National 1 (Spotlight Weekly)

Pillar of Strength

Despite certain constitutional controversies regarding the role of King, the institution of monarchy remains Nepal’s major force that can guarantee the stability of the country

By KESHAB POUDEL

With the dismissal of prime minister She Bahadur Deuba by King Gyanendra more than a year ago, the stable relations between the country’s political parties and the institution of monarchy has been shaken.

In both ends there prevail extremists who have neither faith in the institution of monarchy nor in the democratic process. A section of so-called monarchists are provoking political leaders by blaming them for all the present political mess whereas some so-called democratic leaders are harping anti-monarchy slogans in the streets of capital. Interestingly, both the institutions will be the losers in this battle.

Narayanhity Royal Palace : Big role to play

In the course of last 200 hundred years, the institution of monarchy in Nepal has seen many ups and downs. It played the roles ranging from titular head to constitutional and active one but the institution as such, a traditional and centuries-old institution, remained an asset of Nepal, which unified this nation with diverse culture, religion and ethnic groups. Sandwiched between two powerful nations of Asia - India and China - monarchy also played a tricky role of balancing the influences of these two Asian giants.

“Political parties are violating the Constitution and existing laws by criticizing King. We will not tolerate any such activities of the political parties,” warned minister of Information and Communication Kamal Thapa. “These political parties which are chanting the slogans are responsible for the present situation.”

Whether during the one-century-old Rana rule or half-century-old democratic rule, the monarchy has always been there providing legitimacy to the authority exercised by them. Despite the violation of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 in dismissing the elected prime minister, Nepalese people abided by the decision of the King.

“This traditional influence of monarchy is the strength of Nepal to bring order and unify the country. At a time when the modern democratic institutions are in the process of making, the support of institution of monarchy will help in consolidating the democratic process,” said an analyst.

Despite the nearly one-decade-old insurgency, monarchy has been very much attached with the population at the grass root level. Any efforts to destabilize the institution of monarchy will have far-reaching consequences beyond imagination. “Even with the institution of monarchy at the back, the country is finding difficulties to consolidate the political change of 1990. What would have happened if there was no support from the monarchy,” asked the analyst.

Some self-proclaimed democratic leaders, knowingly or unknowingly, are harping anti-monarchy slogans. “Since monarchy has often betrayed us, there is no reason for us to be constitutional monarchist now,” said Mahanta Thakur, central committee member of the Nepali Congress.

Congress leaders like Thakur have never realized the strong influence the monarchy has in our society. “The institution of monarchy is equivalent to the strength of tens of thousands to restore order and stabilize the society. Without the patronage of monarchy, the institution of army cannot play effective role in democratic society,” said an analyst.

This is not only true in the Nepalese context. Even after the abdication of monarchy four decades ago, people of Afghanistan invited former King Jahir Shah to promulgate the new republican constitution. The monarchy in Cambodia was reinstalled by Khmer Rouge leaders even though the Kind there had abdicated following the revolution. They reinstalled the monarchy to take advantage of the wide popularity and stabilizing role of that institution in their society in the aftermath of the tumultuous years of revolution.

The institution of monarchy is still going side by side with the western industrialized democracies. World’s prominent western industrialized democracies like the United Kingdom, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark and Japan are the countries with monarchy. Canada, Australia and New Zealand still regard British monarchy as their head of the state.

In a multi-racial and multi-religious country like Nepal, the institution of monarchy can play important role in unifying the nation. The institution, which has such a long binding and traditions, cannot be authoritarian.

Although most of the framers of the Constitution of Kingdom of Nepal 1990 have already changed their commitments, they realize the importance of the role of monarchy in the country’s stability and unification. Article 27 (2) of the Constitution says that His Majesty is the symbol of unity of Nepalese people.

With the dismissal of democratically elected government, King has fallen into controversy for his role in choosing prime ministers and other ministers. However, the institution of monarchy is Nepal’s asset and Nepalese require monarchy to safeguard their interests.

Despite the direct rule of King, Nepalese political leaders, students, human rights activists and media are enjoying enormous and unlimited freedom - even the slogans for abolition of monarchy are not being muzzled.

Whether monarchy under the constitutional monarch late King Birendra or under the assertive present King Gyanendra, the institution has played important role in Nepal’s independence. Sandwiched between two Asian powers India and China, institution monarchy is the country’s strength to guarantee stability in Nepal as well as South Asia.