Democracy, as it is currently practised, is facing challenges worldwide. Could Nepal be the next in line?

The politics of ‘bhagbanda’ is thriving, with political parties of divergent ideologies scrambling for their share of the pie. There is frustration among the people. Job opportunities are scarce and this has prompted a mass exodus for foreign employment. The country’s economic growth is stagnant. Confidence in the domestic education system is dwindling. The suicide rate is rising. Road accidents, mainly due to poor road infrastructure and lax monitoring, have become a daily occurrence.

In a nutshell, the political leadership has failed to fulfil its promises, leading to widespread frustration.

Economic inequality flourishes when certain individuals profit from the bhagbanda politics and nepotism, widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots. Consequently, this fuels social disparity, posing a threat to Nepal’s political system enshrined in the Constitution of Nepal, 2015.

Hence, the escalating cycle of frustration, political instability, and failure to achieve growth pose a new threat to Nepal’s democracy.

Public perception of the country’s economy is closely intertwined with its democratic framework. The rule of law and democratic governance are crucial for economic progress.

A stable policy framework led by a democratically elected, transparent and capable government, alongside a strong civil society, fosters sustainable growth and better social welfare.

Conversely, any threats to democracy also threaten a conducive business environment and effective service delivery.

Amid the chaos, Nepal is celebrating another Democracy Day on Monday.

What does it take for democracy to flourish, and how can it be made sustainable?

Professor Lok Raj Baral says parties should stick to their ideologies, should not deviate from their promised duties to the people, fight corruption, and put the nation first.

“We have a new republican set up, which needs to be preserved for sustainable democracy.”

“Parties should work towards institutionalising democracy. They should adhere to the spirit of the Constitution and republicanism. The parties should stay away from corruption and work for the greater good of the people,” said Baral.

Nepal’s journey towards democracy has been long. It all began in the 1950s, but hit a major snag about a decade later when King Mahendra dismissed the elected democratic government and imposed the Panchayat system. Under this party-less system, Nepal endured thirty years of political suppression—political parties were banned and democratic activities were virtually non-existent.

However, through a joint struggle known in the Nepali history as Janaandolan-1, the restoration of democracy was possible in 1990 with the overthrowing of the Panchayat system.

The multiparty system was restored along with the adoption of the Westminster parliamentary system. A new democratic, open system was established, although the monarch used to be the titular head of the country.

Nepali Congress won a majority in the first parliamentary elections and formed the government. Initially, it took several positive steps for the nation’s development, but due to internal conflict and struggles inside the party, the then prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala dissolved the Parliament and announced midterm elections.

That particular incident became a catalyst for political instability in the country, according to political analysts. Subsequently, Nepal plunged into a vicious cycle of political instability, with forming and dissolving governments becoming a regular affair of the political parties and their leaders.

In February 1996, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) went underground and launched an insurgency, which lasted for ten years. At the peak of the Maoist movement, seven mainstream political parties and the Maoists formed a working partnership in 2005 with the signing of a 12-point agreement in New Delhi. They decided to launch a massive opposition movement against King Gyanendra.

The royal massacre of 2001 marked a major turning point in Nepal’s history. The entire family of King Birendra was killed, which paved the way for Gyanendra Shah to ascend to the throne. But during King Gyanendra’s rule, the relations between political parties and the royal palace deteriorated.

King Gyanenda took several anti-democratic steps inside the country and suppressed the political parties.

Experts say that since the Maoists joined mainstream politics by abandoning the insurgency in 2006, Nepal’s political, economic and social landscape has not undergone significant changes.

Once again, political leaders want a new experiment.

In the process of making an inclusive constitution, Nepal adopted a mixed electoral system, but now political party leaders want to change it. Also, there are also calls from various sectors of society to reverse the achievements and progressive agendas enshrined in the 2015 constitution.

“Only economic transformation can give true durability and sustainability to democracy,” said Khagendra Prasai, Assistant Professor at Nepal Open University.

“If a handful of people control the state resources and agencies, it will definitely have a direct impact on the functioning of democracy.”

“This leads to frustration among the people,” Prasai added. Equal distribution of opportunities, resources and services among the general public is essential for strengthening democracy. Unfortunately, this is lacking.”

Prasai gave examples of Scandinavian nations that have successfully distributed opportunity, resources and services thereby strengthening democracy.

In contrast, in countries like India and the US, among others, their resources are in the hands of a handful of rich people. “This is where the problem begins,” said Prasai.

“Therefore, economic transformation is crucial for the sustainability of democracy.”

There have been much discussions on the political changes occurring inside the country. Socially, people are increasingly aware of their rights and are demanding an inclusive society. The irony is that people, despite being aware, still have to fight for their rights.

Nepal has seen significant political changes and upheavals since the 1950s. However, issues of economic progress and transformation have always taken the back seat. The present frustration and chaos are linked to poor service delivery, and the failure to create equal opportunities and equitable economic distribution.

The 1996 insurgency launched by the Maoists was a result of the growing frustration among the people, which ultimately propelled the Maoists into prominence. Although the Maoists have been in power in most governments formed after the insurgency, they have failed to act on their promises.

“Indeed, economic dividends have not trickled down to the general public,” said Mohani Ansari, former commissioner of the National Human Rights Commission.

“That’s why our democracy is progressing at a sluggish pace.”

Political analysts say no one is being held accountable in the current fragile political system, which has allowed corruption to thrive.

“Accountability is also key to sustaining democracy,” said Ansari. “But who is accountable? That's a question.”

A few crucial things are missing in Nepal—maintaining the rule of law and adherence to the constitution.

“The issues of representation, inclusiveness, and participation are also equally important in democracy. The voices of women, the oppressed, and other under-representation classes must be heard,” said Ansari.