Essay On Present Political Condition Of Nepal

Current Political Situation in Nepal

Dev Raj Dahal, FES Nepal


Introduction

The mass movement of April 2006 in Nepal sought to restore parliament for the democratic process to continue and to initiate a peace process for the end of a ten-year long armed conflict. This required the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) to join democratic competition which in turn necessitated the devising of a constitution to manage root causes of conflicts afflicting the nation. Hence, a Constituent Assembly (CA) election, that would pave the way for an inclusive state responsive of social diversity and sustainable peace, was seen as the compromise solution among all the political forces. A train of processes and events was thus set off resulting in the advent of current Nepalese politics.

A Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was signed between an alliance of the seven political parties (six after the merger of Nepali Congress and Nepali Congress-Democratic) and the CPN (Maoist) on November 21, 2006. An Interim Constitution drafted and the restored parliament dissolved to pave the way for an interim legislature and interim government that included the CPN (Maoist) in 2007. The ruling seven-party alliance (SPA) announced substantive structural reforms, such as declaration of the country secular, federal and republican. Civilian control of Nepal Army (NA), nationalization of royal property, empowerment of the Premier as head of state, abolition of the national unification day and substitution of the national anthem were announced as time went by. There were also reform measures such as greater inclusiveness regarding marginalized people in the CA, the bureaucracy and police. However, all these measures have allowed a neo-patrimonial regime to incubate, sapping the political will necessary to alter the policy and strategic development vital to transform the "structural causes of conflicts". This has hindered efforts for cultural, social, economic and political transformation needed to establish a well-organized virtuous state capable of instituting sound democratic governance. The political transition has remained highly turbulent due to the open-ended nature of the conflict system. It is, therefore, hard to say whether Nepal has actually entered a post-conflict phase.

The continuation of high political dynamics in the country now indicates a steady erosion of the writ of state and the low level of constitutional and government's stability. This has resulted in a new bargaining environment for armed non-state actors and movement-oriented ethno- regional forces thus further limiting the scope for complex reforms, both involving long-term institutional restructuring and short-term policy interventions. The weakness of state institutions has further spoiled efforts to promote relief to vulnerable sections of the population and address conflict residues. Social movements of marginalized groups-- women, Dalits (untouchable underclass), Janajatis (ethnic groups), Aadibasis (indigenous groups) and Madhesis (people living in the southern plains) -- for identity, proportional representation, federalism and self-determination and insurrectionary activities of two-dozen non-state armed actors have upset the coherence of state-society relations in an unprecedented manner. While the mainstream parties have interest in restructuring the state, the social forces favor restructuring political parties to expand the social base of politics.

As a result, the SPA has missed three deadlines (June 14 and 20 and November 22) for the CA elections to draft a new constitution. It was forced to amend the Interim Constitution three times in eight months-(May 9, June 14 and December 18) to give in to rising demands that the political process was exacting and to give in to the voice of various agitating groups. Among the provisions included in the amendments the more significant ones empower the parliament to abolish the monarchy, if found plotting against the CA elections, and declare the country a federal democratic republic, subject to ratification by the elected CA, or even before that by a two-thirds legislators if the King poses a threat to the elections. Despite voices emerging for a space for monarchy and efforts of CPN (Maoist), NC and CPN-UML to woo its supporters, King Gynendra remains aloof from the power struggle. All this has not changed the political dynamics for the better. The Madhesi People's Rights Forum (MPRF), a group which organized violent protests in the Tarai where scores of people were killed last year, is demanding a fourth revision of the constitution to address the grievances of the Madhesis.

The peace process kept in limbo by the political events appears to have been finally taken up with the 23-point accord reached among the SPA constituents on 23 December. It finally decided that it would establish a high level Peace Council and the six basic pillars of peace within a month. Accordingly, the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal has been assigned to probe into rights violations during past emergency rule, managing cantonments and providing remuneration to Maoist combatants, return of illegally seized public property, end to forced donation by Maoists, etc. It vows to hold the CA elections by April 10, 2008, has increased the number of seats for CA from 497 to 601 and began a common process of electoral socialization through joint mass meetings. The process is marred by mutual accusations. On January 16, Minister for Peace and Reconstruction R. C. Paudel, made a public call on all the agitating groups for dialogue and facilitate CA elections. He has to be more strategic with the ability to strike a balance between achieving the human rights protection objective and responding to changing narratives of discourse, contexts, actors, issues, rules and political priorities.

