The constitution and the crossroad

By MADHU GHIMIRE

In 1990 people risked their lives and went to the street to voice their frus tration and disgust with the Panchayat oligarchy that functioned under the absolute monarch. People longed to love their king, and not to have to worship him. When the constitution was aired and the sovereignty vested on the people of Nepal, we all thought we were ridding the country of the dirt of the past. The king would come under the constitution and there would be a rule of law under the democratic polity !

The events after the advent of the constitution have, however, brought the nation to the present crossroad. We expected emergence of free and enlightened people, and economically strong and morally sound state that would function as a dependable and stable member of the world community. Instead the constitution got used in every possible way to serve the interest of a small class of people with immense political muscle power, both legitimate and otherwise. After the first election, political muscle power began to shift towards those with an acumen to buy and store vote banks. Buying vote banks and keeping them growing meant acquiring and amassing vast amounts of illegal money to which all the main political parties and their leaders ascribed without even a blink. This indeed raised a big question mark on the concept of "freedom to choose" in a democratic polity. Morality for almost all the political leaders lay in maintaining a thriving power structure for themselves at whatever cost to one’s proclaimed values, and to the nation. The government dwarfed the parliament, individual political leaders dwarfed the political parties they belonged to, the political parties dwarfed the government as well as the parliament, and the parliament dwarfed the nation. All upside down !

It is not only the scale of corruption that is so detrimental to the present and future of our nation but the social sectors it has pervaded through. In Panchayat raj the scale was by no means a lesser one but it was covert and limited to a select circle of the political establishment. The vast majority of the work force could still claim to be morally intact in this regard. That inspired hope among the large majority of the country’s population that fought for a change.

Despite the rampant political and administrative corruption one could, for sometime, take solace in the fact that the country had after thirty years made a singular achievement in the newfound freedom of expression. The constitution also assured fundamental rights to the people without any distinction or discrimination. All that seems to be changing at a steady pace over the past few years and is probably going to change further soon. Journalists are being asked to bend and, we fear, they will begin to lie prostrate in just the same fashion as they did during the Panchayat raj. Glory be to the Masters and the Big Brothers ! What became so distasteful to most of us is that those who were the identified victims of the Panchayat days were themselves indulging in formulating and implementing acts that would seriously curb people’s fundamental rights and the freedom of press. To learn that after thirty years of struggle for democracy their declared faith and commitment in individual liberty and the freedom of expression are only thin and flimsy coats on the surface created to mask their deep-rooted greed for power and wealth is awesome indeed. Ganging up in the Parliament against one’s own chosen leader in order to bargain for financially coveted portfolio and curtailing the life of the Parliament itself simply because the majority view did not favour the prime minister of the day became the most unfortunate norms that the common man could do nothing about but witness helplessly from outside the parliament.

Collusion with unconstitutional forces in order to maximise one’s own political gains meant nothing to these leaders despite serious undermining of the bare essentials to maintain the democratic polity. Constitution can hang in there. Don’t know for how long. Elections can be deferred, beyond the horizon. Political discipline ? Does it really matter ? Power once grabbed needs to be consolidated. Musharrafs of this world cannot be easy losers. What an irony of fate for the Nepalese people ! For how long more are we to accept ‘the indignity and shame" the term Mr Jayaprakash Narain attributed to the Indian emergency that lasted only 20 months exactly 27 years ago ? Do we all surrender our dignity yet again ? And, to whom-to the far Right, to the far Left or to both? Dignity and blood !!

Perhaps there is a path forward but it appears very steep and uphill and the task of walking along this path really herculean. Changing attitudes, humanising the ‘deities’ of this world, creating fraternity among the fellow human beings, and working for the common good are tasks so difficult to accomplish and yet so necessary in our situation. It became clear to most observers that the demonstrated change for public view from quarters was mere lip service to the constitution. This in turn created conditions for the extremists in our midst to assert their mighty existence both vocally and by the use of force.

(To be concluded)

Interim arrangement

By DAMARU LAL BHANDARI

The current drive against corruption in public life does not seem to have much steam in it. Or it has just enough steam to incarcerate a handful of people. To wit, only those who have fallen out of grace. In fact, one feels pity for those 22 civil servants, who are still under detention. What are human rights activists doing?

