Revamp bureaucracy

It appeared as though Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, who also looks after thea General Administration portfolio, was merely going through a formality when he told parliament the other day that the "reformed" organisational and structural set up of ministries was in its final stage. One does not bring about changes in the organisation and structure of ministries unless the goal is to: reduce costs, make austerity measures more effective; and enhance efficiency by strengthening the delivery mechanism. Unfortunately, the reality is that since the past three months that the Koirala government has been in office, there have hardly been any changes worth the name in terms of efficiency of the bureaucracy nor has there been any perceptible reduction in government expenses.

With the new financial year due next month, government costs are expected to soar even higher as the salaries of government employees have been substantially raised. Though employees do deserve higher salaries to lead a decent life, there is no denying the fact that government expenses need to be cut with or without the pay hike. It is this reason more than anything else that calls for organisational and structural changes. Without these changes it will be impossible to ensure that the civil service is there to deliver and that people get the best possible service from the bureaucracy.

First and foremost, if any new changes in the bureaucracy are to be brought about, care must be taken to avoid reforms from being merely cosmetic. They must be for real and designed to benefit the people if they are to be considered as relevant. The government must recognise the dire need to streamline the manner in which it has been functioning. Obviously, one of the very first steps in any move to reform the ministries, bureaucracy and other government bodies will have to involve cutting down on unnecessary expenses. Ministries cannot be allowed to continue to run up unaccounted expenses without the responsible persons having to answer for them. The new set up should also ensure that government employees are evaluated properly without any bias and the evaluation is based purely on their performance. It should however be understood that no matter how enticing the changes to be effected are, everything will depend on the commitment and will of political leaders to ensure that they produce results. If the present tendency among political leaders to bless the corrupt and lazy officials with patronage is to continue, no amount of "reforms" can bring about qualitative changes in the bureaucracy.

No threat from Palace, Army

By K S Brar

Many politicians feel and have declared that there is a serious threat to our 10-year-old democracy, mainly from two quarters, viz, the palace and the army. Many parties even conducted discussions and meetings whether there was any threat of army coup, especially following the military takeover in Pakistan. Whenever anything goes wrong in the country, the finger is automatically pointed out at the palace. This is particularly the case after the restoration of multiparty system. Palace naturally means the monarchy or that is the understanding of the general public. We have felt, experienced and seen this tendency over the last ten years. Many have done this either to camouflage their own mistakes, shortcomings and weaknesses or to draw and divert the public attention from the real national issues. In fact for many politicians and print media bashing the monarchy and the army has become a familiar hobby over the years. Any piece of normal news is sensitized, exaggerated, twisted and magnified with the clear aim of discrediting or maligning the particular institution rather than informing and educating the public.

The real threat to our 10 years old democracy has not, does not and will not come from either the monarchy/palace or the army. This we can safely say from the dignified behaviour and extraordinary respect to the system shown by the monarch in these last ten years. The supreme display of unique tolerance to all sorts of bitter and scathing critique from many individuals and organizations on various occasions has further enhanced people’s confidence in the institution of monarchy. Many did exercise their brain and sweated a lot to drag the monarchy into extreme political controversy on several occasions. In spite of extreme pressures from many quarters, internal as well as external, to support one group or the other, the monarchy stood ever firm for the larger interest of the nation. This has forced even the anti-monarchist and undemocratic forces to accept and respect monarchy as an inevitable national institution above politics.

This is how the monarchy occupies a unique position in this country. In fact it is the strongest asset, not a threat, to democracy. The monarchy has endured, sustained and strengthened the democratic institution and enhanced its values, norms and principles of democracy. The monarch has been at ease even when his personal prestige were at stake and even anti-monarchist have found him magnanimous through all ups and downs in the process of exercising and protecting constitutional procedures.

