Issue
For
Constituent Assembly
For the first time in the last two thousand years, Nepal ’s institution of monarchy, which has seen many ups and downs and different forms and dynasties, has been put into elections. Although the concept of republicanism in Nepal is highly elitist and extreme in its results, silent majority, who are familiar with monarchical system as they have long practiced under it, are given a choice now in forthcoming elections for Constituent Assembly to choose between constitutional monarchy and republican. As the institution is so old, the monarchial opinion has wide support base. Vast majority of people know where they stand. But it is now time for centrists and moderate parties like Nepali Congress - which has a long history of championing monarchy from constitutional to ceremonial – to decide whether to compete with a dozen or so communists and other urban extremists elite for republican model or remain as a centrist party championing monarchial opinion with wide base
By KESHAB POUDEL
If prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala is to be believed, the election for Constituent Assembly is going to be held in agreed date in the month of June. This election is going to be completely different than past - as previous elections were program and personality-based and those elections were fought on party planks for the parliament to form the government.
In the past, issues of economic development, social agenda, foreign policy and national development were placed before the people to decide. In forthcoming elections for Constituent Assembly, the main issue is going to be whether the country will have constitution on model of constitutional monarchy - which Nepal already had in practice - or the country will have constitution on republican platform. Other sundry issues including autonomy based on ethnicity, linguistic and regionalism, federalism or unitary forms of government will also be dealt with by the CA. Anyway, monarchy or republican seems to be its major agenda.
“The opinion of the country has been polarized between two models of governance and the constitution. That means the people have choices on both the sides. It is unimaginable that the total number of voters will choose to cast their votes on the only one side. The concept of republicanism is highly elitist and extreme in its results. Whereas the monarchical democracy is not unfamiliar to the people as they have practiced the governance under it. Thus, it is anybody’s guess that a vast majority of the people understands this pattern of governance and, therefore, it does not require much intelligence to grasp the system of constitutional monarchy,” said a political analyst.
Nepal has always lived in peace and harmony with element of continuity and monarchy remains as the institution of continuity in all political change. If democracy moves along with monarchy, its sailing will be easier without any turmoil.
History of Monarchy
For the people of Nepal , monarchy is not a new form of governance as they have had centuries-old practices. “ Nepal has history extending over a period of more than two thousand years. In her long history, dynasties have risen and fallen and different tribes have become dominant at different times. The Lichchhavi, the Thakuri, the Malla and last but not least, the Shah dynasties have played their parts,” writes late Rishikesh Shaha in his book Heroes and Builders of Nepal. “But it was the Gorkhali conquest during the last quarter of the eighteenth century that gave the entire territory comprising present-day Nepal a single name and strong central government.”
 |
Then PM Deuba administers oath of office to his ministers in the King's presence: Monarchists have turned republicans now |
As Nepal has a long history of monarchy and the governance under it, people have habit of obedience towards the monarchical institution despite change in its variances and groups. “The people, thus, have a habit of respect and obedience to the monarchical institution, despite variance in the personal behavior and style of different Kings,” said the political analyst.
Among Shah Kings, every individual King had their own personal style of functioning. Prithivi Narayan Shah, who unified Nepal , had a unique character in terms of quality of leadership. Rana Bahadur Shah and Surendra Bikram Shah had different characters and behaviors. King Tribhuwan and King Birendra pursued pluralistic idea whereas King Mahendra pursued party-less system. New King Gyanendra centralized the power preaching for multi-party democracy.
“Even if a particular King acted eccentrically or unwisely, people in Nepal , like any monarchical tradition, have tolerated the institution and maintained the monarchical tradition,” said the analyst. “Instead of overthrowing monarchy for some of its weaknesses, the people discovered constitutional ways and means to keep it under a democratic discipline.”
Not only in Nepal has the monarchy shown that it is an adaptable institution. Even in western industrialized democratic countries, monarchy shows its adaptability. “Out of ten best democracies in the world, even now have constitutional monarchies such as United Kingdom, Japan, Denmark, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Luxembourg, Spain and the Netherlands and some countries like Canada, New Zealand and Australia have still maintained linkage with monarchy despite a continental difference of vast distance,” said the political analyst.
“As an adaptable institution, monarchy in Nepal has been a source of change, as well as the mainstay of continuity and tradition. As a most ancient political institution, it has passed through various stages of political development; it has been as relevant in modern times as it had been in ancient and medieval periods. Though non-elective, it has always commanded allegiance and obedience of the common people for different reasons- not necessarily by coercion,” writes Ganesh Raj Sharma in his article Monarchy and the Democratic Development in Contemporary Nepal in the journal of Center for Nepal and Asian Studies Tribhuvan University in 1989.
