Responsibility needed

The other day, some political leaders and senior bureaucrats traded charges regarding the ineffective performance of the civil service. This certainly reinforces the general perception that the country's civil service seriously lacks accountability and is riddled with inefficiency and rampant corruption in all sectors. It is not that successive governments were unaware of this fact. However, the glaring truth is that none of them have taken steps to reform the civil service in order to provide quick, efficient and effective service to all. It is because of this neglect on the part of the government that  things have deteriorated to the extent that it will be an extremely difficult task, if not an impossible one, for any government that attempts to reform the country's administrative system.

There are a number of things unnecessary political interference and rampant corruption and political protection for the unscrupulous- that have rendered the country's civil service virtually non-functioning. This has arrested economic growth, affected changes and encouraged dishonesty in the service. In fact, there is a nexus between political leaders and bureaucrats which has been eating at the roots of development and administrative performance. This apart, nepotism, cronyism and sycophancy are other factors that have led to the degeneration of the bureaucracy. Bureaucrats run around political bosses to fulfill

their vested interests instead of implementing the rules and regulations. Political leaders order transfer of civil servants and also act as if they are the administrators at the time of appointment.

The Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) the corruption fighting body has also become a tool in the hands of political leaders to protect themselves from corruption charges. With every change of guard there are massive changes in state owned corporations which have been turned into recruitment centres by political leaders.

They have not only spoilt the environment of government offices but also encouraged moves to sack the appointees of previous governments in the name of providing good governance

by replacing them with new appointees. Due, largely to this,   government offices have become overstaffed; and this is no doubt a chronic problem.

It is true that the government has come out with no concrete plans or measures to prevent overstaffing. Neither has it made efforts to reform the bureaucracy nor have the two committees formed by successive governments come up with recommendations to reform the administration. Besides, political leaders and bureaucrats have also failed to live up to the expectations of people. The political party in power must recognise that it is the duty of the government to provide effective and efficient service to people. For this, it has to introduce measures and implement laws that prevent corruption, political interference and overstaffing. If it fails to do so, it is definitely not fulfilling its responsibility.

Ogata and Bhutanese refugees

By R P Subba

Despite consistent efforts to solve the Bhutanese refugee problem, the crisis has sustained for ten long years. All possible avenues have been tried from all quarters. The Bhutanese refugees who are at the core of the problem have tried their best to make their voices heard but in vain. Sincere efforts pursued by the Nepalese Government through bilateral means were frustrated due to the Thimphu government's unilateral stand to get its own views accepted in the talks. The efforts made by the international community too have miserably failed to deliver any sense of responsibility to the Bhutanese regime. Under such circumstances, it will be difficult to say with any certainty whether any peaceful solution can be forthcoming. 

UNHCR: Months after UNHCR High Commissioner, Sadako Ogata visited Bhutan and the refugee camps in Jhapa, there appears no bright prospects for the repatriation process in sight. Speaking at Beldangi camp, Ogata had publicly assured the refugees that repatriation would take place very soon. She also assured  UNHCR's support would be forthcoming if the deciding parties felt necessary. Her motive was good and humanitarian. The assurances were taken seriously by  Bhutanese refugees. Around the refugee camps, Ogata is still remembered and her assurances recalled. Even the Nepalese Government and aid agencies working in the camps were delighted. Her address was taken as a  new beginning. The expectations were simply too high. Whether or not her mission will lead to any meaningful action, is for time to test. 

At present, UNHCR is hard pressed to do something very urgent. In honestly apprising the Bhutanese authorities, Ogata placed her own image and that of UNHCR's at the stake. This forces the UNHCR to make the case of repatriation of   Bhutanese refugees a priority. But UNHCR seems to be heavily pitted against odds with Bhutan if the events occurring inside the kingdom, should offer any insight into the regime's real intentions. On the day Ogata was delivering her speech at Beldangi refugee camp, Bhutanese authorities were busy shifting six trucks of northern Bhutanese for new settlement in the lands left behind by the refugees in Chirang district. After Chirang, priority has been shifted to Samchi district where the resettlement strategy is now focused. Resettlement in Dagana, Sarbhang and Samdrupjongkhar districts have almost been completed. 