Constituent Assembly Elections

The Election Commission (EC) has already published the CA election schedule and enforced the election code of conduct from January 16. The parties contesting it will have to submit their closed list of candidates for proportional representation system by February 22, registration of candidature for direct voting will be opened from February 22 to 25 and the candidates will be given election symbols on March 2. The Interim Constitution recognizes the SPA but says that anyone else willing to register a new political party must submit 10,000 signatures to EC.

Many opposition parties - MPRF (Yadav), MPRF (Bishwas), Rastriy Prajatantra Party (RPP)-Nepal, Rastriya Janashakti Party (RJP), RPP, Nepal Sadbhava Party and Tarai-Madhesh Loktantrik Party (TMLP) have depicted the SPA as undemocratic in spirit and attitude and argued that setting the date for elections without creating a proper security and political environment is meaningless. The MPRF and TMLP blaming the deployment of Special Task Force "for creating terror in Tarai and helping the Maoist-affiliated Young Communist League (YCL), have threatened to stage a decisive agitation if their demands are not addressed by January 18. Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN), a coalition of 54 ethnic groups, has put its dilemma this way: if it wages its movement, the SPA will be demolished; if not, the SPA refuses to implement the 20-pint accord it signed with the government.

The meeting of the high level seven-party coordinating committee, a SPA coordination mechanism, is currently discussing the possibility of conducting elections in two phases, keeping in mind the security situation in the Tarai. It decided to request the EC to postpone the implementation of the code of conduct for 15 days so that local bodies can be constituted. Finance Minister R. S. Mahat has requested Nepal's international development partners to extend an additional assistance of $4.76 million to implement the 23-point accord among the SPA and to hold the elections. At the same time, an influential section of NC has warned of "Tarai disintegration" if election takes place in two phases. The decision of the government to distribute $15,870 to each legislator for the development of their constituency also stoked the fire of protest in the civil society. The pre-election perk out of the government coffer does not make the election competitive process. It is such controversies that overturned the election apple-cart in the past. A badly designed election can easily foment social divisions, fragment the political sphere, institutionalize sub-national conflicts and embroil the nation into the centrifugal pressure of regional geopolitics.

Tarai's Geopolitics

Twenty-two districts in Nepal's southern plains bordering India constitute the Terai or Madhesh. It is fertile area and is linked to Nepal's major supply routes to hills. After the declaration of secular state and talk about redistributive land reforms, the glue that bind hill and Tarai communities got lost. The Madhesi movement spearheaded by the MPRF wants the declaration of the Madhesh as an autonomous region, talks with armed Madhesi groups, balanced distribution of state revenue and income to Madhesh, proportional representation in all the governance institutions including the NA, appointment of chief administrators in Madhesh from the Madhesi communities, return weapons captured by Maoists to the concerned people and declaration of those killed during the Madhesh movement as martyrs including compensation for their families. The TMLP has expressed its desire to have its own state organs for the plains. The two radical components of Janatantrik Tarai Mukti Morcha (JTMM) demand international mediators like the UN to resolve their issues and a separate independent state. India's assertion that "Tarai's demands should be addressed," has provoked a prickly reaction from various political forces. Premier Koirala who had earlier assertion that the "Tarai problem can be resolved within a minute with India's cooperation" has led to suspicions about an 'Indian hand' in the unrest. India's main opposition, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), however, criticizes the Indian government for remaining silent on the collusion of Indian and Nepali communists for creating turmoil in both countries and quashing of the symbols of Nepal's stability and unity-Hindu state and monarchy. An open border with India, existence of co-ethnics across the border and affiliation of each group and political party with like-minded ones in India create a context in which resolution of conflict requires confidence-building measures from both sides.

