Recalling the past and pondering over the present

I am reminded of the erstwhile Panchayat days when the then ministers were really very active. However, being active on one’s own is different than being pressed to be come active. These were entirely two different things.

The general impression was that the ministers of Nepal worked hard to enhance the prestige and the popularity of the country whether the platform provided them were within or without.

The ministers then usually proceeded with "under the active and the dynamic leadership of the monarchy" the country was marching ahead in all possible sectors, in their speeches. The ministers also wished to insert the benefits of the one-party system that was in place then which, according to the ministers, had remained instrumental in enhancing the prestige of the country abroad. Not only this, they used to claim that the Panchayat system was the best systems prevailing in the then world. Whether it was or not became evident that a mere forty-nine days of foreign supported movement in the 1990s secured the crumbling of the system. However, it is an altogether different matter that the then monarch late King Birendra preferred not to take pleasure in the killing of his citizens. He was simply a great monarch.

Coming back to the ministers of the Panchayat days: The routine of each and every minister was to make lectures. They wished that the organizations or for that matter groups of people out in the districts call them either for inaugural or for the dismantling of an already established infrastructure.

It so happened that if one minister laid the foundation stone for a new development enterprise, the other after a span of few months came to share the same platform for the same purpose. The people in the districts enjoyed inviting ministers quite often in their midst for it were like a fun for them. And the ministers invariably came there and preached sermons on development. Undeniably, the ministers thus invited used to laud the system. The system perhaps felt proud but for what the system never knew. Nor the people knew.

Be it the inaugural of a poultry farm or of the establishment of a Tuberculosis center, the glory of the system were lauded.

One minister who was in real sense of the term was a true nationalist and staunch supporter of the then system went to the extent that he lauded the Panchayat system and said that had it not been the system, the toilet in the village which he was supposed to inaugurate not come into existence. The minister later was sacked. His sacking came as a surprise for all in the country. It so happened that the said minister while on a tour to China was greeted with a reception in his honor. The poor minister couldn’t control his temptations when he could see some of the Chinese ceramics (I am not sure whether it was a ceramic or bronze item) in the room where he was being greeted by his Chinese counterpart. As a result, the minister politely demanded that very particular item for himself to which the Chinese hosts pleasingly offered.

That was the end of it all. Some how or the other the news came to Kathmandu and within days of his arrival in Kathmandu upon completion of his China trip, he was sacked. The minister is no more. He has already left for his heavenly abode. Barring this sad event, the minister was, I am told, very cooperative. He was a declared nationalist and a Royalist as well.

Come the democratic days: Nepal’s minister, mostly from the congress, speak very high of their leader B.P.Koirala adding all the available adjectives for the late Congress leader. However, the ministers forget that late Koirala never had advised them when he was alive to become corrupts. Late Koirala, a genuine democrat, never told his cadres to squeeze the system for their personal benefits. But they did. Ask the anti-corruption authority-the CIAA as to what is the statistics of the corrupts? Whether it far exceeds in the camp of the communists or in the camps of the congress? Certainly it is the congress who in the name of strengthening democracy and the constitution strengthened their own bowls which will perhaps allow them all the live a life of an aristocrat for decades and decades.

The communists too at times talk of late leader-Madan Bhandari. Bhandari, truly speaking, was really a patriot and a man of political vision. The UML leaders have almost forgotten his name to the extent that they in the party do not consider it opportune to dig the truth as to who or which force on the earth killed their charismatic leader? The sudden killing of Amar Lama—the driver of the ill-fated Pajero which was carrying UML leaders Madan Bhandari and Jiv Raj Ashrit to Chitwan that was gulped in by the swelling Narayani river but miraculously the driver was saved- did some how or the other reminded the present day UML leaders of their leaders. The tragedy has been that Madan Bhandari’s widow too now does not talk of her husband on how he was killed? Was it an accident or a calculated killing? Mrs. Bhandari perhaps has compromised with the bygone events.

No need perhaps to dig the truth for still mysterious reasons.

This is how the Nepali politics functioned then and is functioning now. The difference: the Panchayati leaders talked of the King; the present day leaders cash their own leaders albeit who have already left for their heavenly abode.

Headline | National | 5 Question  | Editorial | International | Past