Don’t agree? Consider the overwhelming number of people, who are out of jail. The word was that the ombudsman body would pursue cases of abuse of at a terrific speed. That word was further amplified to send shivers down the spine of even the innocent people.

On top of it, the government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba had instituted a Judicial Inquiry Commission on Property (JICP). Initially, it appeared that the time was up for those who had wallowed in corruption to become fabulously rich. But as we now know, there is nothing which may be tantamount to terrific just yet.

As if the unfulfilled promises to root out corruption were not enough, now we have a government which is lacking basic constitutional legitimacy! However, its members are peddling the claim that they have arrived to cleanse the system once and for all. Equally quixotic is its composition with one eminent surgeon, too, taking time off from the operation room.

But all this, of course, is something which has dogged this nation of otherwise hardy people. But, as has become evident by now, all the hard work put in by hardy people has gone waste. Said conversely, the economy is moving ahead as guided along by nature. The malicious claim in place meanwhile is nothing good has issued out of twelve years of multi-party democracy. Worse, and to a certain extent justifiably so, the system has failed to work.

But a question, which nobody has yet asked is: Who is behind all this? Believe it or not, Nepalese politics has always been shaped by prompting from those out to derail the system. While one may assuredly blame the representatives of the people for falling prey, what is also true is no one was left alone. And to this extent, it would be injustice to single out Deuba for precipitating the latest crisis. Concatenations of circumstances are often unavoidable. Only thing is Deuba has learned it the hard way.

First and foremost, it is the members of the electorate, who repeatedly returned people who soon forgot their role. The people who once damned the Panchayat politicians soon evolved on lines much more corrupt than their Panchayat cousins. Promiscuity and consumerism took art-like forms and money-grabbing as culture. But all the more strange to hear is a litter of handpicked people have arrogated the responsibility of cleaning the stables. Nations too have their share of karmas, it seems.

They, too, however, need to be given the chance for the lack of better alternative just yet. Just in the event they have not yet drawn up the blueprint, here’s something which could be the guiding mantra for them in their jehad against corruption in public life. Achieving anything big against corruption would require them to simplify both the procedure and the modus operandi. Human right activists can be expected to hold on for the moment, thank you.

In fact, the government in place could do well if it draws comparison between pregnancy and instances which boil down to cases of corruption. Just as an unmarried women cannot be expected to conceive a baby, any one who does not have undisclosed source of income cannot be expected to build mansions overnight. In short, disproportionate assets to known source of income should be deemed as enough for fool-proof police case. Importantly, anyone found guilty should be carted off to jail quickly. This, of course, has been suggested only as interim arrangement.

The Bali blast and after

By M R JOSSE

On October 12, 2002 an explosion at a nightclub in Bali, Indonesia took a toll of 190 human lives. Over 100 Australians died and more than 300, including Indonesian nationals, were injured.

al-Qaeda’s fingerprints

Eight persons, led by a Middle Eastern al-Qaeda operative, were reportedly responsible for the carnage. No individual or group has, as yet, formally claimed responsibility.

Many Indonesian officials think that its mastermind is "Hambali", the nom de guerre of Riduan Isamudin, a cleric who — along with Abu Bakar Bashir, head of the Jemaah Islamiya – aims at creating a single Islamic state comprising Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.

Hambali, in early 2000, urged his followers in eastern Indonesia to join a brutal, long-running conflict between Muslim and Christian villagers. A Western correspondent has charged that Hambali was "keen to forment a miniature version of the clash of civilisations that al-Qaeda wants to provoke."

Bashir, an avowed admirer of Osama bin Laden, has been detained and is implicated in bomb plots in a spate of Christmas eve church bombings in 2000 that killed 18 people. His organisation, not he personally, has been implicated in the Bali butchery.

That atrocity was followed by assaults by Islamic militants on Christians in the Philippines, long inflicted by terrorism perpetrated by the Abu Sayyaf in Mindanao thought to be in cahoots with the al-Qaeda.