The violent conflict in the Tarai has forced the hill people to migrate to safe places and create their own mechanisms in the area, like the Chure Bhavar Unity Society (CBUS) that positions itself in the foothills bordering the Terai and the mountains, for autonomy and self-defense. The autonomy movement in the Madhesh has snowballed into ethnic Tharus, Rais, Limbus, Tamangs, Gurungs, Magars, Dalits and Newars also demanding autonomous federal states based on the right to self-determination. But, there is no unity among Madhesi groups due to their multiple caste, language, religious and ethnic identities. For example, TMLP leadership is dominated by high caste groups, MPRF by intermediary caste groups and JTMM by lower caste groups. The government's Special Task Force (STF), deployed in Kathmandu and eight Terai districts, has failed to penetrate, divide and destroy criminal networks and create public security for local governance to operate. Nepal's problems cannot be tackled without taking this regionalism into account and identifying ways to address it. No matter how one looks at this problem, it seems obvious that there is no military solution. The political package must create a situation favorable to all groups where they see they have more to gain through peace than violence. An election in a security and authority vacuum will neither have legitimacy nor ability to institutionalize democratic polity.

Law and Order

The Nepalese army has expressed its commitment to democracy and a nationally-owned security sector reforms. But, Chief of Army Staff, Gen. R. Katawal clearly said "No" to integrate the CPN (Maoist) combatants. The UN has verified 19,602 politically indoctrinated People's Liberation Army (PLA) out of its total force of over 32,000. Premier G. P Koirala agrees with the army's viewpoint and has given options to Maoists- to integrate the PLA into industrial security groups or give them priority in foreign employment. Nepal's total strength of security forces stands at 165,000-- NA (92,000), the civilian police (48,000) and Armed Police Force (25,000). The NA is holed up inside barracks as per the peace accord. The existence of these two adversarial structures does not provide any incentive for confidence building and to pursue a viable peace process for the future. Similarly, without disarming all autonomous armed groups and improving civil-military relations, the chances of free and fair elections remain fragile.

Erosion of state monopoly on power, taxation and loyalty of citizens, growth of competitive violence and failure of statehood in governance have confiscated the state's capacity to provide security in the country. As a result the ability of the political system to maintain balance of power between different governance organs is severely undermined which is telling on its capacity to enforce rule of law, provide service delivery and resolve the multi-layered conflict. SPA's control over the legislature, the executive control over the judiciary and a lack of legitimate opposition have established monopoly rule. There is an absence of institutions protecting property rights and promotion of collective goods.

Nepal has a very weak middle class and poor mediating agencies to protect the rights and welfare of the poor. Tax contributes 12 percent to GDP and the contribution of public sector output to GDP is only about 7 percent. Foreign aid constitutes 70 percent of development outlays. Domestic revenue raising capacity is very poor. Easy borrowing from international institutions has established the government's autonomy from their tax paying citizens. As a result, the government is less concerned with institutional capacity of the state to deliver governance goals. The substantial contribution of remittance to GDP (17 percent) too has detrimental effect on the accountability of government. GDP growth rate of 2.3 percent hardly balances out the population growth of 2.2 percent. The daily per capita income of $ 1 puts Nepal's human security condition at the bottom of world development statistics. Feudalism, caste hierarchy and patriarchy have suppressed social mobility of the underclass. This lack of social and economic security has made Nepal's politics highly inflammable amidst radical appeals and growing frustration.

Nepal's bureaucracy, police and public institutions are highly politicized along partisan lines, de-motivated, show poor esprit de corps and weak to enforce rule of law and deliver essential public services. "The rulers have no trust in the constitution, leading to its failure," Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee, Laxman Aryal said on January 15. To him, the constitution emerged as a compromise among SPA constituents for the transition politics until the CA election is conducted. It, therefore, does not hold the principles of constitutionalism. He added, "We saw nothing during its first year, but chaos and deterioration of law and order." This condition has made national integrity system ineffective in controlling crime, corruption and impunity. Public institutions and enterprises are still monopolized by ruling parties. Sense of public trust in the authority, assuming that the government is trustworthy and acting in the public interest, is sharply declining. Lack of a boundary between leaders' personal and institutional interests has given birth to a political culture of clientalism although new social movements of women, youth, Dalits, indigenous people and ethnic groups are increasingly challenging the position of authority fixed at birth, lineage and patronage. They are seeking to remold the pre-modern political culture of mutual distrust, betrayal and revenge and into post-conflict modern culture of a shared future based on social justice, democracy and peace.