Within these last ten years there is a growing tendency to bring the army into controversy of one sort or the other. This is done in order to project it as another threat, next to palace, to democracy. A penetrating analysis into the wider aspect of national integrity tells that Nepal army has been playing an unique role since the country’s unification. Not to be biased, Nepal army has bled to blend and harmonize the diverse social, ethnic, communal, cultural and linguistic groups into one homogenous organization, always ready and rolling whenever its service and sacrifice is demanded by the nation. Even after the restoration of multiparty system Nepal army has answered the call of the government--whether for internal or external duties. As an integral organization of the government, the army cannot neglect or ignore to abide by the constitutional rules of the government to implement its policy. As students of history know, army in this country has neither the will nor the desire to involve itself into politics. Thus it too has proved itself to be an asset, and not a threat, to democracy.

The present systematic campaign of criticizing the army on trivial issues by some of the local print media trying to present and project it as against the democratic procedures of the country could be aiming at tearing the very fabric of our social structure. In this country there is no other organization that has successfully amalgamated our multi-ethnic cultural and multiracial linguistic groups into one single cohesive institution with very high degree of esprit de core as the army has been. Because of this unique characteristic Nepalese would still like to believe that the army can give a robust response to any call (of the government) whenever demanded of them. The little exercise, internal or external, to destabilize the traditional set-up of command, control and leadership in the army just to serve some petty personal interest could threaten not only the convergent structure of this institution but also the democratic institution and finally, the integrity of the nation. In a young democracy like ours, there is a dire need of a strong backup force to foster liberal and democratic culture particularly in this transitional phase to fall back on if a threat develops. Nepal army, at this juncture, should start winning greater confidence from multiple quarters to prove itself a high quality professional army ready to provide a robust response as a combat effective fighting machine.

The self interested element bent on discrediting the army should instead stop screeching and hurting it and start caring, sharing and sacrificing to improve and upgrade the public standing by solid support which the army should also seek for. This army under the leadership of the monarchy and accountable to the people belongs to the nation. Therefore hurling constant criticism, fabricated and twisted for cheap popularity, will not bolster democratic set up, rather it would weaken the bedrock on which the young democracy should find a firm base. Criticizing, demoralizing and publishing unfounded information of any security and law enforcing agency is a risk and threat to the national interest. Army must be kept as an unknown quantity to produce an instant and constant result whenever and for whatever reason the government decides to mobilize. It must be kept ready to respond at short notice to provide full security to the people and protect the public property with undoubted effectiveness besides its primary responsibility of safeguarding the national borders. In the last ten years we have seen the army disinterested in the political infighting, groupism and internal bickering and firm not to take sides. Remaining apolitical does not mean possessing a threat to democracy.

Yes, our young democracy suffers from other multiple threats but not from the monarchy/palace or the army. Let as see where the threat really comes from. The first major threat to the smooth functioning of democracy in our country is the total lack of ethics, ie a system of moral principle or rules of behaviour. This is something which cannot be forced by the rules/laws made in the parliament. This is a strong moral courage not to kill one’s conscience. This should come from the top and should filter down with honesty, which is totally lacking today. Lack of ethics has led to political corruption and bankruptcy reinforced by intellectual and moral bankruptcy.

Rampant corruption at all layers of state machinery has frustrated the public so much that they have developed disenchantment towards the system itself. It has badly weakened the growth of national economy and instead encouraged criminal activities, breakdown of proper law and order providing good incentive for centrifugal political tendencies in the country. The flagrant lawlessness and criminal threats to the legitimacy or integrity of the state agencies has provoked a citizen’s backlash of sorts, facilitating the rapid growth of extremist and authoritarian movements that has promised to re-establish their own order and fairness.

In this respect organized crime has presented a particular threat to the growth of young democracy. Our government regulatory agencies and state business codes have become weak and powerless due to political meddling and the organized crimes have thrived. Furthermore, the law enforcement agencies have tended to be demoralized, underpaid, underfunded and ill-equipped. As a result, laws have become simply ineffective. Such a situation has encouraged the offer and acceptance of bribes, as well as the use of violence by organized gang against honest law enforcement officials. The resultant atmosphere of flagrant lawlessness has hollowed out the support for democratization and free markets, discouraged proper investment, retarded economic growth and rendered some parts of the country fertile grounds for undemocratic and destructive forces. Innocent and ignorant people have been attracted to their sweet slogans. The criminals, saboteurs, and radicals are the greatest threat to our democratic system today. The financial mismanagement, uncontrolled population explosion, huge external debt, increasingly wide gap between the haves and have nots and the lingering refugee problems are serious threats to our democracy. Other threats include weak, immature, irregular and uncompromising (might is right attitudes) self interest, fully politicized civil service, growing and uncontrolled proliferation of religious activities, rising rivalries among ethnic and racial groups, unchecked external influence in our internal affairs, and the total crisis of leadership and lack of national consensus on national issues.