In retrospect, it is remarkable that the Bali horror should have come soon after a series of other episodes of terrorism – and that, too, after the recent emergence of two audio-tapes from bin Laden and his senior aide, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

In a TV broadcast by the Qatar-based Arabic language satellite television channel, bin Laden is heard saying to America: "The youth of Islam are preparing something to strike fear in your hearts and will target the vital sectors of your economy until you renounce your injustice and hostility." A tape of al-Zawahiri warning that the al-Qaeda was preparing fresh strikes against the United States and its allies, notably France and Germany, followed.

Days earlier, an explosion, believed to have been a terrorist attack, seriously damaged a French oil tanker as it prepared to sail into an Yemeni port. That, in turn, was followed by an attack on two American marines, one of them fatal, by two Kuwati al-Qaeda members.

Australian reaction

Understandably, the denunciation of the Bali slaughter was loudest in Australia whose nationals have for years been frequenting the beaches, nightclubs and watering holes of Bali. Its impact is comparable to the national trauma experienced in the United States in the wake of the dastardly attacks by the al-Qaeda last year that left more than 3,000 dead.

Prime Minister John Howard described it as Australia’s worst disaster since the Second World War. He cautioned that more attacks were likely in Asia, while officials warned of increased risks of terrorist activity in Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.

Apart from travel advisories, Australia on October 24 announced a series of new counter-terrorism measures to deal with heightened threats to its nationals at home and abroad. They included creation of a National Counter-Terrorism Committee to oversee the "war on terror" and legislation making it easier to prosecute perpetrators of atrocities against Australians abroad.

Howard has been pressed for an inquiry into the failure to foresee the terrorist threat to Australia ahead of the Bali bombing, amid reports that the United States had forewarned it.

Not surprisingly, one reaction to the Bali brutality was a rash of complaints by Australian commentators who charged that Howard’s government made Australians a target through their high-profile backing of the US war against Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda and its willingness to join a US-led war against Iraq.

(Currently, Australia has troops fighting alongside US forces in Afghanistan against remnants of the al-Qaeda.)

Predictably, that caused US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, to call on Australia to remain committed to the global war on terrorism despite its terrible losses in Bali. Colin argued, thus: "This is the time to redouble our efforts to make sure that this campaign against terrorism is done not only locally but regionally and throughout the world."

Indonesian response

Jakarta has finally woken up to demands by the international community that she crack down on extremists linked to al-Qaeda which has been morphing into a loose global terror network of hard-to-identify cells which, as one commentator put it, "has spread like a vapour to as many as 50 countries, with up to 100,000 militants ready for action."

Significantly, American ambassador to Indonesia, Ralph Boyce, reportedly disclosed that in the month before the Bali attack, he and other American envoys had discussed with Indonesian officials the possibility of attacks against US targets in Indonesia.

President Megawati Sukrnoputri, slow to act against religious militancy in the past, has now rammed through emergency measures by decree after months of legislative delay. The decree was made retrospective to cover those responsible for the Bali barbarity. Perhaps that is why after a meeting in Mexico recently, American President George W. Bush told her he would consider increased US aid to help Jakarta battle extremists linked to global terrorism.

Bashir has been placed under police guard. On October 23, that heightened security amid fears of more bombings, even as the United States said it would list Jemaah Islamiya, blamed for the horrendous nightclub attack, as a terrorist outfit.

Why Bali?

One must ask: why Bali? Bali was hit possibly for the following reasons. First, the al-Qaeda drew the bead on a nightclub frequented by Western tourists, including Americans, its enemy number one. Secondly, it wanted to targeted Australians because of Canberra’s support for America’s "war on terror" including for a likely US attack on Iraq, an Arab state to which al-Qaeda may have ties.

Here, Sydney’s Daily Telegraph’s disclosure that bin Laden threatened Australia in a videotape last November – for its role in helping East Timor win independence from Muslim Indonesia – is noteworthy.

Thirdly, given al-Qaeda’s jihadist character, it may have selected the nightclub as a hated symbol of an un-Islamic way of life and Western "depravity". Finally, a disguised goal could also be the destabilisation or economic destruction of an internationally acclaimed Hindu enclave in what is the world’s most populous Muslim nation. The al-Qaeda’s goals and those of Jemaah Islamiya would have perfectly meshed.

