Erosion Of Political Culture
In the big bad world of Nepali politics, everybody is a fair game where prime minister humiliates the King and his minister humiliate him
By KESHAB POUDEL
"Don't say King Gyanendra, just say Gyanendra," thundered prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala to Nepalese and foreign journalists while he was in New Delhi last month to attend Summit of South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
"There is a problem in declaring republic because 20 percent of the King's rights and privileges are intact. However, 80 percent of his rights have been clipped. When even those remaining rights are ended, the nation will be declared a republic," prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala said in Biratnagar last week.
Few months ago, he also advised the King as well as the crown prince to abdicate for an infant as a successor from his home town Biratnagar.
When Koirala is expressing his wrath against monarchy and King Gyanendra, his ministers and other leaders of eight parties are using similar derogatory words against him. The following are but few examples:
"Prime minister Koirala snatched eighty percent of power from King but he is keeping it with him as a dictator," said minister of Forest and Soil Conservation Matrika Yadav (Rajdhani May 14). Minister Yadav goes on to say: "Girija Prasad is protecting the
smugglers."
"Girija Prasad Koirala is all powerful but he is inefficient and weak in terms of his health," said CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal (Kantipur May 22).
"Girija Prasad must understand that he would be thrown away by King Gyanendra if he does not declare republic," said Maoist leader Mohan Kiran Vaidya.
“While speaking, a person like prime minister must not forget how much he might have lost the essence and dignity of the Office of Prime Minister. The monarchy is yet getting all purse from the tax payers pocket as usual. There might be some personal vendetta against the person Gyanendra but as long as he has privilege of the institution, it is unbecoming for an official like prime minister to express such arrogance,” said a political analyst. "Unfortunately, prime minister is also getting worst treatments from his ministers in the cabinet in public."
Though Koirala is projected as a dictator, he is too weak in real terms. Even senior leaders of eight party alliances like CPN-UML general secretary Nepal and Maoist leader Prachanda are using disrespectful language against Koirala.
The level has deteriorated so much that prime minister is accused by minister just as prime minister uses derogatory remarks against the King. While the artistic statues of previous Kings of Nepal including King Prithvi Narayan Shaha the great, whom the credit goes not only for a unified and independent nation but who was the only person to resist expansion of British imperialists in South Asia, were being destroyed, prime minister Koirala, who is commanding the support of nominated persons of the parliament was at his full throat to declare that the monarchy had reduced to its 20 percent credential.
"One is not sure how much percentage prime minister has on his size when his own chosen apprentice in the cabinet like Krishna Bahadur Mahara, Matrika Yadav and so many others are faltering his authorities without any precedents in the past and violating all norms of cabinet system's team spirit," said the analyst. "Things are going on parallel in this country. Prime minister is free to speak whatever comes in his tongue and ministers and his party men are free to flout the prime ministerial system as well as any norm, decency and decorum of political team."
Being a team leader of eight party government, prime minister Koirala is responsible for all those acts of the.
"He is too old and, therefore, unable to diagnose the situation and to take prompt and appropriate decision to deal with that. The country is suffering by his health and age. Sooner he retires, better it would be to find out appropriate person to lead," said the analyst.
Nepal is in a crisis not only by sabotage and destruction by terrorists and anarchical elements but by deterioration in the political norms and behavior, too.
The way discontents and differences are being expressed by the mob in the streets, in educational institutions, factories and industries have made negative contributions in the crisis of this country but our politicians in power are no less in their negative role for the deterioration of political norms and behaviors adding fuel to the fire.
The way politicians are coming out to the public through unruly behaviors and utterances have saddened people. Leaders who are supposed to set examples of behavior - are destroying those values. "The more one is at responsible position, the more gravity and wisdom is expected from him or her. The prime minister has at present more power and authority which was confound upon him by the constitution statutory than the previous constitution," said the analyst.
According to previous constitution, prime minister could be removed from the power by just a simple majority but there is no provision in interim constitution to remove prime minister. But in practice, the realty is demonstrated in a very unruly and unbecoming manner.
The relation of eight political parties is not based on any ideology or principle. Only the greed for power and opportunities are holding them together.
"The country is going through systematic and consistent destruction of institutions and disregard for laws and disciplines maintaining the continuity of destabilization since the beginning of Maoist movement in 1996. Actors have changed their paraphernalia but there is no change in the trend of systematic destruction and destabilization. Previously there was parliamentary government to defend the establishment and to defend the infrastructures and institutions," said the analyst. "The latest casualty is mega project Melamchi in which donors were considering to fulfill water demands of 3.5 million people of Kathmandu valley. Now the sabotage has been done by the minister while the prime minister is silent or helpless spectator."
Democracy is not only a form of government but also a way of life, which develops step by step and with precedents after precedents. Whatever is practiced at present may be established as a precedent to be followed by the successive generation. It is a kind of habit formation under certain rules and norms.
Nepal had two parallel forms of political precedents: one was the traditional autocratic political culture where everything was done under the command of superior.
After the beginning of democratic system in 1951, a new political trend was established, which requires adequate patience and tolerance, compromise and concessions based on popular consent and the laws evolved according to that. Nepal is under going through these two different trends under the influence of established precedents.
"Apart from all other problems at present, politicians themselves have become another set of problem as an unruly class. Commitment for democracy does not go even skin deep when it comes to deal with the adverse views. Every day other problems of the country are made more and more complicated either by wrong diagnosis or wrong treatment. Politicians who are in power have been put into such a difficult quagmire that every body needs a scapegoat and every body has their own wishful solution," said the analyst.
ICG Analysis
While the Maoists have accepted multiparty democracy and have lost their appetite for all-out war, they could still resort to physical confrontation if the peace process stagnates, an international analysis group said.
'Nepal's Maoists: Purists or Pragmatists,' the latest report by the International Crisis Group (ICG), states their entry into democratic politics – working alongside mainstream parties to force the king to relinquish power in April 2006 and joining a coalition government one year later – has brought them new influence and opportunities.
However, some Maoists fear they have traded in their principles and military power for little tangible advantage, the report said. "Making the political process work is up to other actors as much as the Maoists", the report quoted Rhoderick Chalmers, Deputy Director of Crisis Group's South Asia Project as saying.
"If the mainstream parties are committed to the peace agreement and keep their side of the bargain, Maoist leaders will find it much easier to persuade their followers that compromise is the best way forward," he further says.
The report further states that the Maoists always said their campaign would adapt classical Marxism and Maoism to suit the context of Nepal but now they argue that they can carry out a 'peaceful revolution' that is true to their aims but also reflects political realities. In this light, joining the parliamentary parties and pushing for a bourgeois 'democratic republic' is just a stepping stone towards a true 'people's republic'. They hope to use the constituent assembly process to restructure the state, secure a dominant position within the multiparty system and move toward their ultimate goal, the report says.
The decision to join mainstream politics stemmed from an analysis of the Maoists' own strategic weaknesses who concluded that their belief in military victory had been misplaced, acknowledged that they had misread the likelihood of determined international opposition, and drew lessons from the failures that caused the collapse of many twentieth-century communist regimes, the report added.
