By Narayan Prasad Mishra
What should a member of parliament do when their own government is wrong? Should a ruling-party parliamentarian support the government regardless of what it does, or should they have the courage to speak the truth? As a political science student and a lover of democracy, this question comes to mind. To me, this is not merely a question about individual politicians. It is a fundamental question about parliamentary democracy itself.
There are different views about the role of parliamentarians. Some believe members of the ruling party should always support their government’s policies and plans and endorse its actions. They consider such support a matter of party loyalty. Others hold a different view. They believe that every parliamentarian should use their knowledge, judgment, and conscience to distinguish between right and wrong—and should call what is right, right and what is wrong, wrong.
In my view, the second approach is essential for a healthy democracy, whether the traditional parliamentary system accepts it or not.
A parliamentarian is elected by the people, not merely appointed by a political party leader. His or her primary responsibility should therefore be to the people and the country. Party membership is important, but it should not require a person to surrender independent judgment.
Unfortunately, Nepal’s political history tells a different story. Members of ruling parties have too often remained obedient followers of their governments and party leaders. Most of them stay silent, their conscience serving as their party’s rubber stamp. They have supported government decisions simply because they were government decisions. At the same time, opposition parties have often adopted the opposite approach: opposing almost everything the government does simply because they are in opposition, as if they have no conscience to separate truth from untruth, right from wrong.
Both practices weaken parliamentary democracy.
A parliament should not be divided into people whose only duty is to say “yes” and people whose only duty is to say “no.” A good parliament needs members who can say yes when something is right and no when something is wrong.
Supporting a good government decision is not a weakness of the opposition. Criticizing a wrong government decision is not disloyalty by a ruling-party member. Both are signs of responsible parliamentary conduct.
The real test of a parliamentarian is therefore not whether they support or oppose the government, but why they support or oppose it. Is the position based on truth and facts? Is it in the interest of the people? Does it serve the country? Or is it motivated by party instructions, personal ambition, political revenge, or the desire for power and privilege?
This distinction matters greatly in Nepal today.
There are some encouraging signs. Some members of the Rastriya Swatantra Party have shown a willingness to criticize even their own government when they believe something is wrong. Such independence of judgment is commendable. A parliamentarian should not be afraid to disagree with their own government when conscience and facts demand it.
At the same time, some politicians appear to oppose the government because they have not received the position, privilege, facility, or benefit they expected. Such opposition is not principled. It is opposition motivated by personal interest.
This is dangerous for the country.
The same criticism applies to opposition parties. Their responsibility is not simply to oppose the government. They should carefully examine government policies and actions and distinguish between those that benefit the country and those that harm it. If the government does something good, the opposition should have the honesty to acknowledge it. If it does something wrong, the opposition should expose it with facts and reason.
Unfortunately, such political maturity remains weak in Nepal.
We must understand that democracy is not strengthened by blind loyalty. It is strengthened by independent thinking, honest debate, accountability, and respect for truth.
A government can make mistakes. A government can also do many good things. Parliamentarians are responsible for correcting mistakes and encouraging good work—not protecting their party at any cost.
The present government has emerged in circumstances different from those of many traditional self-centered governments of Bhagabanda Parties (parties based on the distribution of positions and benefits). I mean a group of political parties that focuses on dividing government positions, ministerial portfolios, appointments, and other benefits among its leaders and supporters rather than serving the nation and the people. If it is allowed to fail because of personal interests, political infighting, blind opposition, or parliamentarians’ failure to act responsibly, no single political party will bear the consequences. The country and its people will suffer heavily for a long time. There is a real danger that the country could fall into the hands of the same parties that ruled it, such as the Bagabanda Parties.
That is why this matters to every honest and impartial citizen.
Nepal cannot progress if politicians put party interests above national interests. It cannot progress if parliamentarians are afraid to speak the truth. And it certainly cannot progress if political opposition is reduced to automatic rejection and government support is reduced to automatic obedience.
What Nepal needs is a new political culture—one in which truth matters more than party, facts matter more than political convenience, and the national interest matters more than personal interest. A parliamentarian should be able to stand before the nation and say: “My party may be wrong, but I will not support what is wrong. The government may be right, even if I am in opposition, and I will acknowledge what is right.”
That would be a genuine sign of democratic maturity.
The future of Nepal’s parliamentary system depends not only on who forms the government. It also depends on how parliamentarians perform their responsibilities after they are elected.The time has come for Nepal’s parliamentarians—and for the country’s honest citizens—to think seriously about this. A parliamentarian’s first loyalty must not be to a party, a leader, or personal interest. It must be to truth, the people, and the nation.
About the author: A non-partisan writer of several books and numerous articles in Nepali and English; former Chief of the Office of the Tribhuvan University Service Commission, Nepal; and a senior citizen in his mid-eighties.
Login to add a comment