Should we in Nepal be perturbed? Certainly. For one thing, as Prime Minister Lokendra Bahadur Chand said in a message of condolence to President Sukarnoputri, Nepal believes that "the international community should stand yet firmly united to counter and get rid of the global menace of terrorism."

For another, as Australians have discovered, no country is 100 percent safe from the likes of al-Qaeda which Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed had connections to the Chechen militants that terrorised Moscow just days ago. A counter-terrorism operation resulted in 115 deaths, although more than 700 hostages were saved.

Lastly, there is an urgent need for constant vigilance on the part of our security/intelligence agencies, especially as we pride ourselves "the only Hindu state in the world."

One ANFA, myth or in reality?

SUMAN MALLA

A peaceful solution to the long- standing football dispute in the country is long over due. After turning a blind eye on country’s football for long, and sometimes fuelling the feud, the member-secretary of National Sports Council, Binod Shankar Palikhe, indicated that the dispute over All Nepal Football Association (ANFA) would soon be put to end.

The tournament that Palikhe was inaugurating last Saturday at Pharping may not have any major significance in the footballing calendar, but what he said there certainly does: "The ANFA dispute will be sorted out within the first week of November."

In his speech, he also gave indication that a new ANFA body would be formed with the accent on "including only those who have made a significant contribution to the game’s development in the country."

Surely, good for football. But following what we have witnessed over the last two years, one could not rule out, though, that it could well be another ominous signals of trouble brewing.

Hardly any football loving person now is ignorant about what is eating up the most popular of all the games. ANFA- the football’s ruling body in Nepal, broke into two parallel bodies when Ganesh Thapa had held a unilateral election on October 16, 2000. Thapa retained his seat as the president but NSC disproved the election and subsequently formed an ad hoc ANFA committee with Geeta Rana as its chief.

And when Thapa elected his 17-member executive committee with unanimous vote in the presence of Asian Football Confederation (AFC) representatives – Harnoor Rashid and Sanjeevan, the council convened for a separate voting for ANFA and elected Rana as its president. Throwing out of Rana through a no confidence motion and disruption of talks for unification between feuding factions have only made NSC’s wrong signalsall apparent. 

The decision of the country’s apex sports body is symptomatic of administrative incompetence and discloses, among other things, the concealed arrogance of officials towards the cause of sportspersons. And many within the sporting community see this as a mere covering act for failure at the recently held Asian Games in Busan.

Not only are the officials of NSC and Nepal Olympic Committee (NOC) least concerned over the disappearance of 15 players from the Games but they are concealing the exact number of Nepali contingent. While only the players have remained under the spotlight, many fear that equal number of officials, taking advantage of a clandestine nature of clearance, have stayed back in South Korea.

Coming back to football, under these circumstances, what Nepali football needs is sophistication not only in training but also in administering the game on a professional footing. Admittedly, sport cannot be allowed to lapse into inertia on account of the unsettled political climate. And more importantly, they require impeccable co-ordination among the various limbs of sport and a spirit of harmony, where irritants, however genuine, must be buried deep in the interest of sport.

Not so long ago, we used to crack jokes on tiny island nation of SAARC the Maldives. One of the famous one goes: "Anybody playing soccer in the Maldives, because of its limited space, has to be careful while taking his shot; the ball would go out of bounds and into the sea."While we continue to enjoy such jokes, the progress of the same tiny nation in the world of football has been quite phenomenal. If only we bother to take a close look at the FIFA’s monthly world rating, their progress will become all clear.

Formulation of attractive programmes to improve the game’s standard, and its effective marketing, Maldives appeared to have shot it long. Long enough so that some of their clubs have well-developed semi-professional league with some of the players coming to play there from as far a field from England.

Nepal’s rating in the FIFA list touches the nadir repeatedly, indicating that all’s not well with the system. Looking back, it is difficult not to feel a sense of loss over the chequered progress of what should be the pride of Nepali sport.

The dispute has also blocked the supply of funds, which used to come in sponsorship as big corporate sponsors – Coca-Cola, Surya Tobacco, Gorkha Brewery decided to pull out of the deal. That put most of the big domestic tournaments into uncertainty, as a result, the  tournaments lost the lustre.