If monarchy is providing stability, encouragement and incentive to our democracy, army is the best, strongest and most sustainable bridge amongst different ethnic, communal and linguistic groups. Although it is said there is no alternative to democracy for meeting people’s expectation, people here are threatened from multiple crises. So they are waiting, expecting the leadership first to establish an atmosphere of peace and security and then provide two meals a day. Political parties must work out consensus to address such pressing issues with total commitment and discipline. Only high sounding words and thundering public rhetoric without political will and national commitment will not tackle the problem.

Lila in democracy

By Basanta P Rijal

Lila is a drama; of course fake, to make others fool. Late King Mahendra did Lila for thirty years and people enjoyed the fake democracy of his type. It was quite new even to the political philosophers. Nebraska character democracy with unicameral legislator was party less and under the capable dynamic leadership of the King. This Lila sustained for thirty years.

Hindu theological books have lauded the Lila of many gods. The conclusion of Ramayana says, Rama had neither lost his consort Sita nor Ravana kidnapped her. It was only the Lila of Vishnu in the form of Rama. His Lila was ended with the death of Ravana. Lord Krishna in Dwapar Yug (bronze age) convinced his disciple Arjun that he had only two options, to do or not to do. No third option, like the relativity theory of Einstein, had been proposed. According to Krishna, Arjun was not killing his opponents. It was only his Lila, which would end after the purge of millions of human beings in the battlefield of Kurukshetra.

Lord Vishnu is also addressed as Janardan. The King in Hinduism is considered equal to Lord Vishnu. Thus, he is also Janardan. So a king can perform Lila. Democracy has declared that the Janta are Janardan. As a representative of Janta Janardan, the leaders too have started to perform their Lila. They say the people have enjoyed democracy. Now people can eat the data food of development to be offered them in the golden plate of the budget lecture. In the same way, all leaders, of course in the time of necessity, are one in all when there are some things to be divided among them. They do not even think of punishing girl traffickers although they do Lila promising to control it. They are the protectors of corruption, as none of us have smelled their real intention to curb it. Some of them, like Yamaraj (Death God in Hinduism) on his bull charging against corruption and others swear they will control it. Now they looked like Dattatraya Gods in Bhaktapur city living under the same roof doing their Lilas.

They are one in all. They are like creator Brahma. They can create the problems. They are like protector Vishnu. They can protect the problems. Also they are like destroyer Shiva. They can destroy the faith of the people in democracy. They can destroy religious and communal harmony. They can destroy the image of the motherland itself.

The Lila of Rama existed for fourteen years and ended with the slaying of Ravana. Rama’s time was the zenith of Aryan civilization. Our democracy is also ten years old and is at its greatest height to make people aware. We have to wait four more years for their Lila to end. Religious books say that Krishna, the Lila performer, was assassinated although unknowingly, by a hunter.

The development in itself is an evolution, thinkers say.

Punditry and quackery no answer

By M R Josse

How many of you have encountered quacks in Kathmandu hovering around Tundikhel or Dharahara? Believe me, there are more than a gaggle of that sturdy breed around at any one given time.

Glut: Unfortunately, there are even more gullible people who not listen raptly to the marketing spiel of those con artistes but who then dip into their pockets and buy their spurious panaceas, good for enhancing sexual prowess as well as curing cancer!

This columnist was somehow reminded of those flim flam characters while chewing idle cud over the sparkling pearls of wisdom that occasionally drop from the ruby lips of our dear politicos, specially when they are wont to diagnose the maladies affecting this beloved country of ours, including the Maoist affliction.

