Transparency and confusion

With the nation’s attention still rivetted on the monumental tragedy that overtook the royal palace the other day, not many people seem to be aware that another crisis is looming. The convulsions that seized the country’s educational sector a few weeks ago may see a replay if the authorities do not come up with a lasting solution to the problem. All Nepal National Free Students Union-Revolutionary (ANNFSU-R) closed down over 8,000 schools for a week in May, with the government looking on rather helplessly. Some of the ANNFSU-R demands were not very practical. But others made a great deal of sense even to those with school going children who suffered the most from the closure. As for the children, there has been another school closure since to mourn the demise of royalty. If the authorities do not deliver the goods, there may be yet more days of enforced idleness school-side. In view of what is at stake, another look at some of the nitty gritty involved would be worthwhile. One of the most contentious issues is tuition. The ANNFSU-R has been calling for a reduction of tuition fee by 50 percent. Another is the question of teacher salaries. The quality level of tuition is tied up with the amount of salary teachers get. There is also the question of school textbooks. And underlying all this is the disparity between public and private schools. The resulting two tier schooling system has serious implications for the future of the country in terms of the kind of educated manpower being turned out.

In light of all this and the industrial action resorted to by the Maoist-affiliated student organisation, the government formed a committee last month to study the problem and make a report. The committee whose term ends little over a week from now, has raised various questions. One of these is that of responsibility and transparency in the school system. That’s just as well. The question now is to what extend these concerns will be translated into practice. The committee will also consider classification of the schools, and the rights of headmasters and schools boards. While the committee is at work other committees have sprung up to grab a role for themselves. One of them is meant to assist the original committee, though it has yet to get started. PABSON is fielding a committee of its own. Not to be outdone the ANNFSU-R is to come out with a report also. Complicating the picture still further is the argument in some quarters that all this is superfluous as the seventh amendment to the education act has already been tabled in parliament. In fact the activities of the various committees might actually be harmful and get in the way of the new legislation. That the picture is confusing is bad enough. It will be even worse if the outcome of all this committee activity turns out to be similarly confusing at a time when the question of transparency at schools has been raised for the first time.

An end of an era

By Ratnakar Adhikari

Just to recapitulate, Their Majesties’ great great grandfathers not only ruled this hill-state in western Nepal more than 250 years ago, but also chalked out plans to unite many tiny states into modern Nepal from here. But now, the sudden demise of King Birendra, Crown Prince Dipendra and several other members of the Royal family recently, this historic mountain hub has been left aghast-literally.

There is a media reporting that the deserted they already were, the historic Shah dynasty palace - and the temples of Gorakhkali (goddess) and Baba Gorakhnath - looked more gloomy on last Saturday and Sunday when ashes were coming out from the funeral pyre of late Kings Birendra and Dipendra and Queen Aishwarya in Aryaghat, nearly 150 kilometres east of Gorkha.

Following the landmark victory over Kathmandu valley, Nuwakot, Makawanpur and several other states, the great King shifted his capital to Nuwakot, which was later moved to Kathmandu. The kingdom of Gorkha, founded by Dravya Shah in 1559 AD, was one of the most important ‘states’.

Multifaceted personality: What kind of a man was King Birendra? Regarding the question some neighbouring diplomats are of the view that basically a soft-spoken man who knew his word was law in his own land. During the hey days of Panchayat, he was conscious that his own people looked upon their king as the incarnation of Vishnu and his conduct in public life did nothing to damage this perception among his own subjects. He was not given to discourses on matters of state even when he was omnipotent during the Panchayat years. Unlike his father, the late King Mahendra, he could not be called a hands-on king and during the latter part of the partyless Panchayat system high officials in the palace came to wield increasing influence on the nominal government under the Panchayati prime minister.

The years 1988-89 were marked by a period of difficulty in Indo-Nepal bilateral relations brought about by the Nepal government’s unilateral abandoning of preferences granted to legitimate Indian trade. This is indeed not the time to reopen the wounds of that period beyond saying that the king knew that his government was leading him down the garden path but he did not assert himself to respect the independence of executive arm of the state, his own prime minister’s government.