The 8th round of Nepal-Bhutan bilateral talks, which took place in the background of Ogata's visit to Bhutan too, achieved nothing despite the euphoria it had generated. The much awaited 78th National Assembly session actually indicated a drive in the reverse gear. The government has failed to appreciate the symbolic meaning of international cooperation intended solve the problems of its making. 

It is a recognised fact that the Bhutanese regime plays its game through doublespeak. Its actions bear a purpose and a mission. By behaving well with Ogata, the regime intended to deflate international opinion going against Bhutan and through the resettlement program, the regime intended to revoke the right of citizens to return. This was apparent in the decision of the recent National Assembly session, which categorized all refugees as 'terrorist groups'. This is indicative of the mental poverty running the show in Bhutan. The regime has failed to understand that terrorists will participate in anything but peaceful rallies. Neither would peaceful demonstrators take up terrorist activities. It is clear that the regime's only goal is to immobilize the opposition or to block the efforts for the repatriation of refugees. 

Under the present scenario, it is anyone's guess that UNHCR may be facing the following dilemma, namely, whether to serve as a conduit for the return of the refugees en masse or to adopt a simple face saving strategy. Circumscribed, as it is, the UNHCR might compromise on the first and adopt the second. It has been currently sensed that the issue of prestige has become more important to UNHCR than the issue of repatriation.

Therefore, it would not be very surprising if the UNHCR came up with a request proposal to the Royal Government of Bhutan to accept back the smallest fraction of refugees. Numbers, not repatriation has become the actual matter of concern. The possible time frame for such repatriation  is December 2000 when Ogata's term in office ends. Such a strategy would hurt rather than help the cause of  Bhutanese refugees.   Given the UNHCR's position,   Bhutan will further encouraged to manipulate. Given the regime's traditional position on refugees, it is unlikely that Bhutan will ever agree or concede to voluntarily repatriate a single individual to Bhutan.

Nepal: This is also not in the interest of Nepal. The Nepalese government is very fearful about assimilating Bhutanese refugees. This is because Nepal essentially views that it is not going to be an issue of one hundred thousand Bhutanese refugees only. Assimilating the Bhutanese refugees means opening the floodgates for over ten million Nepali speaking people living outside Nepal. Political conditions force people to move into Nepal even if the economic circumstances do not encourage it. There are still three hundred thousand Bhutanese Gorkhas in Bhutan whose next destiny will be Nepal. With the anti-foreigner movement picking up sporadic intensity in the northeast, already some people are pouring into Nepal. Similar  types of people can come from Assam, Burma and elsewhere.

Nepali speaking population settled outside Nepal have never been very stable. Such inflow of outsiders into Nepal will definitely cause severe strain on the limited resources in Nepal. It will also have its own share of political problems. Nepal must strongly guard against any tendency to assimilate outsiders. 

Therefore, for Nepal, Bhutanese refugees symbolize just the tip of the iceberg. The issue needs timely and proper treatment.  This is where the repatriation of Bhutanese refugees becomes important. The repatriation must be complete and has to take place soon. On top of this, the Nepalese government must encourage any genuine effort made by refugees to assert their right to return.

How great Kathmanduites are

By Keshab Raj Acharya

Backbiting is a very easygoing business. As we start speaking of somebody, besides some exceptions, we plunge into peeling off the mean aspects of the person more than giving a cursory glance to the worthy ones. It is still easier to hold such business on the democratic government.

No matter who bag the chairs in the cabinet, the government is for all. What is noteworthy is that if we and our party are at bay we quickly develop a negative approach. Many times we happen to speak ill of it and even sometime we curse it and spit at it even if it is on the right track. The present government has just announced the def budget, but for whom? The stevedore knot of friendly affairs with neighbouring countries has been tightened, but for whom? The remuneration has been propagated over the expectation, but for whom? Aren't all these even for those who throw down the gauntlet against the government?

