Last week, various political parties unveiled their election manifestos. A close reading of these documents reveals a familiar pattern: polished language and grand promises aimed at selling dreams to voters. Nepali political parties have long been adept at offering hope, but such promises rarely materialize after elections.
Since the April 2006 political change, Nepal has held two Constituent Assembly elections and two periodic parliamentary elections. Yet neither Constituent Assembly delivered a constitution that ensured political stability or national prosperity, nor did the parliamentary elections result in stable and accountable governments. Instead, the country witnessed a succession of weak coalition governments formed by parties with conflicting ideologies. These governments appeared more focused on corruption, power-sharing, and commission-based dealings than on genuine reform and effective governance.
During this period, Parliament itself became largely ineffective. Many lawmakers acted as obedient followers of party leadership, unwilling to question or oppose imposed decisions. Consequently, Parliament failed to pass timely and meaningful legislation, even as Members of Parliament continued to enjoy salaries, allowances, and state privileges without delivering tangible results for the public.
This pattern is not new. In every election cycle, parties present attractive manifestos promising prosperity, development, and transformation. The current manifestos are no exception. Nearly all parties claim that within a few years—often within five—the country will become prosperous, economically strong, and efficiently governed. Such claims are now met with skepticism, and sometimes ridicule, by citizens who have repeatedly seen past commitments go unfulfilled.
As a result, public trust in election manifestos has eroded. Voters increasingly judge parties by their track records rather than their promises. This growing gap between words and actions has deepened political frustration and disillusionment.
To address this problem, an institutional accountability mechanism is urgently needed. A monitoring committee under the Election Commission should evaluate parties’ commitments and post-election performance and publicly report how many promises are fulfilled. This would promote transparency, discourage unrealistic pledges, and encourage political parties to treat manifestos as binding commitments to the people and the nation.
Login to add a comment