Legendary leader B.P. Koirala has also rightly said monarchy is the best form than presidential because it does not have to contest the popular elections. “I think an elected government finds easy, if the King is good. If King actually performs within constitution, there will be no easier head of the state than him,” said B.P. Koirala in his recently published book Raja, Rastriyata Ra Rajniti. “There were many dictators who came through the elections. Even Hitler came through elections. Thus, there should be head of state but he must not be aligned with any political party but only responsible to protect the constitution. King can perform this role more easily than by an elected president.”
Monarchy Against Totalitarians
Other scholars like George Orwell, too, had his strong opinion on monarchy. In his political commentary published in Partisan Review published in January 1944 Orwell writes, “The function of King in promoting stability and acting as a sort of keystone in non-democratic society is, of course, obvious. But, he also has, or can have, the function of acting as an escape-valve for dangerous emotions. A French journalist said to me once that the monarchy was one of the things that have saved Britain from Fascism. What he meant was that modern people can’t, apparently, get along without drums, flags and loyalty parades, and that is better that they should tie their leader-worship onto some figure who has no real power. In dictatorship the power and the glory belong to the same person. In England the real power belongs to unprepossessing men in bowler hats: the creature who rides in a gilded coach behind soldiers in steel breastplates is really waxwork.”
According to Orwell, it is at any rate possible that while this division of function exists, a Hitler or a Stalin cannot come to power. “On the whole the European countries which have most successfully avoided fascism have been constitutional monarchies. The conditions seemingly are that the royal family shall be long-established and taken for granted, shall understand its own position and shall not produce strong character with political ambitions.”
 |
RPP and UML leaders ganging up against NC PM Koirala: Strange bedfellows in the past |
Despite all powerful opinion in favor of the monarchy in the country and its adaptability with change, communists and extremists along with some centrist see it as a main bstacle. For communist leaders like Prachanda, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai of CPN-Maoists, CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal , monarchy is the main hurdle to establish totalitarian one party system of proletariat.
“After the promulgation of interim constitution, the era of republican will upsurge,” said CPN-Maoist leader Prachanda. “Some regressive and feudal elements within seven party alliance are still conspiring by prolonging the announcement of interim constitution. Once the monarchy is wiped out, then the way for People’s republic will open.”
Communist leaders are honest enough to speak the truth about their own hidden strategy but nobody understands the rationale behind leaders of liberal democratic parties like Nepali Congress who are also speaking against the institution that will guarantee their own interest. Either Nepali Congress leaders know the communist leaders who are championing the cause of communism are fake and they need not fear them or their arguments merely sing of foolishness.
“Our alliance with Nepali Congress and other seven parties is strategic - to defeat strong force by joining with other smaller forces. Monarchy is the last hurdle to establish the communist state in Nepal . Once monarchy is wiped out, we will take care of other weaker forces,” Prachanda has said publicly.
This view is shared by leaders of all other communist factions and there is unanimity among them about monarchy. In fact, the popular opinion base of monarchy is much powerful and stronger than the just five decade long modern and liberal democratic ideals. Communists hate both of them. CPN-Maoists started their People’s War in 1996 by attacking the elected parliamentary government and their fist bullet was against the multi-party democratic parliament. Maoists attacked the institution of monarchy just after they forcefully derailed the multi party parliamentary democracy.
Congress With Liberal Voice
At a time when some Nepali Congress leaders are pressuring congress leadership to declare it as a republican party, other leaders are stressing the need to follow centrist stand taken by the party in last five decades including on the issues of monarchy.
 |
UML and RPP leaders in a memorial service: Remembering the late monarch King Birendra |
“The history of political change in Nepal is always based on reconciliation as the change has been neither completely revolutionary nor completely evolutionary. We have some revolutionary character and evolutionary character - it is mix of both. So far as Nepali Congress is concerned, as a centrist party, Nepali Congress has always been in middle. Our party’s general convention made a decision to end autocratic monarchy,” said Gavinda Raj Joshi, former home minister and central committee member of Nepali Congress.
” Although country is debating over republican and monarchial issues now, Nepali Congress has not made a new decision. Our party has not deviated from our previous stand as we want to accommodate all political forces prevailing in the country,” said Joshi, former home minister and central committee member of Nepali Congress.
“As a liberal democratic party, every individual member can uphold his/her views but it is the party’s general convention which will have final authority to change the party’s stand. Our party’s general convention made a decision to end autocratic monarchy. It is a fact that no single political force is decisive in Nepal . Every matter of national importance can be settled through the consensus among all political forces in the country even after the formation of Constituent Assembly,” Joshi added.
Pressure for Republican
Communists are vibrant forces in the race of republican. From mobilizing students and trade unions and other communist leaders and some members of civil society, they have been staging street demonstrations demanding to promulgate the new interim constitution –which is said to establish eight-party dictatorship curtailing the right of independent judiciary.
“Republican is not a communist ideology. Our party must lead the political process through republican politics to defeat the communists,” said Nepali Congress central committee member Narahari Acharya. “All republicans including communists have to come together.”