A few years back, water pollution seized the mirth of the then government. With a think on the impending bad results, a bulky project swung round the Bagmati. We must not forget that the Melamchi will flow at every corner of Kathmandu city very soon. But for this, some parties lulled donor agencies and other laughed at them scornfully. But the people-service-oriented government never did fall asleep. After it maturies, how beautiful will be clean, green and healthy Kathmandu! How sturdy and wealthy will Kathmanduites be.

Though not pre-planned, the roads here get decked as  soon as hollows appear. I wonder if you can remove the mask to show the lovely smile on the pavement. Do we know how much garbage, rubbish, sewage and excrement the government pains to dump? Whatever may be the case, the government has courageously faced even unprecedented challenges. Government's working will always light the lamp of progress and development. But still why do we stare at it? Why do we scoff at it? It is okay not to let it go astray. To scourge the government to catch the right track is our onus but can't we, sometimes, speak for it?

Being choked by the lethal air pollution, the government was shocked and tried to release us from suffocation. Two three years back, the then government forecast that Kathmandu would very soon be pregnated by dark, formless, mute and terrifying form of smoky lethal monstrosity.

So smoke-checking system was carried out and Bikram tempos received adieu to be garlanded by the outlying cities. Recently, new and novel plans have been born and credited. The reveries of been revamped. Thanks to the Prime Minister's intervention.

In order to quit our frequent communion with health workers, major factories and industries were  curtailed. The government is not trying to  lull us but to pull us in the path of development. But none looks

cheerful, rather sputter bitterly at it, why?

The long indefatigable endeavour of the government to make you feel you are living in the  second Switzerland. With them all the best. Thanks to the government for giving them prodigious birth to trot on the newly adorned streets of our clean, green and healthy Kathmandu. Our duty is to foster and coddle them as our own kids. How great Kathmanduites are! However, I still can't help praising the strategies of the government herein.

Improving environment for direct foreign investment

By KU & PK

In recent years, the scope of private investment has been broadened by the elimination of state monopolies. Privatization of public enterprises in several sectors has dominated the political and economic debate. In  the area of public enterprise reform, two basic approaches can be noted. The first one is directed towards dispossession and the other one, ie, for those retained, the emphasis was on greater managerial and financial autonomy as well as commercialization. Since the early nineties, the focus on reducing direct government intervention in pricing allocation of resources and production has also been experienced as the principle approach for privatization.

Substantial initiative has been taken throughout the nation for privatization because privatization has been given top priority. The government is increasingly focusing on the strengthening the legal framework of both laws and institutions to support those activities and make efforts to reform the legal and regulatory environment for business. In this context, the Privatization Act enacted in 1994 has had a beneficial effect, and the 'one window' policy implemented since 1993 has contributed significantly to limiting the constraints faced by foreign investors. One of the major setbacks for privatization of public enterprises, however, has been the inability of  relevant authorities to bring a set of rules and regulations to guide the privatization process. It is for this reason that despite the continuous effort of the government to attract direct foreign investment;  investors remain at arms length. The long process of decision making, lack of respect for international norms concerning bidding as well as transparency have been identified as some key hurdles on the way of privatization.

Apart from other regulatory steps, transparency is one basic element of the entire process which will strengthen privatization effort and provide the entire process a firm footing but this has been found to be grossly missing from the whole scenario of privatization. Lack of it has resulted in suspicion in the minds of potential investors which has resulted in the continuous weathering of confidence in the government. Rumours of corruption, favouritism as well as pressure on the part of donor agencies have to a certain extent, slowed the entire process of privatization. This would not have been the case if the government had issued a set of  rules and regulations which, it seems, the Ministry of Finance is planning to introduce within the next few months.

