By Deepak Joshi Pokhrel
Our political parties and their leaders always hogged the attention of people from all walks of life. Last week was not an exception. The issue related to Rabi Lamichhane had become the talk of the town soon after his citizenship controversy was exposed.
The political scenario in Nepal keeps changing unexpectedly during the government formation. In the latest episode of Rabi Lamichhane, a media person turned politician has exposed the weaknesses and shortcomings of the governance and judiciary in the country. It has also highlighted how our constitutional bodies like Election Commission is incapable of identifying genuine and non-genuine Nepalese citizen while giving the nod to contest the election.
Rabi Lamichhane rose to fame by raising the problems of hardship faced by migrant labourers abroad and various social problems including fraud and corruption within the country. He asked politicians and the government and politicians to hold them accountable. His activism in eradicating social and political anomalies won the hearts of many especially youth across the country. Intending to contribute to nation-building, he launched a party “Rastriya Swatantra Party” under his leadership.
But in an unexpected turn of events, Rabi Lamichhane was declared a non-Nepali on 27 January by a ruling of Nepal’s Supreme Court. With the ruling, he lost his parliamentarian position including his DPM and Home Ministry. Not only this, but he also lost the party president position he had established on 21 June 2022 — just five months before the general election in 2022. Just two days after he was declared a non-Nepali by the Supreme Court of Nepal, he regained his citizenship on 29 January! Now, he is once more the President of RSP and is looking into ways of getting back his position as the home minister and DPM.
Throughout the episode, the concerned citizen are raising a few critical questions: What led our state mechanism led him to contest the election without convincing documents — be it his citizenship or others. The other moot question is what our so-called legal experts were doing when Rabi Lamichhaney filed his candidacy. The Nepali people are wondering why the Election Commission was so flippant in their decision to allow Lamichane to contest in the elections. If the Supreme Court ousted him after he became the country’s DPM and Home Minister, should some legal action be taken against the Election Commission team who gave him the ticket to contest without fact-checking?
The episode of the Rabi Lamichhane has exposed the judiciary and election to its core. Over the years, both institutions have been contributing to defending and strengthening democracy. They have been tirelessly checking immoral and unethical activities to uphold the rule of law. Their unbiased and unprejudiced decisions have invoked pride among us thinking that rule of law prevails in the country. But now both institutions have become tainted as a result of their irresponsible and unaccountable behaviour in raising the citizenship issue of Rabi Lamichhane earlier.
Many people across the country smell a rat over the intention of the politicians and Election Commission which at their behest raised the issues three months after the result of the election. According to them, it is a conspiracy to defame RSP chair who has now become the most admired politician in the country. They say that Rabi Lamichhane was gaining popularity and many politicians were seeing him as their biggest threat.
This is not to say that Rabi Lamichhane is not the culprit in this whole episode. He too is equally responsible. If he could get Nepali citizenship two days after he was ousted from the status, shouldn’t he have done that before registering for RSP and contesting in the elections?
Right now, the people are blaming state mechanisms more than Rabi Lamichhane. Their perception and action are justifiable. The constitutional body has the responsibility to check the irregularities and punish the defaulters without any ado. They are also responsible to check the eligibility criteria of any individual aspiring to contest the election. Their timely action could prevent the situation from turning from bad to worse. But it is strange and surprising that our constitutional bodies have raised the issues much later.
I would not do justice if I do not highlight the role of media in exposing the wrongdoers. It has been viewed as the fourth pillar of democracy. Its role in strengthening and defending democracy has always been held high. But, exception apart, our media also failed to investigate the issues properly.
We hope that such a blunder will not be committed in the future on the part of our constitutional bodies. We also expect that no one dares to flout the law of the land and acquired his goals through a backdoor approach. The issue of Rabi Lamichhane citizenship has taught us the biggest lesson that we should be cautious to check their background — be it academic, professional or citizenship. Finally, we hope that this is the turning point in the way we give undue importance to our politicians.
Login to add a comment