The bloodless revolution of 1991 saw the end of the Panchayati form of government and the emergence of a multi-party democracy in Nepal. King Birendra managed the transition from an absolute monarch to a constitutional one, which owed as much to his temper as to his vision. He played the role of father figure to Nepal’s fractious parliamentarians and in turn they gave him loyalty and abided by his "advice" as several crises erupted in the running of the parliamentary system.

Nepal is a country criss-crossed by ethnic and cultural diversity. This diversity was bound together in the person of the king. He was the one undisputed person in the kingdom whose every wish was a command and whose word was law. Birendra quite evidently enjoyed being a king but took his duties in right earnest. He balanced his country delicately between two large neighbours although his advisors were often tempted to play the China card against India. He was able to rein them in but only up to a point. He knew India’s place in the overall context of Nepal’s regional and international relationships.

In the backdrop of already reeling from political instability and mounting challenge by Maoist guerrillas, former Indian Prime Minister I K Gujral said: "In the political turmoil in Nepal, King Birendra was the stabilizing influence". Former prime minister I K Gujral was a personal friend of the late king. Gujral, who met the king in December during a visit to Kathmandu, said he was shocked and surprised to learn that his son, Prince Dipendra, was responsible for the carnage in the Royal Palace. "The king had positive views about his son. He was preparing to go abroad for higher studies. The misfortune for Nepal has been that the multi-party democracy introduced more than ten years ago did not bring political stability to the country. The divisions in the old and largest political party in the country, the Nepali Congress, made things worse for democracy." King Birendra behaved like a constitutional king. He never interfered in the functioning of the government, after he gave up the powers of the monarchy voluntarily in favour of democracy.

It has been noted that the king was one of the few ‘absolute monarchs’ in the world who restored democracy and sincerely delegated powers to the government. "He acted with responsibility and in the midst of the instability in the political parties, he was the only source of stability in the country. His removal from the scene will lead to unforeseen repercussions because democracy has not as yet taken roots in the society".

Economic development: King Birendra was a sincere person keen on Nepal’s development and attempted to reform the education sector. But the nation still remained one of poorest countries in the world during his 29-years rule and reign.

King Birendra showed keen interest in the development of the country and at a very young age, he travelled all across the nation on foot to get first hand information on the state of the Nepalese. King Birendra pushed for regional cooperation in South Asia and some even credit him initiating for South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).

The late king inherited the partyless Panchayat system from his father late King Mahendra and put it to test in a referendum held in 1980 when people voted in favour of continuing the partyless system with reforms; the king enjoyed absolute powers in the partyless dispensation; the king gave the people an option to choose between the partyless system with reforms or reinstate multi-party democracy abolished in December 1960. A popular movement toppled the system in 1990 and restricted the power of the monarch.

"I am moving into uncharted territory," the king told on of the Indian correspondents at a meeting on the eve of the promulgation of the constitution on November 9, 1990. People at home and abroad and political parties rate the king highly for steering the country’s fledging democracy in the last 11 years. "His efforts at reforming the social system and the role of the Royal family members in business ventures will not go unnoticed." His step to set up five development regions designed to improve specifically the lives of the people of west Nepal, was a major development initiative. King Birendra had visualized the balanced development in all the regions."

King Birendra’s foreign policy initiative to declare Nepal a zone of peace was abandoned without explanation by successive governments after the restoration of multi-party democracy despite the support 116 countries, except India.

The king pushed for friendly ties with immediate neighbours China and India which slapped a 16 month economic sanction on Nepal in 1989 after importing Chinese arms for the Royal Nepal Army. The king was a widely travelled man and established personal rapport with world leaders who have mourned his death. The king, a paratrooper and helicopter pilot, visited every nook and corner of the country on foot and by air; during the Panchayat era he paid annual regional visits setting up camp at the five regional district headquarters to get a first hand knowledge of local problems and issues; the practice was discontinued after 1990.

