Lenin once said, “There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen”. The current state of affairs in Nepal appears to resonate with his words; however, the reality is different. At a point where it seems like the nation is at the cusp of yet another bout of political turmoil, we, as political leaders, citizens and well-wishers of the country need to reflect on what went wrong.

Nepalis have long protested against the monarchy for fundamental rights, social inclusion and a better future. Over the years, this culminated in a single statement in the Constitution of Nepal 2015, “The sovereignty and state authority of Nepal shall be vested in the Nepalese people”. The citizens of Nepal were declared sovereign, forming a self-governing state with the right to elect representatives of their choice out of their own vocation and the unhindered influence of others.

The Constitution

A constitution has two associated images: ideal and objective. In the case of our constitution, the ideal image, prima facie, is attractive. However, the objective image is full of contradictions. What was once considered the best in the world—the Constitution of Nepal—has been at the centre of political debates since its inception.

Any constitution requires implementation and ownership to function. Without these, it remains a static piece of document. The second Constituent Assembly promulgated the constitution amid what seemed to be a grand gesture from the then-ruling parties. In reality, the announcement was made either by necessity or by obligation. The political forces that saw it as a necessity solely focused on the aspect of the document that they valued. Even the ones who saw it as an obligation did not take its ownership. In either case, the implementation of the constitution was incomplete. While most of the forces aligned their thoughts on fundamental rights—provided by the document—issues such as secularism and federalism were left stranded.

The fundamental aspect of federalism—the self and shared rule—did not apply in our case. Federalism, as it stands, simply translated into an evolved form of administrative division. Incomplete administrative division simply turned into an opportunity for political parties to engage their cadres. In a state governance structure where the local bodies do not have a single financial regulatory body, the provinces were given minimal financial resources or regulatory oversight rights.

Where went wrong

Having been part of most of the major revolutions in the country, the senior strata of the political fraternity has forgotten what the entire fight was for: The people of Nepal. The battle against atrocities by the rulers of yesteryears has turned into mere statements that loosely try to validate the leadership’s existence. The governments formed after the promulgation of the constitution are legitimate as they have been elected representatives of the people. However, with each successive leader, we have seen a downturn in the authority of the country’s executive branch.

The decline stems from the political leadership’s tendency to cherry-pick the aspects of the constitution that would ease governance. This form of governance lacks moral grounds and administrative understanding—hinting towards a rise of kleptocracy.

The political division of the country has yielded decentralised corruption. From the ground up, the cost of living in the country now includes bribes and illegitimate compensation. This is rampant in the local bodies due to a lack of oversight. The state has now created a new group of political leaders who have bequeathed the responsibility of taking Singha Durbar to the villages and have commercialised daily services. Corruption has become institutional in every echelon of the government, from local to provincial or federal.

None of the political agendas in our fight for democracy included the rise of oligarchs or the prevalence of political faces living beyond the justified means. The change did not validate protection for political cadres. It should not have legitimised selling people, smuggling gold, encroaching on government property or favouring opaque procurement. The government of Nepal stands to be the apex executive of the nation; however, it has turned into a government of the parties, not the people. The core problem remains corruption, as in the governance systems before the people’s revolution.

An apology

It is not a shocking revelation that there is unease in the psyche of Nepalis. It should not come as a surprise that people on the road are seeking reform in the system and freedom to live an honourable life. We, as the leadership of the country, have failed. As with anyone who has been part of the government of Nepal, I should apologise to all Nepalis for bringing about a situation like this and take responsibility for our actions.