Voice and Participation of Marginalized

The struggle for human rights in Nepal for liberation, entitlements and social opportunities still remains unfinished. Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal (NHRC) K. N. Upadhaya stresses the need for joint efforts among the human rights organizations and individuals to mitigate human rights violations in an effective manner. The government's presence is felt to some extent only in Kathmandu and some urban nodes. Killing, kidnapping, extortion, strikes, food shortages, rocketing prices, shrinking job opportunities and growing fear have deteriorated human rights conditions in the periphery. Last year, 130 civilians got killed by various forces.

Seventy-two political parties have applied in the EC for registration. This number represents asymmetry and diversity in Nepalese social life. A number of social groups are struggling for social, gender and inter-generational justice in the party structure of mainstream parties. Internal party democracy is essential to make political power proportional to its representativeness and end the fissiparous tendencies that have sapped their social integration potential. The country has 102 ethnic groups and more than 82 languages. No single group claims more than 18 percent of the population. This means it is a country of minorities and there is no institutional mechanism to prevent the minority from becoming a majority. Civil society groups are columnized along partisan lines. This condition has marred the possibilities for cooperative action for public service. Despite the legislation of the Right to Information Act, the media is unevenly distributed just like the per capita income and, therefore, people of backward and remote areas have no access to the public sphere in shaping the agenda.

In contrast, the apex body of media persons, Nepal Federation of Journalists, revealed the condition of media freedom this way: Between April 24, 2006 to December 1, 2007 one journalist was killed, one disappeared, 74 detained and 128 threatened. There were 203 attacks on media houses, 129 journalists lost their jobs and 55 media houses were shut down.

Engagement of the International Community

For an international community caught in a fluid political climate, it will be hard to enlarge the development space as agreed in the Basic Operating Guidelines (BOG), other than relief and humanitarian supplies. The presence of the international community in Nepal acts as a deterrence against excessive use of violence and abuse of human rights. Japan has put Nepal in the category of a "fragile state." By definition, a fragile state creates a situation for humanitarian intervention owing to anarchy of free wills, poor governance and failure to enforce rule of law. India has often insisted that elections to the CA must take place on time at any cost, but remained silent when the SPA failed to create a favorable security and law and order situation. The European Union and the US are insisting that the security situation in Nepal must improve for a credible, free and fair election. On January 18, the US Ambassador to Nepal, Nancy J. Powell suggesting the government and political parties to fulfill earlier commitments made in the peace accord said, "The CA polls will not guarantee sustainable peace in Nepal. What is necessary for the sustainable peace is loyalty to the nation."

On January 11, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon submitted his report to the UN Security Council proposing a six-month extension of UNMIN's mandate to support Nepal's peace process through CA elections. He has advised against downscaling the UN's presence, emphasizing that it could imperil prospects for a successful election, except in the cases of technical assistance which has already been provided. The UN too favors a credible CA election with improved security, government's engagement in a dialogue with disgruntled groups and abolition of the culture of impunity. Unlike the EU, however, India, the US and China have geopolitical priorities. India's role in bringing the SPA together against the 'monarchy' in November 2005 and their joint struggle forced King Gyanendra to hand over power to the political parties. As the SPA established their monopoly over power and resources but failed to maintain security and rule of law, it evoked the security concern of neighbors. China has voiced against "any foreign intervention in Nepal," showed interest to actively involve itself in Nepal's peace process, expressed anxiety about the events taking place in the Tarai and asked the Nepalese leaders to take independent decisions depending less on outside forces.