Football administrators here should be more careful to respect the support they have received from the football’s world governing body – FIFA in Goal Project, which was suspended once due to the same dispute. The failure to that would lead to further slide in country’s football, inviting more frustration and disappointment for thousands of football followers.

The question in issue now is if the member-secretary’s was just another gambit to hanker for the post for publicity without the love of sports or he is genuinely acting for the unification of ANFA. And if the latter is true, then he will have to get rid off most from the committee, the one that the council recognises. Going by the member-secretary’s own words, only few could be considered for "the new ANFA" while the rest seem to be jockeying for positions without any formal knowledge of the sport.

Arguably, the responsibility of promoting the sports does not lie only with the government. The clubs have a more important role to play in this endeavour in helping resolve this problem. This is the right time to make their voice heard, loud and clear.

Political perfidy bane of democracy

BEENA KHAREL

Consistency is hardly a strong point of Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala. Habituated to interpreting issues and developments to suit his needs, Koirala’s latest outburst that the Royal massacre is related to a "grand design" begs specifics he never cares to explain.

Whenever he finds himself out of power or cannot ramrod things his way, Koirala tries to invoke the ghost of the "grand design" that never was or is. This time he has crossed limits, trying to sling insinuations at institutions that one can only strongly guess. Which means he has lost all hopes of regaining the prime ministerial chair.

He was the prime minister when the Palace tragedy took place in June 2001. He never bothered to explain to the people what he knew or felt, let alone consider at any point of time the idea of tendering resignation on moral ground. If he thought that there was a "grand design" related to the Palace killings, why he did not speak out then, instead of now when his political star and credibility are at their lowest ebb? The answer is simple: Height of political perfidy. It is such lack of norms that has wrought havoc on our society.

The country’s current crisis is basically the making of the mainstream political parties and their leaders who behave in a manner as if they can do no wrong. For twelve years, they made loud promises without the intention of fulfilling them. They refused to look beyond the periphery of their narrow circle and shamelessly doled out favours to sycophants and hangars-on.

Blatant nepotism was the order of the day, intoxicated as they were with the position of power they held, thanks to the unsuspecting voters who expected the leaders to deliver the goods that the 30 years of partyless Panchayat failed to provide them.

Wherever there was a post of privilege and power to be filled in, their first and last thought was to ensure that their own "loyal lieutenants" secured it, whatever the latter’s true credentials. Work contracts, tender approvals, fund sanctioning were more often than not awarded through highly questionable processes that served the immediate interest of the get-rich-quick mentality of power brokers. Influence buying and selling went on to become a norm. Some of the corrupt, including the one-time "political bigwigs", seem to have fallen under the scrutiny of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority.

The we-are-the-elected-representatives-and-you-can-vote-us-out-if-you-do-not-like-what-we-do-attitude proved to be the bane of democracy which was ushered in with such enthusiasm and high anticipation in the spring of 1990.

Electoral democracy need not necessarily ensure a functioning democracy. Holding elections regularly without the political parties in power bearing responsibility does not bring about liberal democracy. In the absence of serious efforts at ensuring liberal democracy, we face the sort of problems that we have been suffering since so many years. True democrats should devote their energy to exposing the fraud and corrupt among politicians. Unmasking them without any mercy is a challenge for both the press and the rest of the public.

Privatisation saga

The next worst thing to not being talked about is being talked about. Why this paradox-ridden one-liner? Privatisation is a case in point. Another economic slogan that generates tall talks but delivers little. The process of privatisation that gained momentum in the early 1990s is now bogged down in confusion, political bungling, and lack of transparency and proper marketing. So far, over one and half dozens "sick" public enterprises (PEs) have been privatised. The initial enthusiasm seen in the drive for privatisation seems to have lost its steam.

After much delay and controversy, the Nepal Tea Development Corporation contract was given to a private company a couple of years ago. Not to talk of the "still-in-the-process" Butwal Power Company that was attacked by the Maoists. The Norwegian government recently said that it would help rebuild the damaged plant only after its hand-over to a private consortium led by Interkraft, a Norwegian power developer.

