP’s agenda of the Hindu Kingdom, should move forward by keeping the agenda as the means for Nepal’s identity and stability. The wrong practice started in 1990 and then 2006 has only destroyed Nepal.
The political leaders are aware that the decision of declaring Nepal a republic nation in 2008 was not natural.
If law and process were properly maintained during that time, the RPP could not have been able to laud its agenda so strongly. Also, I may not have the courage to put forward the very question time and again!
As republicanism is non-functional, we should not delay throwing such a non-functioning system!, Adhikari has remarked.
Leaders have been failed
By Our Political Analyst
At the inaugural ceremony of the 14th national convention of the Nepali Congress held in Kathmandu in December 2021, Rashtriya Prajatantra Party chairman Rajendra Lingden, in the course of extending congratulations to NC for organizing the 14th national convention, had remarked that the image of the Nepali politicians has deteriorated to the extent that the villagers compare them as thieves.
Newly elected RPP chair Lingden’s remarks jolted the entire nation. In the course of denying such a feeling of the Nepali population, Maoist Center chair Pushpakamal Dahal Prachanda put forward a question to the floor on whether Lingden was true or not. The floor, against the expectation, lauded, “True!”
The floor said Lingden was true!
It became difficult to defy Lingden’s remarks to communist leaders K.P. Sharma Oli, Madhav Nepal and Prachanda. They were not ready to accept the public sentiment against the politicians.
At the 8th national convention of the Maoist Center, a participant, Lekhnath Neupane, presented a different paper against Prachanda’s political document. He put forward a 10-point argument on why the Maoist Center, which was emerged as the largest party in the first constitutional assembly elections, had become the third force in the second constituent assembly elections!
In his remarks, he has criticized Prachanda for his self-prize and self-centred attitude. He had counted the number of words “Me” used by Prachanda in the political document.
He has explained the declining image of the party among the people which was due to the non-transparent and luxury lifestyle of the Maoist leaders, earning huge amounts of money without source and spending luxury lifestyle by the leaders.
He also demanded to form a committee to investigate the property earned by the Maoist leaders.
“Why Prachanda is staying at the house owned by a controversial construction contractor despite all sector’s criticism!”, he has questioned. He had remarked that above one million party cadres can construct a house for Prachanda if he wishes to quit the controversial construction contractor’s luxury building.
Participants, in the closed session, discussing the political document presented by Prachanda, demanded an investigation on the party leaders’ property.
They asked to make clear whether socialism is arriving itself or that should be brought by the party!
They questioned why the communists in power were unable to conduct pro-people works?
They demanded for a person not enjoy the same post more than two times.
Two members from one family should not get chance to enjoy posts; End the tradition of exploitation of power by cunning and clever leaders time and again; review the commitments made in the previous national convention held in Hetauda; party leaders’ kids should compulsory go to the government schools, etc.
On the whole, the party cadres expressed utter dissatisfaction with the leaderships’ anarchism and feudal lifestyle, which were against the spirit of the “people’s war” and sacrifice of above 17 thousand Nepali people.
One can assume when the party cadres are not satisfied with the performance of their leaders and the system, what is the level of dissatisfaction among the commoners! After all, Lingden’s remarks that the leaders are compared with the thieves is true. The fact is that the system has not been able to perform!
Login to add a comment