Aid coordination and coordination of government-donor practices have become particularly important in Nepal, especially to engage both sides in abolishing the historical practice of clientalism and paternalism, building trust on each other's role and engaging in multi-dimensional aspects of the peace-process, such as state-building, support to constitution-making, transport, communication, energy development, education, agriculture, rural development, water supply, finance, health and sanitation and sustainable development. Conflict mitigation projects should involve rehabilitation of the damaged infrastructure and internally displaced people, rural reconstruction and eradication of the root causes of mal-development which, in the first place, triggered the cycle of conflict.

Expectation of People at the Grassroots Level

The media and the political leaders have generated unrealistic expectations among the population that the CA is the panacea that will fulfill all their needs and desires. It was important to cast the message that CA is meant to frame a draft of the constitution and the necessary laws for governance. People at the grassroots level are expecting informed and reason-based knowledge about the constitution-making process, the suitability of the election system, improvement in security and are concerned about political stability, cooperation from outside, avoidance of unnecessary foreign intervention, knowledge about the modern state, functions of political systems, government, political parties and leadership, enfranchisement of citizens and their stake-holding in public institutions, social cohesion, support in education, health and economic activities and social justice. Minorities are increasingly questioning about their human rights in a majority dominated federal state. They want to know about their role in the multi-staged negotiation with the CA, suitability of federalism, concept of a republic and the vision of a New Nepal. Ordinary people also ask about the mixed election system that has been adopted and which presents a new challenge- what with the twin-ballot paper for voters and administration.

FES training series on civic education has created a synergy as demands for such activities from various quarters have increased, advocacy documents have been utilized by all sides, resource persons interviewed by the media and published in the local papers. They were even involved in non-partners' activities with the same advocacy resources. In general, our programs have strengthened the civic competence of citizens as they can debate on equal terms with their leaders and contest their view points. In many conflict-hit places, our activities provided space for dialogue among heterogeneous participants and directly contributed to building public opinion, democratic will-formation and reconciliation. We also tried to encourage participants to speak up and share their views rather than just receiving top-down dissemination of knowledge and information. In many places, they suggested to us to provide training to central level leadership and demanded more seminars in the districts and villages so that dialogues across diverse communities can build trust between conflict-torn societal groups and improve their relations with the state.

Road Ahead

A credible, free and fair election depends on the ability of the political parties to create a secure environment for political actors and voters, cross-party consensus on security plans in the Tarai, engagement of movement-oriented and armed non-state actors opposed to the elections in constructive dialogues to address their outstanding grievances, dispelling the threat of pro-monarchy forces through inclusive measures and a common process of socialization and goal-orientation towards democratic peace. What happens if elections do not take place on April 10?

  • In case the CA election does not take place as scheduled, then this constitution, parliament and government will suffer from legitimacy deficit. The first scenario is well articulated by Minister without Portfolio Sujata Korala, "The constitution of 1991 will return." This will satisfy the traditional forces and its resistance to change. But, there will be a dangerous polarization between the radical and the conservative forces.
  • The second scenario is the creation of a civilian government with the backing of NA. A CPN (Maoist) ideologue calls it a "democratic coup," because civilian politicians, not the King, will be utilized. A lot of things depend on the move of the international community because Nepal is an aid-dependent country and its policy, power and legitimacy flow from it. Similarly, it requires to win the confidence of India, the US and China as they are geo-strategically enmeshed in Nepal's internal developments.
  • A group of civil society and opposition parties are opting for a broad-based national government to hold elections. The third scenario seems optimally satisfactory if the major insurgent groups are engaged in dialogue and national consensus. Civil society groups should serve as a mediating ground for all political perspectives and mobilize national and global public opinion for it.

Berlin, Germany January 21, 2008

This article needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(February 2018)

The politics of Nepal function within a framework of a republic with a multi-party system. Currently, the position of President of Nepal (head of state) is occupied by Bidhya Devi Bhandari. The position of Prime Minister (head of government) is held by Khadga Prasad Oli. Executive power is exercised by the Prime Minister and his cabinet, while legislative power is vested in the Parliament.