Contrary to the expectations tossed up by shrieking sloganeering, privatising PEs has been like flogging a dead horse. What went wrong? A number of pressing issues and mismanagement are identified as the chief culprits.

First, the policymakers went about the business in haste without doing proper research, acquiring expertise, and weighing pros and cons. For them, it was no more than an imported slogan. What has worked in other countries may not work here. Unfortunately, this realisation failed to dawn on the blind advocates of privatisation.

Although the Privatisation Act has been endorsed, it is still an incomplete document, full of loopholes. Supplementary rules and guidelines are yet to be prepared and enforced. The bidder proposing the highest price is selected. The process of giving weightage to each selection criterion is conspicuously absent. The Agriculture Tools Factory (ATC) is a telling example of such a disaster. It is to be noted here that ATC was handed over to a party that had no track record of managing big enterprises.

The leasing of assets and the management contract, two of the preconditions set by the Act, have not fared well. Take Bhaktapur Bricks Factory and Biratnagar Jute Mills, for instance. But this is not to say that all privatised PEs have foundered. The Bhrikuti Pulp and Paper Mills is another exception. Surprisingly, the ailing Royal Nepal Airlines Corporation, a breeding ground for corruption and all imaginable ills, to name one, is yet to make it to the top priority list.

There’s also lack of clarity and transparent mechanism in using privatisation proceeds. Until now, they are being pumped into gearing up the slow "supply-driven" privatisation process, or so we are being told. Further delay means more wastage of resources and funds. Still more questions follow. Is privatisation really needed in Nepal? If yes, in what form? Is it only an attractive imported concept, or an effective ingredient to prop up the country’s sagging economy? Perhaps, it is time to take an official break from the wanton privatisation, single out ailing PEs, review the status of privatisation and enforce unambiguous rules and regulations.

Courting corruption Who is the loser?

UDAYA WAGLE

Many countries, especially in the developing world, have witnessed the limited resources they hold being drained away via corruption. In many countries, rampant corruption has brought social and economic development activities to standstill and has made political culture and government trustworthiness questionable. While industrial countries too have encountered corruption problems, their problems appear to be less daunting. For one, for reasons that are beyond the scope of this discussion it is obvious that industrial countries observe fewer corruption problems. From the standpoint of magnitude too, corruption in these countries does not draw much attention. This is because amounts involved in corruption are negligible compared to total measurable economic activities, for example, in terms of gross domestic product. In poor developing countries where public income and expenditure carry majority of the economic activities, in contrast, amounts involved in corruption are substantial with tremendous impacts on social and economic development.

Very few would deny that corruption in Nepal demonstrates a clear example of what can happen when rampant corruption takes place. Nepal presents an interesting case of corruption especially because of extreme corruption that took place during the party-less Panchayat system which continued if not escalated even throughout the past 12 years of "democratic governance." While corruption can take many forms, to narrow this discussion let’s focus on two corruption categories that are prevalent in Nepal, i e, embezzlement of public money and extreme "clientelism" in public service.

First, embezzlement of money in Nepal is one major conduit many people, from political representatives and high level public officials to lowest ranking civil servants, misuse and extract public resources onto their personal favour. This is a very common form of corruption as demonstrated by those in public service entrusted to handle state activities. This is furthered by the state’s obviously dominant role in the country’s economic and social development.

Economic and social development activities that a state initiates are something that benefits people at large. The use of public money for public cause not only results in individual benefits for quite a large number of people, but it also incurs large positive externalities as those not paying for such activity can also automatically acquire them. Any private use of public resources that theoretically are to benefit a large number of people can never be justified: neither on efficiency nor on effectiveness grounds. While a person embezzling money will definitely put it into use which in turn benefits a number of activities and people, it happens at the cost of depriving people of the services that are planned to be delivered. Simplistically, who is using the money should not matter since the money supposedly stays in the economy. But over and above depriving people of the services they deserve, it accelerates the deepening of income inequality, as those with and without power will be able to secure separate and quite disparate fortunes.