In the sad demise of His Majesty King Birendra, Nepal has lost a true pioneer of development. So, in this state of grief let the Nepalese people untie to fight for the poverty and desperation prevailing in the country.

Time for great judgement

By Ghanashyam Ojha

Last Week passed by in all hue and cry in the street. After the shocking carnage that took place in the Royal Palace last Friday, people went agitated. The turbulent situation did not remain only in the Capital but shook the entire nation.

All the people were flanking the streets of the Capital in rage. Despite the tonsured heads showing utmost reverence for the late King, people resorted to violent protest in the streets. This street protest followed after rounds of protests few days back.

However, unlike the so called Hrithik-Roshan and Lauda scandals, the recent outburst of Royal carnage spurred people high. It not only prompted people to take to the streets but also go against Monarchy which has been respected as the emblem of unity among all Nepalis. The tear filled eyes and cross face were undoubtedly marks of sheer anguish people were undergoing. However, the agitated gathering went violent in its pursuit of truth about the incident.

Trend of pouring one’s anger in the streets is on rise in Nepal. It has turned so insidious that it has crippled the development of the nation. Another stark fact is that mostly children are being used in street protests. It might have worse repercussions on the childlike mind.

Besides the chaos it has created within the nation, it has tainted the image of our nation abroad too. Many countries which used to send citizens to Nepal for visit have been scary for the last few years. They have even warned their citizens to curtail their visits. A bleaker future for the tourist industry can be estimated here.

People are still mentally disturbed. Lots of rumours like poisoning of water and milk and killing of different personnels at the same time gripped the people tight. Such misleading rumours flared across the Capital and intimidated the people.

People have turned so sensitive, any rumour can flare up any time. It is an intense fear that the entire nation is being gripped by rumour. People’s judgement is thinning down every day by such rumours. Anything can happen anytime in such a crucial state.

People’s only hope, democracy, was brought at the cost of many lives and much property as well. Democracy is in oscillation between conflicting views at this hour. So the spurt of people’s anger cannot be ruled out at this time.

The new King has already pledged to preserve constitutional Monarchy in The Royal Speech which has already swept away all doubts .

It is high time for all political parties to come together and forge solidarity for the sake of the nation despite their nominal differences. People too have to make their will power and judgement strong so that they won’t be moved by any rumours. Lest we may be listed as the people of rumour-filled country where it is very dangerous to utter even a single word for its sake.

Doubts that will not down

By Kuldip Nayar

Burning pyres can bring out the poignancy of a tragedy. They can also underline the unknown elements in the slaughter of practically an entire royal family which was woven deeply into the warp and woof of Nepalese society.

True, King Birendra was a constitutional monarch since 1990. But his stock was growing in proportion to the notoriety the elected representatives were gaining. Why was he murdered in cold blood is the question. This will continue to haunt his countrymen and others for years. Shakespeare’s warning, "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown," was not inspired by fear of revolutionary ferment but by something else.

The high-powered inquiry will have to get answers to many questions and set at rest all doubts and suspicions. But will it? The opposition leader’s ‘No’ to serve on the committee has made the situation look murkier. Can anyone cover up the shoot out or give it a twist to make it seem an accident, or call it a "conspiracy" when all the facts have not come out? Kathmandu would have been well advised to associate some outsiders with the probe. When people suspect foul play or believe that the whole truth will not come out, it is better to be transparent.

New Delhi’s association is ruled out, particularly when a former ISI officer sees the hand of India. It is a wild, biased allegation. Still it cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. It must be looked into because it does not take time to stoke the fires of anti-India feelings in Nepal. The distance between the two countries has seldom been spanned. Unconfirmed charges will only widen it.

It is a coincidence that I stood opposite Buckingham Palace in London and Narayanahity Royal Palace in Kathmandu within the space of a few weeks. At the first, I was surrounded by a multitude of visitors, watching the colourfully mounted horsemen. At the second, I was all by myself, some passersby giving a casual look to the pagoda-like palace.

Buckingham Palace brought to my mind the age-old traditions which provided royalty with a lifeguard in the sweltering waters of cynicism and pointlessness. The palace in Kathmandu, despite the advent of democracy some 11 years ago, radiated dignity, if not authority.