Take, for example, UML boss man Madhav Kumar Nepal’s latest pronouncements on the Maoist insurgency. More than four years — and 1,300 plus deaths — after the Maoists’ "People’s War" hit the headlines, the usually perceptive analyst and leader of the political opposition in parliament declared that the Maoist insurgency had surfaced due to the distortions in the democratic process in the past ten years.

Elaborating on that fascinating thesis he added that even the elite who had "exclusively benefited" from it were not totally satisfied with the achievements of the past decade.

In his memorable words: "We have neither been able to fulfil the people’s expectations after the restoration of democracy nor exercised democratic rights properly."

Going even further, and in a burst of refreshing candour, he put out this startling mea culpa: "The problem lies with political parties themselves." Note that he did not blame politicians.

Another political stalwart — to wit, Speaker Taranath Ranabhat — came out with the opinion that successive governments over the past ten years had largely failed to discharge constitutional obligations such as relate to law-making.

Then, with reference to the awesome M. challenge, NC’s Ranabhat in a rare burst of self-confession let it be known to all and sundry that the disparate views on the problem within the ruling party have hindered its resolution.

However, by declaring that "if the problem is not solved immediately, terrorism is likely to stay here" he elliptically equated Maoists with terrorists in a clear departure from the new NC stance that the Maoist problem is political in essence.

Notably, at the time of writing, one is also informed that the NC’s brilliant political doctors on its Central Working Committee have yet to agree on a prescription to treat the rare Maoist disease — presumably because, as Ranabhat has hinted, there are divergent views on what that dread illness is actually all about.

Poverty: From my news clipping file I see that former prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba stated at a recent colloquium in Kathmandu that the Maoist problem could be attributed to "rampant poverty, unemployment and social discrimination." Wow!

If that penetrating diagnosis is accurate, may one ask NC’s point man designated to deal with the Maoists whether "rampant poverty, unemployment and social discrimination" were not extant during the bad old days of the partyless panchayat order? Why then, wasn’t there any "People’s War" at that period?

To continue with that stream of impertinent thought, could one venture to question: why did the "People’s War" surface in February 1996, or six years after the Jana Andolan and not, say, a year or two later? Was hope for a fairer and gentler Nepal still flickering in the breasts of the toiling masses until the magic of the Jana Andolan was replaced by the alluring promises inherent in the Jana Yuddha in 1996? At what point exactly did such hope die — and why?

What were the specific social, political and cultural conditions obtaining in February 1996 that were particularly congenial to the birth of the Maoist insurgency? Was the Maoist virus indigenous to, or immured in, Nepal’s political ecology or was it imported, and, if so, from where — and why?

Returning to the airy punditry of our politicians, one notes that Rajeshwar Devkota of RPP (Chand) has diagnosed the M. disease as political and has suggested the helpful prescription that it be treated politically — whatever that might mean in detailed or concrete terms.

Incidentally, a similar prescription was offered by UML’s Som Nath Pandey, chairperson of parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Human Rights Committee, when he opined at a public function recently that a resolution of the problem should be sought "at the political level" because it is "a political crisis".

There is, once again and naggingly, no explanation as to how there can be a meeting of minds between those who subscribe to the present Constitution — which embraces a multi-party system functioning within a constitutional monarchy — and those to whom both political attributes or values are akin to hemlock.

And what about the RPP? To recall, on 9 March this year a RPP delegation met the then home minister and presented him with a memorandum which sought "immediate and concrete steps by HMG for distribution of relief in an impartial and transparent way to people affected by Maoist violence and police oppression..."

There was no explanation of how all that was to be done in what is by all neutral accounts virtually a civil war situation.

In short: Clearly, Maoists have the Establishment on the run. It is they who call the shots. They decide when and where to strike and in what form. While HMG and mainstream politicians appear confused, contradictory, divided, even hopelessly naive, Maoists come across as clear-headed, determined and supremely confident.

The time for shallow punditry and political quackery is thus long past as reported desertions from the police force also grimly underline. But when, if ever, will our politicians, particularly those in the ruling party, realise as much?