Second, extreme clientelism is prevalent on public service in the country in which ordinary people pay extra money to get things done and to get them done on time and in their own favor. Nepal’s public service is replete with this notion of clientelism and thus paying extra money to obtain favor has developed into a culture in which those in power seek some pecuniary advantage in return for doing some favor.

Economically, extreme clientelism is not necessarily a bad thing. As rational actors, those acquiring public services do so such that the costs incurred do not exceed the benefits derived. People pay extra money to accelerate the pace at which they receive services or to acquire services that are important and yet otherwise unattainable for them. Further, how much one pays to acquire services is determined through some explicit or implicit interactions between the receiver and the provider of services. In reality, however, rationality assumption does not always hold and thus the benefits received do not always outweigh the costs involved. Additionally, since those providing services are far more powerful than those receiving services and since the latter in most cases are not well cognizant of the mechanics of service provisions, the arbitration process that leads to price outcomes does not always turn out to be just, fair, and satisfactory. Those unable to pay extra money become excluded from the mainstream economic systems, as they cannot acquire services even if they are necessary to sustain normal lives.

It appears that in both cases, corruption does not necessarily lead to economically justifiable outcomes. In social and political terms too, corruption helps deepen social and political inequalities. Those capable of acquiring services even with extra payments tend to be from different social strata than those who are incapable to do so. Those government officials or political representatives making money out of corrupt activities, on the other hand, tend to be separated from the rest in society, as they are seemingly more resourceful. While the fact that some government officials or political representatives accumulate money by engaging in corrupt activities often disallows ordinary people to venerate them well, their power and financial resourcefulness compel them to demonstrate some, even if fake, veneration.

Similarly, a malicious legacy of previous political leaders and representatives when they turn out to be corrupt clearly discredits sound images and benefits of democratic political systems. History would possibly disqualify one person if s/he is the only one committing corruption, but it would blame the entire political system if many political representatives turn out to be corrupt.

An involvement in corruption of public service officials, too, helps accelerate the process of discrediting the image of political system, questioning the trustworthiness of government and its functionaries, and exacerbating political segregation among citizens even if they supposedly possess equal votes.

If corruption is not justified in many respects, why does it get exercised and well protected in Nepal after all? Many reasons contribute to this even though I consider two dominant reasons especially noteworthy. First is an economic reason. Economically, corruption should and will be controlled only if the cost of curbing corruption is less than the benefits that will be derived by curbing it. If the government has to pay fortunes in dismantling corruption mechanisms and controlling corruption activities, it will not opt to do so. Although there is no easily measurable yardstick to ascertain how much corruption is taking place and how much needs to be spent to curb it, cost-benefit analyses are often invoked to justify anti-corruption activities at least in theoretical discussions. This also includes discussions of what alternatives—including increasing monetary incentives, punishing corrupt officials, rewarding those demonstrating outstanding non-corrupt behavior, and privatizing public services so that corruption cannot take place—are available to choose from in terms of controlling corruption.

Second, just like every other activity in the public domain, corruption has to do with who the losers and the winners are. Explicitly or tacitly, ordinary people represent the losers out of every corruption activity; either by being deprived of economic and social development facilities or by being overexploited and paying exorbitant prices for regular public services. Further, it is that part of ordinary people who are economically, socially, and politically less-powerful actors. A businessperson, for example, can increase profit margins on her/his business to pay for extra money needed to obtain a corrupt official’s favor or to compensate for an extra money paid in taxes due to corrupt activities with all the burden transferred to ordinary consumers. The winners, on the other hand, are those who are powerful enough to manipulate either public funds or those needing different types of public services. They are capable of using different tools, languages, and symbols first to commit corruption and second to disguise as if either nothing has happened or even if something has then to cleanse their dirty hands.

It is interesting to note that new and in a sense unusual turn of events has taken place in an attempt to curb corruption. Agencies that are held conventionally responsible to watchdog corruption activities now appear to be more active. Clearly, it takes a great deal of effort and commitment—not just a few court cases—to curb corruption. But future will tell if the current turn of events regarding dismantling corruption mechanisms and controlling corruption is genuinely well-formulated or only a whimsical act just like every other populist activity that is initiated by the state to please more powerful few in the country.

(Mr Wagle is a doctoral candidate in the Public Policy Program at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.)