Hopes were high. People sacrificed their lives for the historic change. Hundreds were injured. As Nepal celebrates its 16th Republic day on Monday, it may be an occasion to review the Republic we had hoped for and the Republic we have now. The republican dreams seem to have been shattered, with the politics of Nepal blatantly failing to live up to people’s expectations, say observers.

Rajesh Gautam, a political historian, claimed the public is now wondering if the change 16 years ago was worth it. “We are not headed towards realising the goal set at the dawn of the republic. Politicians and political parties have rather been serving their own interests,” he said.

Political analyst Rajendra Maharjan said that in a republic, politics should be centred on and for the general public—in decision-making and governance. “But that has not been the case.”

On May 28, 2008, the first elected Constituent Assembly declared Nepal Federal Democratic Republic, abolishing the 240-year-old monarchy. Despite having already installed a multiparty democracy in 1990, the monarchy maintained hegemony over the political parties, hence the country was unable to experience true democracy. After the royal coup by Gyanendra Shah in 2005, seizing all power, the mainstream parties turned completely against the monarchy, leading to a historic 12-point agreement on November 22, 2005.

A nationwide revolution was sparked, people took to the streets: the People’s Movement started in April 2006 and lasted for 19 days. The demonstrations were so massive that the autocratic monarch ultimately kneeled before the people—former King Gyanendra formally declared on April 21, 2006 that the power finally lies with the people. The first Constituent Assembly elections were held in April 2008.

Failing political parties—old and the new

The Maoists and Madheshi parties entered the scene as major political forces after the second people’s movement in 2006. The former emerged from a decade-long insurgency, claiming to be the messiah of the poor and the marginalised, while the latter promised to empower Madhesh and identity-based politics. While they are still major players in Nepal’s politics, their influence and strength is on the wane, for they are widely denounced for deviating from their promises.

After the promulgation of the constitution in 2015, some new parties—the Bibeksheel Sajha and the Naya Shakti—emerged on the promises of good governance and economic prosperity. But they have now gone into oblivion.

“Many new forces emerged in the republic, as it is a fertile ground for political parties to emerge and grow,” Maharjan said, adding that what has been seen is that if the new forces start to enjoy power, they soon become corrupt, undemocratic, and distant from the public. “Their only focus is on cashing in on the public sentiments and power.”

In the meantime, Gautam said, the older and traditional political parties, the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML, declined after the country became a republic as they got mired in corruption and their lust for power kept increasing. “The person-centric political parties have been emulating the monarchy,” he added.

Currently, some new forces have emerged with big promises. The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP)’s performance in the November 20 polls surprised many as it won 20 seats in the House of Representatives. Similarly, the CK Raut-led Janamat Party, in its first attempt at parliamentary elections, bagged six seats and became a national party.

Observers say the new political forces have challenges galore. They can emphatically push their agendas from the opposition benches, raising public issues and focusing on organisation building. But they too seem to be craving power, just like the old parties.

Mad rush for power, unstable governments

A trend of forming pre- and post-poll alliances followed the country’s adoption of multiparty democracy. All the governments since 2008 have been coalitions of two or more parties. Particularly after the first Constitutional Assembly when the proportional representation system was brought in, coalition government has become the norm. Unfortunately, that trend is pushing the politics and country toward instability.

“Sadly, the craving for power has only intensified after Nepal became a republic. The dirty power games which the political parties play and the coalition thus governments have made the country more unstable,” said Gautam, the political historian.

All major parties—the Congress, the UML, the CPN (Maoist Centre)—have been at the helm of the governments formed over the last 16 years. But not a single one has completed its five years. The current government, formed after a hung parliament, has already witnessed a couple of twists and turns and changes in power dynamics in less than six months.

If vested interest of a certain political party is not served, governments collapse, which eventually impact the stability of the provincial governments as well.

Rise and fall of regional and ethnic politics

With the second people’s movement and the country turning into a republic, there was a rise in the Janajati and Madhesh movements. Several regional parties including a few armed groups have emerged in Nepal over time after the Madhesh uprisings—some rising to prominence and then struggling to stay relevant, while others simply fading into oblivion. The Madhesh-based parties became strong political forces in the 2008 Constituent Assembly. Thereafter, the constitutionalisation of federalism in 2015 gave the regional parties the ground to nurture themselves.

“For Madhesh, the Madheshi identity got the constitutional guarantee after we became a republic. Politically, Madhesh and Madheshis converted to the leader class from the voter class, made their own political parties, and turned into leaders of power politics,” said Tula Narayan Shah, a close observer of Madhesh politics.

Hanging on to the Madhesh agenda, the regional parties have fared well in the major elections, time and again. But beset by internal disputes and splits, the parties that once held sway in Madhesh and were seen as a ray of hope by the Madheshi people, have been on a decline.

“Unfortunately, in Madhesh province, a new kind of marginalisation is seen—the representation of the Muslim and Aadibasi Janajati has declined while the slim participation of Dalits has not improved,” Shah added.

According to Shah, the Madhesh province has failed in governance and service delivery while corruption is rampant. “Madhesh politics has not touched on the idea of social transformation—transformation in health and education, women’s rights and empowerment—which was the dream of the republic.”

Western Nepal has seen the emergence of another regional party, the Nagarik Unmukti Party led by Ranjita Shrestha, wife of the jailed (and now pardoned) Tharu leader Resham Chaudhary. But, it too, was widely criticised for being person-centric and for not having any agenda besides securing Resham’s release.

Three presidents since becoming a republic

Dr Ram Baran Yadav served as the first president of the republic from July 2008 to October 2015. Elected as the second president of Nepal in October 2015, and re-elected in March 2018 in the new federal set-up, Bidya Devi Bhandari served as Nepal’s head of state for seven years. In March, Ramchandra Paudel, a senior Congress leader, was elected as the third President of the country.

Observers say presidents, who are meant to be the custodians of the constitution, have themselves been crossing constitutional boundaries.

“The presidents elected by the representatives of the people, have at times been seen breaching the boundaries of the constitution. They seemed to be seeking a share in the executive power,” said Gautam. “The President should be committed to the people, but in cases such as the citizenship issue, they have failed to do so.”

Federalism losing public’s trust

Republic means being responsible towards the public. Public participation in governance and decision-making is its essence. “The concept of federalism and decentralisation is to increase public participation in decision-making and governance. But that is lacking the most, now,” said Maharjan.

Federalism was a revolutionary change that the country witnessed after becoming a republic. The 2015 Constitution of Nepal provides for three tiers of government—with singular and combined rights. And the relations between the three tiers will be based on Sahakarita (cooperation), Sahaastitwa (co-existence), and Samanwaya (coordination).

Unfortunately, neither the governments nor the political parties have been focusing on strengthening federalism, say observers.

Gautam argues that many people now have doubts about federalism and its benefits. “With federalism failing to take root, people have been questioning its very relevance and have been turning against it,” he said. “The frustration against federalism is indirectly the frustration against the republic.”

The republic has been dying

Sixteen years down the line, hopes are in short supply. Widespread frustration is evident. A major change that was ushered in by shedding the blood of the people has failed to change their lives for the better.

“The republic has not been empowering people as the required structures and processes are lacking and what’s worse, the political parties and politicians themselves don’t have the intent to turn that dream into a reality,” said Maharjan.

“The republic is dying.”