By P.R. Pradhan
The arrest and investigation on controversial business figure Sekhar Golchha, a prominent member of the Golchha Group and former president of the FNCCI, along with the investigation of noted power broker Dipak Bhatt, have sent shockwaves through Nepal’s business circle.
For years, the leaders of the three major parties—the Nepali Congress, UML, and Maoist Center—namely Sher Bahadur Deuba, K.P. Sharma Oli, and Pushpa Kamal Dahal, among others, have been accused of turning a blind eye to corruption. Many of the top leaders who served as prime minister after 1990—except Manmohan Adhikari and Krishna Prasad Koirala—including Girija Prasad Koirala, Sushil Koirala, Madhav Nepal, Jhalanath Khanal, and Baburam Bhattarai, have been directly or indirectly linked to various scandals during both the multiparty era (1990–2006) and the democratic era (2006–2025). If all corruption files were opened, very few leaders, one might argue, would remain outside prison.
In contrast, the government led by Prime Minister Balen (Balendra) Shah has shown the willingness to address widespread corruption and systemic irregularities. The administration has issued a white paper outlining its plans for its first one month in office. Although it has completed only one month, it has already demonstrated a readiness to confront the problems facing the Nepali people.
While the Balen team may have good intentions—and such initiatives deserve recognition—the problems Nepal faces are not solely due to poor leadership but also, arguably, to structural flaws in the constitution. The current constitution, we believe, has failed to deliver effective governance. The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), which secured nearly a two-thirds majority, has proposed constitutional amendments, as outlined in its manifesto for the March 5 elections. The party has also formed a committee representing major political forces to work on these amendments.
However, we believe that mere amendment is insufficient. Thus far, we are advocating for replacing the constitution entirely, either by drafting a new one or by reinstating the 1990 constitution with necessary revisions. The RSP, formed shortly before the 2022 general elections, has now completed three years. Notably, the party did not field candidates for provincial assemblies, reportedly due to its opposition to federalism. Similarly, Balen Shah himself did not vote in provincial elections in his Kathmandu constituency while contesting for mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City.
Although the RSP has challenged traditional political parties, it has yet to clearly define its ideological stance. Recently, it stated that it aims to strengthen the current constitutional framework, which suggests support for federalism, secularism, and republicanism. Our argument is that these features of the constitution have hindered national development. We even suspect that external influences may shape the party’s direction. If such concerns hold true, constitutional amendments alone may not yield meaningful results.
There is also growing concern that the current federal structure—with seven provinces, multiple layers of government, district coordination committees, and 753 local bodies—has made governance excessively complex and costly. Our argument is that institutions such as the National Assembly are unnecessary and that the size of the House of Representatives should be reduced by half.
Meanwhile, proposals for a directly elected executive head have gained traction among some political leaders. However, such a system could prove unsuitable for a country like Nepal.
In conclusion, a return to the 1990 constitution—alongside the introduction of strict anti-corruption measures and accountability mechanisms—is seen by some as a viable path forward.
Login to add a comment