I recalled the interview I had with the late King Birendra in the seventies when he lauded his Panchayat system and equated democracy with it. He found no better way to associate the people, who ultimately came on the streets to secure real power. The king readily accepted that the crown would be a figurehead.

The future of Nepal probably rests on finding a combination of the panchayat system, which gives people a sense of power at the grassroots and the parliamentary system, which ensures an overall control and the country’s integrity. It is a pity that the nation does not get time to ponder over the real problems. And the manner in which the proceedings of Nepal’s parliament remain stalled for weeks gives no leeway for serious thinking.

The situation after the killings demands immediate attention but not the dilution of people’s right to be ruled by themselves. Those who are using the tragedy to undo the democratically-elected government or to give more powers to the constitutional monarch are not facing the facts. Kingship was gaining popularity because the two political rivals - the ruling Nepali Congress and the United Marxist Leninists (UML) - were quarrelling with each other and not taking up the real problems which tormented the public. It is democracy which the people want. They are angry at present because they want to know more, the sine qua non of any democratic set-up.

The reason why the writ of the Maoists, the most radical of the communists, runs in western Nepal is because the democratic system has failed to improve the people’s lot. The dream the Maoists are spinning before the poor and the dispossessed is having its effect. They are making inroads in other areas, even in Kathmandu. But theirs is an ideological warfare. They are basically against democracy.

The Maoists are also damaging Nepal beyond repair. Only in April did they bring the entire country to a virtual standstill through a general strike. Nepal, like Bangladesh, cannot afford to have a shutdown like this because the daily wagers, who are in a majority, have to miss their meals. The slaughter of King Birendra and his family has come in handy to the Maoists. They hate the institution of monarchy. But they are exploiting the situation to the maximum. They have given out that "nationalistic postures and political liberalism" were reasons for the death of King Birendra. Yet their literature runs down the kingship as the greatest obstacle in the way of progress and liberalism.

Of course, the responsibility of giving credence to the Maoists lies on the shoulders of the Nepali Congress and the UML. There is no democracy in the two parties. Since personal power is all that counts, the leaders in both parties use all methods to stay at the top. The country is democratic only up to the polls. Then the politicians take over, reducing their parties to instruments for personal power. It is no surprise that disillusionment with them should serve as grist to the mill of Maoist propaganda.

The slaughter in Kathmandu may give yet another opportunity to political parties to straighten their methods. The best way out at this time is to have a national government to deal with the biggest crisis that the country has ever faced. If togetherness is not possible because of hate and hostility which feed as well as consume the parties, they can at least reach a consensus and ensure a livelihood to the common man. I realise that New Delhi’s cussedness has brought tons of difficulties on Kathmandu’s head. The haughty authoritarian attitude of the Indian bureaucracy has undone whatever concession or legitimate share Nepal has got at times.

But the Kathmandu bureaucracy is no less to blame. Too much suspicion or distrust on its part has spoilt some of the best India-Nepal agreements. Prince Gyanendra, the new king, does not enjoy the reputation of a friendly person in New Delhi, although India has extended him full support. The issue at present is different: how to rebuild the nation when the plebeian crowd is working on bringing the whole country down. India can help because of its social and emotional ties with Nepal.

The government at New Delhi, obsessed with big powers presently, has to attend to the problems of a small country like Nepal because a disturbed state on the border is not in the interest of security. Today Nepal has few experts. Even otherwise, the country is strapped for funds. Tourism has come down considerably. What Nepal needs today is money. New Delhi should offer generous aid to Kathmandu.

King Gyanendra has started on a sticky wicket. But he has a great opportunity to give confidence to the terror-stricken people. Prime Minister GP Koirala is a weathered person. He can lead the country, although charges of corruption against him have thwarted his functioning. He should not have taken shelter behind technicalities. Nepal now needs both Koirala and the king, but within the confines of democracy. Any compromise with the basics of the system - like transparency - can ruin it. The Nepalese may not take anything, which restricts their rights, lying down.