Until May 28, 2008, Nepal was a constitutional monarchy. On that date, the constitution was altered by the Nepalese Constituent Assembly to make the country a republic.[1]

The Economist Intelligence Unit has rated Nepal as "hybrid regime" in 2016.[2]

Political conditions[edit]

2001: Royal massacre[edit]

Main article: Nepalese royal massacre

On June 1, 2001, prince Deependra was killed with his father, King Birendra; his mother, Queen Aishwarya; his brother; his sister, his father's younger brother, Prince Dhirendra; and several aunts, it is unknown that who killed... It's said that Gyanendra was the one who killed the royal family for the Crown.

Although he never regained consciousness before dying, Crown Prince Dipendra was nonetheless the king under the law of Nepalese royal succession. After his death two days later, the late King's surviving brother Gyanendra was proclaimed king.

2002–2007: Suspension of parliament and Loktantra Andolan[edit]

Main article: 2006 democracy movement in Nepal

On 1 February 2002 King Gyanendra suspended the Parliament, appointed a government led by himself, and enforced martial law. The King argued that civil politicians were unfit to handle the Maoist insurgency. Telephone lines were cut and several high-profile political leaders were detained. Other opposition leaders fled to India and regrouped there. A broad coalition called the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) was formed in opposition to the royal takeover, encompassing the seven parliamentary parties who held about 90% of the seats in the old, dissolved parliament.

The UN-OHCHR, in response to events in Nepal, set up a monitoring program in 2005 to assess and observe the human rights situation there[3]

On 22 November 2005, the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) of parliamentary parties and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) agreed on a historic and unprecedented 12-point memorandum of understanding (MOU) for peace and democracy. Nepalese from various walks of life and the international community regarded the MOU as an appropriate political response to the crisis that was developing in Nepal. Against the backdrop of the historical sufferings of the Nepalese people and the enormous human cost of the last ten years of violent conflict, the MOU, which proposes a peaceful transition through an elected constituent assembly, created an acceptable formula for a united movement for democracy. As per the 12-point MOU, the SPA called for a protest movement, and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) supported it. This led to a countrywide uprising called the Loktantra Andolan that started in April 2006. All political forces including civil society and professional organizations actively galvanized the people. This resulted in massive and spontaneous demonstrations and rallies held across Nepal against King Gyanendra's autocratic rule.

The people's participation was so broad, momentous and pervasive that the king feared being overthrown.[citation needed] On 21 April 2006, King Gyanendra declared that "power would be returned to the people". This had little effect on the people, who continued to occupy the streets of Kathmandu and other towns, openly defying the daytime curfew. Finally King Gyanendra announced the reinstatement the House of Representatives, thereby conceding one of the major demands of the SPA, at midnight on 24 April 2006. Following this action the coalition of political forces decided to call off the protests.

Twenty-one people died and thousands were injured during the 19 days of protests.[citation needed]

On 19 May 2006, the parliament assumed total legislative power and gave executive power to the Government of Nepal (previously known as His Majesty's Government). Names of many institutions (including the army) were stripped of the "royal" adjective and the Raj Parishad (a council of the King's advisers) was abolished, with his duties assigned to the Parliament itself. The activities of the King became subject to parliamentary scrutiny and the King's properties were subjected to taxation. Moreover, Nepal was declared a secular state abrogating the previous status of a Hindu Kingdom. However, most of the changes have, as yet, not been implemented. On 19 July 2006, the prime minister, G. P. Koirala, sent a letter to the United Nations announcing the intention of the Nepalese government to hold elections to a constituent assembly by April 2007.

December 2007 to May 2008: Abolition of the monarchy[edit]

On 23 December 2007, an agreement was made for the monarchy to be abolished and the country to become a federal republic with the Prime Minister becoming head of state.[4] Defying political experts, who had predicted it to be trounced in the April 2008 elections, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) became the largest party amidst a general atmosphere of fear and intimidation from all sides.[5] A federal republic was established in May 2008, with only four members of the 601-seat Constituent Assembly voting against the change,[6] which ended 240 years of royal rule in Nepal. The government announced a public holiday for three days, (May 28 – May 30), to celebrate the country becoming a federal republic.

