The newly emerged Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has swept the March 5 elections and is heading toward securing a two-thirds majority. Perhaps even the RSP leadership did not expect such a miracle, yet it has happened in Nepal. Under the present constitution, it is generally considered difficult for any political party to secure even a simple majority. Achieving a majority itself is a challenging task; therefore, securing a two-thirds majority appears extraordinary. Such a mandate is sufficient to amend the constitution.
However, there are certain hurdles. The constitution requires that the National Assembly also approve any constitutional amendment. At present, the National Assembly remains dominated by traditional political parties. Therefore, the RSP may not be able to amend the constitution according to its wishes.
Nepal is a country where more than 90 percent of the population follows Sanatan Hindu traditions, and many among them support the idea of restoring a Hindu kingdom. However, the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), which carries this agenda, has managed to secure only one seat and is still struggling to cross the bottleneck of three percent of the votes in the proportional representation system at the time of writing this editorial.
According to reports, many supporters of the Hindu kingdom were confused by the RSP’s election symbol, the “Bell,” which is commonly used during Hindu worship (pooja). Many voters believe that Balen Shah will become the prime minister and restore the Hindu kingdom. In reality, they are unaware that the RSP formally supports federalism, secularism, and republicanism.
Furthermore, the party has proposed introducing a system with a directly elected president holding full executive powers. We believe such a provision could be harmful for a country like Nepal. Foreign powers might compete to influence or control a president who holds extensive executive authority. A system of checks and balances is therefore essential for a country like Nepal.
In this context, the role of the monarchy has historically been significant, as it has been closely associated with the nation’s sovereignty and independence.
Login to add a comment