Clearly, if the legal or institutional infrastructure is weak, the consequence is likely to be that potential investors will be more risk-averse and as a consequence the influx of foreign technology and capital will be reduced. Foreign investors will be particularly concerned about the legal uncertainty. Private business needs to ensure that there is a reliable system available to enforce contracts that they may enter into. If not, on the one hand, foreign investors will be reluctant to deal with 'strangers' which is interpreted as the unknown laws and unknown parties, and on the other, pressure to integrate functions in-house will grow, even if such functions could be more efficiently provided by outsiders. Ultimately, consumers will be victimized.

Quite systematically, the measures to build confidence in an existing institutional framework should be accompanied by increasing attention to the functioning of the legal and judicial system itself which, however, has generally been marginal in Nepal. Reforming the system, indeed, is complex and time consuming, especially where there is a mix of traditional religious law, new legislation (often conflicting), and decrees, ordinances from the state apparatus which are subjected to frequent and haphazard modifications. On the whole, the application of laws and regulations yet remains relatively arbitrary and therefore an uncertain means of enforcing contracts. Moreover, difficulty in obtaining information about laws which is common throughout the country only but intensifies the problem.

Indeed, privatization is both a process and a transaction. To succeed as a process it needs a clear institutional authority, a stable set of rules such as selection, restructuring corporatization, employee rights, treatment of liabilities, right of foreign bidders and bidding procedures, and special laws defining and protecting the rights of the private sector. Translating these general principles into an effective legal framework remains a challenge for the government. Therefore, if the government wishes the country to continue achieving the goal of an efficient and successful privatization programme, more intensive but pragmatic approach needs to be adopted.

Meanwhile, the administrative position of the government should be non-discriminatory and should not jeopardize the interest of small entrepreneurs. The government machinery should ensure efficient and unbiased implementation of applicable procedures. It is being done but more needs to be done to build investor's confidence. If the need arises, there should be massive--real and visible--shake up in the bureaucracy in order to reduce red tape, to solve practical problems that the businesses face and to gain investor's total confidence. The government also needs to take honest initiative in shortening the time taken for making decisions because of which, in the past, several potential investors have shied away from Nepal and invested in neighbouring countries.

Nepal has so far privatized 17 public enterprises. Except for Agriculture Tools Factory, Raw Hide Collection and Processing Corporation and Biratnagar Jute Mills the privatized enterprises are doing fine. The success of Nepal Foundry, Bhrikuti Paper and Pulp Factory, Nepal Bitumin Factory has sent encouraging messages which need to be tapped. There are 43 other public enterprises to be privatized in the near future. The Ministry of Information and Communication (MOIC) has taken the lead in this contest. MOIC has sent a letter to the Privatization  Cell to initiate the privatization of Nepal  Telecommunication Corporation (NTC) which has been enjoying monopoly of the telecommunication sector. The other institution which MOIC wants to privatize is Gorkhapatra Corporation, the existence of which time and again sparks debate about state involvement in the publication industry.

In general, the privatization process in Nepal should be judged as successful. There are some sporadic instances of failure of some companies because of internal problems relating to management. In such instances, it is imperative to have alternative mechanism for problem solving. The implementing authority should encourage dispute resolution mechanism--inter alia, arbitration--to settle disputes between private parties and the government or between the private parties and employees. Nepal also needs to do some serious homework to frame a set of laws governing employees of private as well as public enterprises. Such a law should protect the legal, economic rights of   employees but it should also make them more responsible and disciplined because no investor wants labour unrest. Problems relating to labour unrest have been a major discouraging factor for direct foreign investors in many developing as well as developed countries and that could also apply in the case of Nepal.

Privatization is indeed a right step towards reducing state burden and curing the systemic illness of flow of scarce state resources in unproductive sectors. Government has, indeed, no business doing business but the government's business is to ensure the smooth operation and success of privatized enterprises. After all, it is the success story which will encourage private investors, either national or foreign, to step forward and invest.