Since 2008[edit]

Major parties such as the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) (CPN UML) and the Nepali Congress agreed to write a constitution to replace the interim one within 2 years. However, uncooperative and "selfish" behavior of the political parties has been cited[by whom?] as the major cause behind the de-railing of the peace process.

The Maoists, as the largest party of the country, took power right after the elections and named Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) as the Prime Minister of the country. CPN UML also joined this government, but the Nepali Congress took the part of the main opposition party. People soon saw that the country's situation deteriorated and political turmoils were in store.[citation needed] Prachanda soon fell into a dispute with the then army chief Rookmangud Katwal and decided to sack him. But the PresidentRam Baran Yadav, as the supreme head of military power in the country, revoked this decision and gave the army chief additional time in office. An angry Prachanda and his party quit the government, majorly citing this reason and decided to operate as the main opposition to the government headed by CPN UML and its co-partner Nepali Congress afterwards. Madhav Kumar Nepal was named the Prime Minister.

The Maoists have been to this date[when?] demanding civilian supremacy over the army.

The Maoists have been forcing closures – commonly known as bandhs – in the country, and have also declared autonomous states for almost all the ethnic groups in Nepal – seen[by whom?] as a part of revenge against the action that foiled their decision to sack the army chief.

Political leaders continue to discuss plans to end this turmoil, but none of the talks have been successful. Rising inflation, economic downturn, poverty, insecurity and uncertainty are the major problems. Many analysts[which?] opine that freedom has brought chaos to the country. Many[who?] doubt that the political parties will succeed in writing a constitution.

On May 2012 constitution assembly was dissolved and another election to select the constitution assembly members was declared by Dr. Baburam Bhattarai.

Madhes Movement (2007 - 2015/16)[edit]

Madhes Movement[7] (Nepali: मधेस अान्दोलन) is a political movement launched by various political parties, especially those based in Madhes, for equal rights, dignity and identity of Madhesis and Tharus,Muslisms and Janjati groups in Nepal. In nearly a decade, Nepal witnessed three Madhes Movements[8][9] - the first Madhes Movement erupted in 2007[10], the second Madhes Movement in 2008[11] and the third Madhes Movement in 2015. About the origin of the first Madhes Movement, Journalist Amarendra Yadav writes in The RIsing Nepal[12]"When the then seven-party alliance of the mainstream political parties and the CPN-Maoist jointly announced the Interim Constitution in 2007, it totally ignored the concept of federalism, the most desired political agenda of Madhesis and other marginalised communities. A day after the promulgation of the interim statute, a group of Madhesi activists under the Upendra Yadav-led Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum-Nepal (then a socio-intellectual NGO) burnt copies of the interim constitution at Maitighar Mandala, Kathmandu." This triggered the Madhes movement I.

The second Madhes Movement took place in 2008, jointly launched by Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum-Nepal, Terai Madhes Loktantrik Party and Sadbhawana Party led by Rajendra Mahato with three key agenda: federalism, proportional representation and population-based election constituency, which were later ensured in the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2008.

However, The Constitution of Nepal 2015 backtracked from those issues, that were already ensured by the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2008. Supreme Court of Nepal Advocate Dipendra Jha writes in The Kathmandu Post: "many other aspects of the new constitution are more regressive than the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2007. Out of all its deficiencies, the most notable one concerns the issue proportional representation or inclusion in all organs of the state."[13] This triggered the third Madhes Movement by Madhesis[14][15][16] in Nepal. Although the first amendment to the constitution was done, the resistance over the document by Madhesi and Tharus in Nepal still continues[17][18]

Legislative branch[edit]

Pre-2006[edit]

From 1991 to 2002 the Parliament (Sansad) had two chambers. The House of Representatives (Pratinidhi Sabha) had 205 members elected for five-year term in single-seat constituencies. The National Council (Rashtriya Sabha) had 60 members, 35 members elected by the Pratinidhi Sabha, 15 representatives of Regional Development Areas and 10 members appointed by the king. Parliament was subsequently dissolved by the king in 2002 on the pretext that it was incapable of handling the Maoists rebels.