Whatever the kind of pressure is building, there is still a large number of opinions sympathetic to monarchy. Even in a recent opinion poll by Kantipur Television, which is known for its stand regarding republic, revealed that 60 percent of its respondents preferred the King as a head of the state against prime minister.
Despite such support, the streets of urban areas are full of anti-monarchial demonstrations and pro-republic arguments. What is missing is a strong political force to champion the opinion of such wide base institution of monarchy.
“What appears in the everyday street protest and demonstration is mainly confined to the urban areas that too of sectoral character,” said the analyst. “The real mass of the people - which is known as a silent majority - may have a different verdict. If they are permitted to exercise their ballots through free and impartial procedures of the elections, people may give their own verdict,” said the analyst.
Champions of Monarchy
Although there is a strong and powerful opinion in favor of monarchy throughout the country, most of the centrist democratic parties are influenced by the street agitations by extremist communists.
Among the number of political parties, organizations of communists are largest in number competing for mainly city-centered extreme opinions. According to present political set up, there are two largest communist parties - CPN-UML and Nepal Communist Party Maoists and there are other eight factions and groups.
Two other fronts consist of seven communist parties and one small communist party confined to Bhaktapur District of the valley. Under United People’s Front, there are Unity Center , Nepal Communist Party Masal and United People’s Front (Subedi). Under the United Left Front (ULF), there are five parties including the recent break away group of CPN-ML. Other parties under the ULF are Nepal Communist Party (United), Nepal Communist Party (Marxist) and Nepal Communist Party Marxist, Leninist and Maoists and CPN-ML and CPN-ML (breakaway).
The wide base of monarchy, even if rejected in elections of constitutional assembly, will be there as an influential bloc. One cannot completely wipe out monarchical opinion from the country.
Strangely, no major parties even Nepali Congress, which has a history of backing constitutional monarchy and Rastriya Prajatantra Party and Rastriya Jansakti Party, both groomed under monarchial leadership, have not shown any courage to speak to represent the monarchial opinion.
Although it is small and comparatively new, RPP-Nepal-which is led by Rabindra Nath Sharma, is championing the opinion of constitutional monarchy facing threats of CPN-Maoist, Communists and republican cadres of Nepali Congress. “Our party stands for constitutional monarchy. Nepal needs institution of monarchy not in absolute form but as ceremonial, symbolic or constitutional form,” said president of RPP-Nepal Rabindra Nath Sharma
Now it is up to political parties to find out their own mass base and ventilate the opinion of that category of general people through their political means.
Whatever communists and extreme elites say about the republicanism, it is still urban phenomenon. “We cannot imagine the country without King,” said Dhan Bahadur Air of Dipayal of Doti District. “We don’t know how the Ganatantra will be.” From east to west, overwhelming majority of people still see there is no alternative to monarchy.
Monarchy Vs Republican
As has been the trend in the past, the communism does not have broader appeal in the mind of people in rural areas. As all communists have similar stand for republican model, support for this model may not be easy and spontaneous because of its involvement with the outmoded communist ideology.
 |
Late King Birendra with then UML PM late Adhikary : Scene from the past |
“Monarchy too is outmoded but it has been able to transform itself from traditional to modern constitutional monarchy as illustrated above. Nepal ’s monarchy has also been surviving because it has resilience to transform in accordance with the time and situation. The institution of monarchy does not have rigidity,” said the analyst.
Nepal has seen two major political changes in terms of transformation of power through the popular uprising of Janandolan I and Janandolan II, the monarchy, though was humiliated; still survives as an institution of continuity.
“The communist ideology, unfortunately, has not transformed itself into a multi-party plural democracy. Not in a single developed democracy, communism has been chosen by the people to rule themselves. Communism has nowhere been democratized successfully while trying to do so, that it has been overthrown by the popular mandate. Present Russia is a glaring example of it. Taking all these factors into consideration, one can have a reasonable prediction about the republican model which they have decided to follow,” said the analyst.
Even in Nepal , though all communists have been preaching for multi-party competitive democracy but in practice they have been doing the opposite - not allowing their competitors to contest the elections.
A great upheaval has recently shaken up society up to its foundation. Political force of moderation like Nepali Congress is yet to realize where lays its genuine interest. “Even if we have dispute with monarchy, we should not work to overthrow the monarchy. We have to clearly draw the line where we have dispute with monarchy and where we have commonality and responsibility to protect it,” said B.P. Koirala.
“ Nepal does not have a politician of that height and depth of late B.P. Koirala who had a firm opinion - stating that the monarchy could not be matter of an issue in the elections. But that concept was violated under the leadership of his own brother Girija Prasad Koirala who led the situation to put the monarchy as a matter of choice in the elections,” said the analyst.
The division of the opinions on the question of monarchy is undesirable but now it has come as a fait accompli due to short sighted and unwise leadership. Now it is up to the people to put the matter of monarchy into right perspective and maintain its continuity with adequate democratic change.
