By Narayan Prasad Mishra
A country’s political system, though it may not reveal everything about governance, does provide a general outline of its political path and the rights of its citizens. Under an autocratic monarchy or a dictatorial regime, such as the Rana rule, people are forced to live within the narrow boundaries of rights granted at the mercy of rulers. By contrast, in a democracy or a constitutional monarchy, citizens are generally entitled to all human and fundamental rights. In strict communism, however, these rights are greatly restricted. Just as in a dictatorship, even if the head of state is called a president, everything functions according to the will of the supreme leader. This is not a matter of theory alone; one can see it clearly in countries that have adopted such systems.
Still, the individual who holds the highest position of power becomes the true reflection of the system. If that person possesses democratic values, culture, and behavior, the governance will align with democracy. If the person is authoritarian, the system will inevitably lean toward autocracy. We can confirm this truth from our own national history. A glance at the recent governance of U.S. presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden also illustrates the point. The constitution and system in America remain the same, but the practice of governance and the democratic culture have been vastly different under each leader.
It has now been nearly two decades since Nepal entered the republican era and adopted a republican, democratic constitution. There is no dispute that this constitution guarantees all the fundamental and human rights found in any civilized democracy. The manifestos of all political parties are full of promises for public service. Nepal has more political parties than almost any other country in the world. The nation has spent billions on conducting general elections. At the federal level alone, in addition to provincial parliaments and governments, nearly 400 members of parliament and ministers receive salaries and allowances from the state treasury. Except for the communist MPs and ministers who do not believe in God, all others have sworn an oath in God’s name to serve the country and people sincerely—without selfishness, bias, envy, or hatred. Every party that has held power has claimed—except when in opposition—that it has served the people with honesty and that the country has steadily progressed. According to those in power, the nation already enjoys the comfort of Ram Rajya (the ideal just kingdom). Those who have benefited from party-led governance also readily agree with this assertion.
However, the independent citizens, who sustain themselves through their own professions and businesses rather than party connections, far outnumber party leaders and cadres. Despite what the constitution declares, they have not experienced true democracy; they have lived under nothing but party-ocracy. They see that party loyalists monopolize positions, prestige, privileges, and benefits. Everywhere one turns, parties and their followers dominate. Citizens unaffiliated with parties feel powerless and abandoned. Besides the following incident, I have personally experienced this reality to a great extent: I even lost my job despite my sincerity, honesty, and dedication.
Once, I needed to meet a minister to present a legitimate matter. About a year ago, with the help of an MP, I went to a ministry at Singha Durbar. There, I found five to seven party workers, serving as personal secretaries and aides, casually chatting. The atmosphere resembled a party office more than a ministry. Because an MP accompanied me, I was respectfully offered a seat. The minister had not yet arrived. Another leader from outside the district had also come, accompanied by someone. He asked the private secretary to convey a message to the minister, requesting a quick appointment for the man he had brought and recommending him for a government post. After the man left, the secretary asked the leader: “Is that person firmly from our party or not? Please think carefully. Otherwise, both you and I will be in trouble.” It became clear to me that without party affiliation, no citizen’s work could be done there. Because I was with an MP, they assumed I too belonged to the party and spoke openly in front of me. Later, I met the minister, but my work was not accomplished since I was not one of their loyal cadres.
Corruption, irregularities, and bribery in the country are boundless. Major scandals are reported daily in newspapers, on the radio, and on television. Every citizen knows that no small task in an office can be completed without bribery. It is no secret how political parties divide positions in constitutional bodies, the judiciary, and even universities, while capable and experienced citizens are deprived of their rights. These are not hidden truths; they are known to all. Yet, intoxicated by power and privilege, those in office commit countless irregularities and then turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to them.
As a result of this corruption, disorder, and misrule, the Gen Z youth took to the streets. They faced bullets. The very next day, the public at large joined them. Of course, as in any mass protest, antisocial elements also infiltrated the crowd. Alongside peaceful demonstrations and demands, there were shootings, deaths, vandalism, assaults, attacks, and arson—destruction in every form. This was not a party-led movement; it was a people’s revolt.
A picture of the funeral procession martyred by the Government‘s Security
The revolt was against disorder, injustice, oppression, corruption, and party-ocracy—against party dictatorship masquerading as democracy. With more than 70 martyrs and hundreds of wounded, it was no minor revolt. The demands of the uprising were just and directly tied to the daily lives of the people. Though the revolt did not explicitly call for constitutional or systemic changes, it is self-evident that to end disorder, injustice, corruption, and party dictatorship, the constitution and system must be reformed to establish good governance and relieve the suffering of the majority of independent citizens. If the current interim government—born from the strength of this revolt—ignores these truths, it will be a grave betrayal of the Gen Z protesters and of the helpless citizens deprived of their rights under party dictatorship in the name of democracy.
Our experience shows clearly how dangerous and flawed it is for both the president and prime minister to come from the same political party, especially when they are from the same party. Such collusion has even tainted the integrity of the legislative process. This underscores the need for a non-partisan, independent president—or even a constitutional monarch as a symbolic guardian. Likewise, instead of unstable coalition governments, the country needs a stable government, which requires the direct election of the prime minister. It is also no secret that party-appointed commissioners in the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority have misused their powers, protecting corruption instead of eradicating it. There are many such problems. Reforms in the constitution and system are indispensable to correct them.
Without such reforms, dissolving parliament and holding new elections will only reproduce the same type of representatives. This will not solve anything; it will merely deceive the people and invite yet another revolt. Both the current protesters and the interim government must recognize this reality in time. I also believe that young leaders and conscientious members of the existing parties, excluding the corrupt leader puppets, will undoubtedly welcome the changes necessary for the country and its people. Do Not Let Martyrs Die in Vain.
Login to add a comment