From Loktantra Andolan to the Constituent Assembly[edit]

After the victory of Loktantra Andolan in the spring of 2006, a unicameral interim legislature replaced the previous parliament. The new body consists both of members of the old parliament as well as nominated members. As of December 2007, the legislature had the following composition.[19]

The first elections after becoming a Republic: the Constituent Assembly[edit]

In May 2008 the elections for the Constituent Assembly saw the Communist Party of Nepal as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly, which will have a term of two years.

Judicial branch[edit]

The judiciary is composed of the Supreme Court (Sarbochha Adalat), appellate courts, and various Trial court|district courts. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was appointed by the monarch on recommendation of the Constitutional Council; the other judges were appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Judicial Council.

Nepal's judiciary is legally separate from the executive and legislative branches and has increasingly shown the will to be independent of political influence. The judiciary has the right of judicial review under the constitution.

International organization participation of nepal[edit]

AsDB, CCC, Colombo Plan, ESCAP, FAO, Group of 77, IBRD, ICAO, ICFTU, ICRM, International Development Association, IFAD, International Finance Corporation, IFRCS, International Labour Organization, International Monetary Fund, International Maritime Organization, Intelsat, Interpol, IOC, IOM, International Organization for Standardization (correspondent), ITU, MONUC, Non-Aligned Movement, OPCW, SAARC, United Nations, UNCTAD, UNDP, UNESCO, UNIDO, UNIFIL, UNMIBH, UNMIK, UNMOP, UNMOT, UNTAET, UPU, World Federation of Trade Unions, WHO, WIPO, WMO, WToO, WTrO CPC Nepal (applicant)

See also[edit]

Further reading[edit]

Jonathan Devendra. 2013. Massacre at the Palace: The Doomed Royal Dynasty of Nepal. New York: Hyperion. ISBN 0-7868-6878-3.

References[edit]

External links[edit]

  1. ^Nepal's monarchy abolished, republic declared AFP, 2008-05-28
  2. ^solutions, EIU digital. "Democracy Index 2016 - The Economist Intelligence Unit". www.eiu.com. Retrieved 2017-12-01. 
  3. ^Nepal Summary, OHCHR.
  4. ^Gurubacharya, Binaj (2007-12-24). "Nepal to Abolish Monarchy". Time. Retrieved 2007-12-26. 
  5. ^"The Maoists triumph". The Economist. 17 April 2008. 
  6. ^Nepal votes to abolish monarchy BBC News, 2008-05-28
  7. ^"Madhes movement - The Himalayan Times". The Himalayan Times. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  8. ^"Madhesh Movement: Then n now (Part I of III) – OnlineKhabar". english.onlinekhabar.com. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  9. ^"Madhesh Movement: Then n now (Part II of III) – OnlineKhabar". english.onlinekhabar.com. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  10. ^"Three years later - Nepali Times". nepalitimes.com. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  11. ^"Three years later - Nepali Times". nepalitimes.com. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  12. ^"The Rising Nepal: Ten Years On, Madhes Still In Unrest". therisingnepal.org.np. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  13. ^"Talk to the Tarai". Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  14. ^"Who are the Madhesis, why are they angry?". The Indian Express. 2015-10-05. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  15. ^Sharma, Bhadra; Najar, Nida (2015-09-28). "Nepal Rations Fuel as Political Crisis With India Worsens". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  16. ^"The Secret to Resolving Madhes Andolan III Demands - Madhesi Youth". Madhesi Youth. 2015-11-24. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  17. ^Yadav, Anumeha. "Interview: 'For Madhesis, the first amendments to Nepal's new Constitution are a disappointment'". Scroll.in. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  18. ^"THRD Alliance Resistance Continues as Nepal Observes the 2nd Anniversary of Constitution Promulgation - THRD Alliance". thrda.org. Retrieved 2017-10-21. 
  19. ^"Interim parliament endorses Interim Constitution-2063". NepalNews.com. 2007-01-15. Retrieved 2007-12-26. 

0 thoughts on “Essay On Present Political Condition Of Nepal”

    -->

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *