write an essay about democracy in nepal

• Privacy policy
• Terms and conditions

Essay on democracy in Nepal in 250 words.

                                      DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL

Rana rule was a family autocracy. It existed in Nepal for 104 years. It did not give place to people’s will and aspiration. So people fought against ranas for rights and freedom. Nepal got democracy in 2007 B.S. we celebrate falgun as democracy day every year. People could not strengthen the democracy they got in 2007. So they again had to fight for it in 2046 and 2062/ 063. The last movement succeeded to bring a remarkable change in the country. We had kingship for nearly 240 years in our history. This movement made it a republic state. Now we have been the citizen of a federal secular state.

However, we have to do a lot to make the democracy stronger. First and foremost need is political stability through elected government. Our constituent assembly should formulate new constitution addressing the will and aspiration of all people representing all cast and creed. Only then everyone can get equal opportunity for their personality development.

Loktantra is the spirit of the people’s movement. It grants citizens various kind of freedom such as freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of movement, freedom to form association, etc. It ensures equality. Loktantra is based on public opinion. The government in a democratic country like Nepal is expected to work according to people’s will and aspiration. No disparity is made on the plea of race, caste, religion and sex. Democracy encourages patriotism and nationality.

Despite these good aspects, it is said to have some demerits. Some people say that is based on hollow idealism. The majority suppresses the minority. Rich persons win elections only. Above all, there are partisan evils and lowers are misused.

In spite of the aforementioned weakness, democracy is the best government. No other forms of government can take its place. It is our duty to make our loktantra strong and provide ensure the rights and freedom of the people.

Posted by Nepticle Blog

You may like these posts, post a comment, popular posts.

Essay on child rights in nepal

CHILD RIGHTS IN NEPAL Child rights simply …

History of earth-2021

The earth is a member of the solar system; Therefore origin of the earth…

Importance of patriotism | Nepal | Essay -2021

PATRIOTISM Patriotism mean…

• Book articles
• environmentalpollution
• formationofFossil
• human brain
• importance of agriculture
• pleasure of reading
• Rights and duties
• rivers in nepal
• student life

Featured post

Structures and Function of brain

Hello Everyone! Welcome to my blog. Here you can find any articles related to General knowledge, creative stories, articles on different subjects, Essay writting, photography and so on.

• anti-social practices (1)
• Articles (24)
• Be positive (1)
• Book articles (1)
• children day special (1)
• conscious mind (1)
• creativity (1)
• cyber law (1)
• Democracy (1)
• dowry system (1)
• drug addiction (1)
• Education (1)
• environmentalpollution (1)
• excursion (1)
• Forest in Nepal (1)
• formationofFossil (1)
• health is wealth (1)
• history (1)
• history of earth (1)
• human brain (1)
• importance of agriculture (1)
• internet (1)
• multimedia (1)
• newspapers (1)
• patriotism (1)
• pleasure of reading (1)
• quiz time (1)
• Rights and duties (1)
• rivers in nepal (1)
• social service (1)
• student life (1)
• student mind (1)
• subconscious in plants (1)
• tourism industry (1)
• unix and linux (1)
• value of science (1)

Most Popular

DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL Democracy is a …

Essay on Social evils in Nepal-2021

SOCIAL EVILS                      …

Essay on rights and duties in 250+ words

RIGHTS AND DU…

Essay on Student life in 250 words

STUDENT LIFE The period of a human life spent at  school  or college for …

HUMAN BRAIN Brain There are vario…

Essay on importance of women education in Nepal in 300 words

IMPORTANCE OF WOMEN EDUCATION IN NEPAL   WHAT IS EDUCATION? Education …

Essay on 'Tourism in Nepal' in 250 words

TOURISM IN NEPAL We want to visi…

essay on science and human values in 300 words

THE VALUE OF SCIENCE The present of era is t…

essay on environmental pollution in 250 words-Nepal-2022

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION Environment simply…

Essay on pleasures of reading | School Essay | College Essay-2021

PLEASURES OF READING              …

Social Widget

• Culture & Lifestyle

• Madhesh Province
• Lumbini Province
• Bagmati Province
• National Security
• Koshi Province
• Gandaki Province
• Karnali Province
• Sudurpaschim Province
• International Sports
• Brunch with the Post
• Life & Style
• Entertainment
• Investigations
• Climate & Environment
• Science & Technology
• Visual Stories
• Crosswords & Sudoku
• Corrections
• Letters to the Editor
• Today's ePaper

Without Fear or Favour UNWIND IN STYLE

What's News :

• CIAA jurisdiction
• Japanese encephalitis spread
• Poor road condition
• PM oli signs performance contract
• Hydel project
• Through my lens

Nepal’s democracy revolutions, and achievements and failures

Binod Ghimire

The country has witnessed three revolutions for democracy in the past seven decades. The first was in 1950 when the people revolted to end the century-long autocratic Rana regime . The long protest of the people paid off when the country ushered in democracy in 1951.

It, however, was short-lived as King Mahendra hijacked it through a royal-military coup in 1960. He took direct control of the executive authority from the leaders who were elected for the first time by the people. It took 30 years to end the rule of the Palace until the Nepali people in 1990 launched a decisive protest to restore democracy in the country.

The country adopted a multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy. Freedom of speech, right to equality and other civil and political rights were enshrined in the 1990 constitution. That, however, didn’t get translated into actions, fully. The parties elected to power failed to live up to the expectations of the people. They were more focused on petty partisan interests and leaders paid little attention to people and their concerns who yearned for development and prosperity.

Six years into democracy, the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist waged an armed struggle against the state which it said was to establish the “ rule of the people. ” The non-performance of the mainstream political parties fueled the Maoist movement. As the country fell into deep uncertainties, King Gyanendra, following the path of his father, usurped power in 2005. He sabotaged the democratic institutions which prompted political parties, including the Maoists, and the people from different walks of life to unite together against Gyanedra’s absolute rule.

That movement against Gyanedra in 2006 lasted 19 days. Gyanedra finally capitulated. People's power prevailed. Multiparty democracy was restored. The ground for turning Nepal into a federal republic was also created. The 2006 revolution also gave rise to the identity movement. The Madhes uprising in 2007, which took place on the foundation laid by the 2006 movement, prompted the country to become federal.

The country became a republic, the Hindu kingdom turned into a secular nation and transitioned into a federal set-up abandoning the decades long centralised system of governance. It is the contribution of the 2006 revolution that the country adopted the principles of inclusion in the state machinery though much needs to be done for them to be institutionalised.

Political analysts say the major achievement of the different revolutions is the shift in the political system.

“There have been paradigm changes in the political system. However, it hasn’t yielded expected results,” Rajendra Maharjan, a political analyst, told the Post. “It is because the same old faces continued to be in power despite changes in the political system.”

In his view, the same “dirty politics” that was dominant after the 1990 people’s revolution continues even to this day as the political behaviour and political culture of the parties remain the same. Democratisation of the existing parties and their leadership is a major challenge at present.

Analysts say despite contributions of the people from different communities in democratic movements in the country, there couldn’t be economic and cultural transformations. The marginalised communities continue to suffer economically and culturally. A large number of the people from the Dalit community, for instance, still don’t possess land, say analysts.

“Inequality is rife. Only a certain section is enjoying state benefits,” Daman Nath Dhungana, a former Speaker and a civil society member, told the Post. “Our leaders do not have any agenda for development. Nor are they committed to addressing the concerns of the people, especially those from the marginalised communities that have suffered oppression for long.”

Dhungana says the political transformation alone makes no sense unless every section of society feels that there is the state for the people to look after them.

The Constitution of Nepal promulgated in 2015 envisions an inclusive state. Article 42 states that representation in the state machinery should be based on the principles of inclusion. However, other than specified in the constitution and laws, the government and parties have always been hesitant in ensuring representation of women and other communities. Neither the Cabinet nor the constitutional and ambassadorial nominations, for instance, are inclusive.

According to experts, democracy can be strengthened only when the people are empowered.

“However, least has been done to empower the people as the parties have been constantly bickering for power,” Meena Vaidya Malla, a former professor of political science at the Tribhuvan University, told the Post. “History has provided several opportunities for the parties to perform but they have failed miserably.”

She says had the parties been committed to the country and the people, a lot could have been achieved after 1990 and 2006.

Observers say even though the country has gone through different revolutions and embraced different political systems, political parties are still unclear on what kind of security policy and foreign policy the country should adopt. “This is necessary because oftentimes external politics gets intertwined with domestic policies,” said Dhungana.

Some political experts believe there is a need for yet another revolution in the country as dissatisfaction among the people is rising.

Maharjan says discontent is brewing in society, but how and when it will erupt is difficult to predict.

“All the revolutions so far have been political. I believe the country is waiting for an economic or cultural revolution,” he said. “A new revolt is inevitable as only a certain section has benefitted from the changes so far.”

Dhunanga also says a new revolution may happen but he says that is not possible in the near future. According to him, no alternative force has emerged to pose a challenge to the existing parties.

“The existing parties aren’t changing because there is no powerful force to challenge them,” he said. “I think the country will continue to move ahead in the same fashion as it has been, at least for a while.” 

Binod Ghimire Binod Ghimire covers parliamentary affairs and human rights for The Kathmandu Post. Since joining the Post in 2010, he has reported primarily on social issues, focusing on education and transitional justice.

Related News

Nepali Congress joins Koshi government

Landslides block Rapti and Madan Bhandari roads

Three including Putha Uttarganga vice-chair dead in jeep crash

Panchthar’s Chiwabhanjyang-Darimba road crumbling due to contractor’s neglect

Panel set up to settle dispute over widening CIAA’s jurisdiction

12 dead, 59 others infected as Japanese Encephalitis spreads across Nepal

Most read from national.

Nepal, China to issue five-year passes for Himalayan districts

Nepali women and girls under siege in digital space

Nepal Oil Corporation slashes fuel prices

At least 40 Nepalis fighting for Russia confirmed dead

Ek Narayan Aryal appointed chief secretary

Editor's picks.

Rukum East’s alluring grassland

Farmers face snow leopard attacks, compensation hurdles

Nepal has enormous biomass potential, research shows

Storytelling in the age of spectacle

E-paper | september 13, 2024.

• Read ePaper Online

• Volunteering
• Translating
• Take Action
• Urgent Appeals
• Press Releases
• Hunger Alerts
• Forwarded News
• Compression
• Orthotics and Insoles
• Foot Health blog
• Email Us At [email protected]
• Call Us At +(852) 2698 6339

[email protected]

NEPAL: The struggle to establish democracy

Nepal President Bidya Devi Bhandari on December 20 sent shockwaves across the country as she approved the Cabinet’s recommendation for the dissolution of the Lower House of Parliament. The president’s move has pushed the Himalayan country deeper into the quagmire of instability even as it had been attempting to find its footing in democratic politics. Having suffered a decade-long insurgency and an autocratic monarchy around the turn of the century, the people of Nepal had fought hard in the past couple of decades had finally begun to dream of a stable and peaceful political future. Their dreams had been fuelled by the success of the 2006 popular movement against King Gyanendra’s direct rule, the Madhes uprising against a centralized political structure, the elections to a constituent assembly, and the drafting of a constitution that, despite various shortcomings, recognized the rights of the citizens to life, liberty, happiness and justice.

The dissolution of the parliament has not only pushed the country decades back to the 1990s that saw Nepal’s nascent at democratizing itself being sabotaged by the monarchy and political parties but has also left them wondering if they can expect political stability in the foreseeable future. After all, the Nepali people had in 2017 ushered the Nepal Communist Party, a coming together of the Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist), led by KP Sharma Oli, and the Maoist Centre, led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda, the former insurgent leader, to power by electing it with a nearly two-thirds majority. Having failed to distance herself from the power tussle between the Oli and Dahal, the twin co-chairs of the party, the president, took no time to approve the Cabinet’s recommendation even if that meant pushing the developing country to yet another political crisis.

Nepal’s encounter with a political crisis, though, is not new. To understand how the country that made some significant strides towards political stability and democratic politics in the past decade-and-a-half went backward to with the stroke of a pen, it is pertinent to see how the latent and manifest forms of authoritarianism, militarism and impunity inform its political culture in the past as well as present.

Militarization of the political sphere

The history of modern Nepal is around 250 years old. It was King Prithvi Narayan Shah, the first king of modern Nepal, who laid the foundation of a military organization loyal to the monarchy. In 1762, when Prithvi Narayan Shah attacked Kirtipur a third time and claimed victory over it, he ordered that the noses of the locals be chopped off. As many as 865 locals were said to have been the victims of such extreme punitive measures. In a place called Lachyang in the present Nuwakot District, the indigenous Tamang people organized an uprising against the state during the reign of King Rana Bahadur Shah. And in response, the state organized a huge massacre on two occasions, around 1794, when an estimated 1000 Tamangs were said to have been killed during the uprising.

After Junga Bahadur Rana became the prime minister of the country through a military coup in 1844, he formed the Bhairavnath Battalion by admitting the Rai and Limbu community people from the eastern part of the country. Not only was a particular community preferred in the military, but the chief of army staff was also from the same Rana family for 119 years. The tradition of Ranas becoming the chief of army staff continued until 1965, which shows how the foundation of Nepal’s military was feudal in structure.

Nepal’s military has not had to face external challenges after the fight with British Indian forces in 1816 and the subsequent Sugauli treaty except in 1976 when two of its battalions had been deployed to control the Khampa rebellion. But the military has had an unrelenting presence in Nepalese politics since the very foundation of the state of Nepal. Although its image is projected to be that of a professional institution that looks after the integrity of the Nepalese territory, the fact is that, throughout the history of Modern Nepal, it has been involved in the suppression of all kinds of movements and uprisings for social, economic, and political changes, and the protection of the ruling class. So much so that it was used against the first democratically elected prime minister of Nepal, BP Koirala.

The struggle to establish democracy

Nepal had had a brief tryst with democracy in the early 1950s when the political climate in the aftermath of the Second World War and the decolonization of the country’s southern neighbor, India, made it impossible for the Rana oligarchs to continue holding on to power. But the initial euphoria gave way to three decades of the autocratic monarchy when King Mahendra orchestrated a royal coup against Koirala. This was a time when the South Asian subcontinent had become a battleground for all variants of political regimes and ideologies, ranging from democracy to dictatorship. In Pakistan, the people’s anger against Zia Ul Haq’s dictatorship was rising after his government executed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto; in India, Indira Gandhi had come back to power after losing elections once on the heels of the emergency; Bangladesh had been reeling under dictatorship, with several high profile assassinations within a decade of its founding; and in Sri Lanka, an armed insurgency was gaining ground and would, in another three years, escalate exponentially.

In Nepal, the movement against autocratic monarchy had entered its third and decisive decade in the 1980s, the time when people across various parts of Asia were trying to get rid of their dictatorial governments. For Nepali politicians, writers and intellectuals who had fought against the country’s autocratic monarchy from the 1960s through the 1980s the May-18 Uprising came as a part of global solidarity against authoritarianism and dictatorship. It became a reference point for the Nepalese, who had been struggling to democratize the country’s politics and the public sphere. More importantly, the May-18 Uprising and its aftermath have important lessons for Nepal, as well as the world, of course, on what must be done to prevent militarism and authoritarianism and to build a formidable democratic polity. It took a sustained struggle, both armed and peaceful, to finally bring the monarch, under the fold of parliamentary politics in 1990.

The struggle to sustain democracy

The early 1990s saw unprecedented freedom of the press, political activities and the opening of organizations and unions, as citizens were allowed to publish freely and form unions and parties. Soon after, however, voices of disenchantment started popping up, with people belonging to different identity groups complaining that their voices were not represented in the constitution. However, hardly had the parliamentary politics begun to get its foothold when the Maoist insurgency, led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal aka Prachanda, began in 1996. It escalated exponentially after 2001 when the Sher Bahadur Deuba government declared an emergency and mobilized the army. After two failed dialogues with the Deuba government and the Lokendra Bahadur Chand government in 2002 and 2003 respectively, the Maoists finally decided to come to mainstream politics after an understanding with a political alliance of seven parliamentary parties in late 2005 to remove the autocratic monarchy led by King Gyanendra. From the 1990s onwards, the military made some attempts at maintaining some proximity to political parties even as it remained loyal to the monarchy. But some attempts at demilitarization, strengthening of the Nepal Police, and establishment of the Armed Police Force dealt a blow to the relationship between the military and political parties. That led the king and the military to come closer to one another. The military’s oppressive character became especially more evident when the government imposed an emergency in 2002 to tackle the Maoist insurgency.

This led to increased casualties not only among the insurgents but among the common people as well as it began indiscriminate killing, kidnapping and other forms of human rights abuses in the name of counter-insurgency. From partaking in oppressive schemes of rulers to turning into an ambitious entrepreneur institution, the military in Nepal is a major case study of what it should not be. And by taking advantage of the country turning into a militarized state, king Gyanendra organized a royal coup with the backing of the military, taking the country to yet another level of regression. King Gyanendra used the military for a political coup and put major political leaders under house arrest and deployed the military in all major media houses in the country. The king’s direct rule was removed by the second people’s movement in 2006. If there is any lesson to be learned from Nepal’s political history, it is that the military should in no way be brought between the rulers and the people. The 19-day movement did not only reinstate the democracy that had been suppressed by the king but also brought the Maoists to the mainstream politics. It also brought the country under the fold of the constitution again and helped remove the 240-year-old monarchy once and for all.

After the successful movement for the restoration of democracy in 2006, which culminated in the transformation of a Hindu monarchical state to a secular republican state, Nepal has undergone a complex process of restructuring of its social and political foundations. In the last three decades, different factors like the rise of identity politics, Maoist insurgency, and the global context have brought about a change in the social and political dynamics of Nepal. But the country has also been facing a crisis of stability as political parties have not been fully successful in their attempts to turn it into a democratic, inclusive state. As Nepal runs into political turbulence yet again, it is important more than ever before, to look back at history and realize that the use of authoritarian techniques for political power-grabbing as well as suppressing a dissenting people is detrimental to the democratic foundations of the country. If anything, the only contribution of militarism and authoritarianism is to aggravate the situation and create a condition in which the ideas of peace, justice, and human rights take a backseat.

About the Author:

« SRI LANKA: Four years prison term for contempt of court violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

Bangladesh: authoritarian repression in curbing civic space harms more than the pandemic », news filter, get involved, take action here.

Make a difference. You are just a few clicks away from making a contribution to Human Rights work

Subscribe for mail

Follow ahrc, get involved, journals & magazines.

• Ethics in Action
• TORTURE: Asian and Global Perspectives
• Human Rights Correspondence School
• Torture: Asian and Global
• Perspectives

Contact Information

Asian Human Rights Commission G/F, 52 Princess Margaret Road Ho Man Tin, Kowloon Hong Kong Tel: +(852) 2698 6339 Fax: +(852) 2698 6367

• Accessibility
• Subscriptions
• Subscription

• Contract Publishing
• Submissions
• Advertise With Us
• Testimonials

• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Indo Pacific
• Middle East
• Climate & Environment
• Defence & Security
• Development Partnerships
• Agriculture
• Politics & Government
• Science & Technology
• Special Reports
• Soft Diplomacy

Nepal: Contemporary Democratic Politics

Nepal’s democracy has made a distinctive identity of the Nepali version. Nepal has witnessed the experience of the second episode of democracy in the constitutional monarchy set-up from 1990 to 2007. Nepalis today are experiencing the first chapter of inclusive democracy in the infant republic declared in 2015. The result of seven decades of political trials since 1950 is not a new political issue for contemporary Nepalis. The preamble mentioned in the Seventh Constitution of Nepal 2015, the result of the ongoing political struggle, has clearly and accurately defined the past, present and future of Nepali politics in a terse chronicle. Democracy in Nepal has become achievable for the violent protests as a means of Nepali politics and the peaceful disobedience of the populist forces.

The story of politics, the consequences of pain and expectation in politics, whether or not we like it, we have no choice but to walk in the vicinity and sync of time and situation. These activities are interdependent in such political and social movements, creating many upheavals in public affairs. We can sum the political vibrations caused in the political repercussions in the political system as neither performance-oriented nor deliver solutions-based actions within the democratic templates even if there are politico-administrative praxis. The primary temporal challenge is seen on the surface. The primary reasons are the lack of strengthening of the foundations of parliamentary democracy, and the delay in the process of democratization of democracy by managing short, medium and long term political transitions.

In the present’s grammar of the Government of Nepal, maintaining a full or collective or comprehensive democracy is an inseparable concern of all. There are three areas of specialization in politics – government and state (polity), private sector (economy) and civil society (political society). The fourth pillar of political communication (media) is the positive activism of political parties and the promotion of the infrastructures of emerging politics. The role of this fourth pillar in promoting political education, political socialization and political advancement is crucial in the 21st century.

Nepali democracy is strengthened by maintaining the balance and control of the interrelationships between the three interdependent and interconnected sectors, including political proactiveness and political semantics, political-economic perspectives and practices, and the conduct of public administration. Ideological diversity and intersectional pluralism pervade political society. Efficient leadership helps bridge the gap between political thinking and performance-oriented delivery of the rhetorics. The practice of pragmatic political mastery and politico-administrative professionalism was not limited to the politics experienced in the Western political society. The time has come for Nepal not to be an exception. The above three bases of governance – thinking of political action, implementation of political ideas and adoption of public professionalism – are also the seeds of social transformation in Nepal. In political aspirations, leadership style and its culture naturally determine the intensity and extensity of political will.

In terms of economic thinking, the challenge is not only to imprison Nepal’s poor economy in the vision of prosperity or its kept tall promises. But also to turn it into realization is no less a daunting challenge. In order to achieve the goal of good governance and sustainable development of Nepal, the current cycle of coronavirus pandemic, the conflict-ridden legacy of the Nepali political economy, and the signs of negative economic growth are further disrupted and stunted. There should be full implementation of public policy in public affairs, whether they are annual policies and programs, fiscal and monetary policies.

It is equally important whether the three core public policies are backed and followed down and up in the strata of bureaucracy, government and governance in Nepal. It is essential that the basic national policy address current and future challenges. Apart from maintaining security, peace and tranquillity, the administration is not impervious to facilitate the state of flux of the state and society and to act as a catalyst for change. Politics should also be sensitive to public management bodies. Therefore, public opinion and political aspirations towards the state and the government assist bonafide citizens and assuage the public to convey positive sentiments.

Public intellectual circles have their own fundamental traditions and new political consciousness on behalf of civil society. Its concept of rational cooperation and coexistence will become more and more universally accepted. In this matter of importance, if the political parties involved in it adopt the ideological practice of mutual rationale of existentialism, in addition to a conventional and agitation role of a vigilant civic society. Civil society is circumscribed into the role of social opposition in Nepal. It can also be analyzed that the use and practice of political theory in Nepal have been misappropriated, abused or deviated if otherwise. These basic and general political problems have eroded internal and external sovereignty creating its thin layer of supreme authority in the design of popular sovereignty. Weaknesses in sovereignty have certainly not diminished some of the hopes in politics that will be resolved over time.

The first chapter of the Republic of Nepal will come to an end if the power struggles in the culture of the political leadership and tensions or anxiety continue in the incumbent leadership. The presidential system of the Executive Rule is not unlikely to be the beginning of the second chapter of the Republic of Nepal. In comparative politics, for example, French politics is in the version of the Fifth Republic after the French Revolution. Despite the failures and successes of Nepal’s political history, in a liberal democracy, all Nepali people depend on the art of doing politics as much as possible when time and tide are cruel and tough.

Nepal’s entry into federalism under this process is another stage of decentralization. The idea of ​​local-oriented self-government, which has been promised in the past or declared in political history, can be considered as the political remedy of overdue administrative affairs. In addition, the voice of inclusive democracy is characterized by respect for plurality and its spiritual acceptance and self-co-existence. It would not be an exaggeration to say that political knowledge is the vehicle of change in the form and structure of the state. In the context of changing world affairs, the end of the old, conservative and authoritarian tendencies is inevitable. The friction of equity and equality in our life world, society and national sphere can also be taken as a part and parcel of political conduct. It is time to jump from simple talk to follow the results of positive thinking in politics. Politics is considered the art of both the possible and the impossible. Because of these state activities, sophisticated and dynamic politics will become the current vernacular and reality of the new Nepal.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Climate & Environment
• Defence &Security
• Politics & Government
• Science & Technology
• Social Issues

Perspectives

Visitor’s Post

Dissecting narratives of democracy in Nepal

Iain Payne, November 26, 2020, Kathmandu

Share this article

Two steps forward, one step back, another step sideways?

In the aftermath of a decade-long conflict and five years after the promulgation of a new constitution, Nepal has had to grapple with many tenets of democratic governance amidst repeated human-induced and natural disruptions. The democratic project that began in the early 1990s remains a work in progress: democratic institutions exist, basic democratic practices like elections have taken place with routine efficiency, and federalisation has created new opportunities for more inclusive governance. However, the dividends of democracy like better representation of public interest, the participation of progressive political interest groups, and increased accountability of government continue to seem out of reach in the face of political party obduracy and resistance to the devolution of power. Citizen efficacy and civic engagement in the public realm can be glimpsed but struggle to emerge from the deep shadows of development and humanitarian assistance cast over Nepal.

Contemporary commentaries on Nepali democracy can be situated within three broad narratives: of incremental democratic consolidation notwithstanding occasional setbacks; of democratic backsliding and creeping authoritarianism; and of unchanged and enduring patterns of kleptocratic patrimonialism. While there are clear points of convergence in the analysis of these narratives, they also sit in tension. Ultimately, the narratives lead to divergent diagnoses of the fundamental direction that democracy in Nepal is moving in — whether democracy continues to consolidate (moving forwards), whether it is in decline (moving backwards), or whether movement in either direction is more significantly shaped by opportunistic groups of elites serving narrow self-interest (moving sideways). In what follows, we provide a brief overview of how each narrative is framed. In the concluding discussion, we draw attention to the complexity of Nepal’s democratic story.

Two steps forwards, one step back

The first narrative highlights Nepal’s gradual democratic gains over the last 70 years. Despite setbacks, this account observes how democracy has continued to muddle forward slowly to become more inclusive — ‘two steps forward, one step back’ — a story that comports well with the still-pervasive (but increasingly challenged) assumptions of ‘progress’ within the development and democracy-building fields. 

Thus, while the democratic gains of Nepal’s 1990 regime transformation from absolute to constitutional monarchy were undermined by the outbreak of the Maoist People’s War (1996 – 2006) and the consequent expansion of royal power that culminated in the 2005 coup d'état , authoritarian monarchical rule was, once and for all, brought to an end through the 2006 mass protest movement . The alliance forged between the Maoists and the parties of the democratic mainstream through the 2006 movement also led to the establishment of an elected, constituent assembly — the most representative in the country’s history — to write a new constitution. 

Where the first Constituent Assembly (2008 – 2012) failed to ratify a new constitution , a second Assembly (2013 – 2015) revived Nepal’s constitutional moment to promulgate the 2015 Constitution . And while many minority communities continue to argue that this Constitution regresses from the 2007 Interim Constitution and thus fails to deliver on the promise of a ‘ full democracy through a forward-looking restructuring of the state ’, the much more inclusive polity that the Constitution frames vis-à-vis the pre-war constitutional settlement cannot be dismissed. Federalism, proportional representation, and quotas have expanded space for marginalised groups to participate in political processes; there is greater constitutional recognition of the country’s religious and ethnic diversity ; and an expanded list of 31 constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights assures eventual redress of deep-set societal discrimination. 

Most obviously, despite some outbreaks of violence during the protests that accompanied the ratification of the new Constitution, the new constitutional settlement emphasizing inclusion has successfully averted the resumption of armed conflict. Going forward, it is generally agreed that embedding inclusion more substantively in the state-building enterprise will contribute towards a lasting peace. This means that the issues that remain — the inclusion of women in political decision-making , elite support for the devolution of power away from Kathmandu , and ensuring accountability of government — have to be seriously engaged sooner rather than later. However, the glass-half-full perspective of this narrative frames these as the next frontiers to be overcome through the ongoing process of constitutional implementation. 

Creeping authoritarianism

A second narrative presents democratic backsliding driven by creeping authoritarianism within the central Nepal Communist Party (NCP) government. Here, the near finalisation of the post-conflict political settlement through the 2015 Constitution is taken as something of a high watermark, with the subsequent faltering, subversive implementation of the Constitution as signs of democratic decline.

The narrative highlights the general subversion of the Constitution by the party in power, the NCP. In particular, the narrative focuses on the party’s stubborn resistance to the sharing of power beyond the political elite of Kathmandu. Despite the establishment of a three-tiered federation, almost every new law passed by the federal parliament continues to concentrate power in federal government actors, in flagrant disregard of the constitutional requirements for key government decision-making to be handed over to the provincial and local levels.

Read also: How Oli destroyed Nepal’s democratic machinery to serve his own ends

The narrative also points to shrinking space for political dissent and the government’s lack of intent to ensure that constitutionalised rights are meaningfully affected through legislation and regulation . In fact, in 2019, the NCP began advancing an agenda to stymie criticism and constrain civic engagement. Indeed, the general environment has become increasingly hostile for journalists and those critical of the NCP. The federal government has put forward a number of bills that have the potential to curtail free expression. Vaguely worded language in the Information Technology Management Bill , for example, would criminalise social media posts that are deemed to contain ‘improper’ content. Given the increasing utilisation of imprecise provisions in existing laws to detain and fine journalists and other prominent individuals, fears that the new provisions will be used to restrict freedom of expression seem well-founded. There are also concerns regarding attempts to undermine the independence of the National Human Rights Commission and moves to restrict the NGO sector . The lack of movement in appointing and activating various constitutional commissions is further evidence of disregard for constitutional safeguards over governmental impunity.  

In many ways, this account represents a resurfacing of a narrative that presents the threat of a creeping communist takeover of the state, a trope that is not new to Nepali political discourse and one that proliferated during the Maoist insurgency. The main opposition party, Nepali Congress, as well as independent analysts regularly point to the NCP’s ever-closer alignment with Chinese state interests and the consolidation of power within the hands of a few NCP leaders with the creeping construction of a one-party state along the lines of China. With elections only two years away, this alignment presents a credible threat to the survival of democratic institutions in Nepal.

Persisting kleptocracy 

The final narrative emphasises that democracy in Nepal has only ever been a thin veneer, papering over an extractive patrimonialism that has shaped political order from the birth of the Nepali state. The narrative thus stresses the historical continuity between regimes past and the present constitutional regime. 

Prior to the 1990 people’s movement for democracy, state power derived from the Shah monarchy and was wielded by the king or, as under the Ranas, the autocratic prime minister, for the benefit of the small ruling clique. Despite the democratisation of the state in the 1990s, the king, albeit with reduced authority, remained the primary locus source of political legitimacy. However, in this era, as political parties became embedded within the state, patronage networks began to shift away from the palace to orientate around individual party leaders. With the monarchy abolished in 2006, the political parties became the unchallenged organising structures through which patronage was dispensed, and amidst the fluidity of post-conflict transition politics, cross-party collusion became an increasing characteristic of the extraction and distribution practices. Government at national and local levels became increasingly informal (and undemocratic) in order to accommodate rent-seeking behaviour. 

Over time, a small number of senior leaders within the major political parties gained a tight grip over the entire political system, using financial incentives to influence individuals. Despite the regularity with which governments have changed, this political party leadership has been incredibly stable. From the late 1990s, the same small circle of leaders has essentially held all of the positions of authority almost unchallenged. This is because they have managed to maintain tight control over resource extraction, monopolised the flow of intra-party finances, and forged close alliances with unaccountable individuals outside the formal state apparatus. Indeed, subordinate positions within the parties now come as the gift of the senior leaders who reap financial benefit from those paying to move up the kleptocratic network’s hierarchy. 

Extraction pervades as a deep-rooted political culture. In many regards, little has changed since the Shah and Rana eras — the state remains a predatory institution in which the delivery of public goods and services is wholly subordinated to the appropriation of money and power for a small ruling clique and their clients. The poor performance of state institutions and their continuing incapability owes to an entrenched kleptocratic network that is only concerned with state institutions in so far as they provide access to resources or a convenient way to dispense patronage to their clients. Every state institution is tainted by the kleptocratic network — either hollowed out (i.e., captured to compromise its regulatory ability to prevent pilfering of state resources) or weaponized (i.e., deliberately corrupted to positively engage in resource extraction).   

Democracy in Nepal: a complex story

While the three narratives sketched out above generally draw on the same factual foundations, their points of emphasis provide the basis for their distinction. In particular, subtle differences regarding what each considers to be the primary time period for examination shapes their analyses. While the narrative of creeping authoritarianism locates itself within the most recent events and machinations of the NCP, the two steps forwards, one step back narrative principally focuses on a comparison between the late 1990s conflict era and today. In contrast, the narrative of persistent kleptocracy searches for patterns of rent-seeking over the entire 250-year lifespan of the Nepali state.

Read also: When it comes to civil liberties, KP Oli is starting to look like the tyrants he once fought

The differences result in divergent diagnoses of the fundamental direction in which democracy in Nepal is moving. The most optimistic formulation, of two steps forwards, one step back, is generally the predominant frame engaged by development actors and progressive activists, where democratic progress is made, even if in a somewhat muddled way, in a manner that is often presented as inexorable. The narratives of creeping authoritarianism and persistent kleptocracy, however, temper expectations by highlighting the threats to democracy, which should not be viewed as just speed bumps on the way to inevitable consolidation, but sure signs of danger.

Rather than seeking to resolve all of the narrative differences to construct a single neat storyline, it may be useful to view them together in tension. For each narrative serves an important purpose, complicating the state of democracy in Nepal. Such an approach allows us to recognise that the upward bending of Nepal’s trajectory of political reform that was achieved by popular movements since 1990 has been flattened by individualized politics and is being forced downward by society-wide networks of kleptocrats. Failure to understand and purposefully engage these sophisticated networks will cost Nepal its democratic momentum and ultimately its early gains.

Note: This article originally appeared as a blog post written for the International Association of Constitutional Law (IACL) Global Roundtable on 'Democracy 2020: Assessing Constitutional Decay, Breakdown, and Renewal Worldwide' and can be found here .

Footnote. This article was first published as part of a book.

Iain Payne  Iain Payne is associated with Niti Foundation.

Get the best of

You may also like.

The Record - December 28, 2020

Even those within Deuba’s own party think he is building an alliance with the PM

The Record - August 11, 2020

From the CJ on down, Nepal’s top-rung judges have amassed a track record of questionable verdicts

Roshan Sedhai - February 4, 2020

One June 2004 , Krishna Prasad was on his way to his grandparents’ home in Jayamangla, Chitwan, when he disappeared mid-journey. The Adhikari family still awaits justice.

The Record - April 11, 2020

A daily summary of Covid19 related developments that matter

The Record - May 13, 2020

The Record - March 26, 2021

The Record is back with its mini-series of artists and the projects they worked on during the lockdown and the pandemic.

Rubin Ghimire - May 4, 2020

Dignified regional cooperation is the need of the hour and self-reliance the major goal

Record Nepal - July 18, 2021

Now that Deuba has obtained the vote of confidence in the House, he will need to move quickly and decisively to control the pandemic and ensure vaccinations for all.

Home » Culture in Nepal, Art, Cuisine, Religion and Tradition » The History of Nepal, Heritage » Democracy in Nepal, History

Democracy in Nepal, History

The well-known Kot Massacre saw to the rise of the Rana regime . They ruled Nepal for approximately 104 years, before there was any hope for democracy in Nepal . The members of the Rana regime were Britain’s allies and supported their war efforts during World War I and World War 2. It took the determination of a King who was blackmailed and forced to back the Ranas, to take a stand - and he did.

By the year 1950, the growing unhappiness of the Nepali people was evident, with a few anti-Rana political parties flaring up all over the country. King Tribhuvan fled to India with his family to escape the wrath of the Ranas, who were quickly losing ground. Public outrage and uproar led by King Tribhuvan soon toppled the Rana regime. The King was reinstated as the ruler of Nepal in 1951 and he set about transforming Nepal into a democratic country. With political parties, voting rights and the freedom to make their own decisions, it seemed that democracy in Nepal was going to thrive.

By 1959 King Tribhuvan died and his son, King Mahendra, was in power. After a failed election, the government was dismissed and political parties were abolished. King Mahendra established a new government that consisted of councils and not political parties. This gave the King sole power of the country and small changes (such as Nepali being the only official language) created a time bomb waiting to explode. The Mahendra Museum has detailed exhibits on his life as king and the decisions he made that influenced the country. As expected, student demonstrations and public upset had the country in turmoil as King Birendra succeeded his father in 1972. Unfortunately, so much damage had been done to Nepal that the 1991 elections and another change in government procedures just worsened the economic crisis of the country.

Over the following years, the reoccurring violence and political struggles had not yet ceased. With the vast differences in options between political parties, the lapse in constitutional rights, the uprising of rebel parties such as the Maoists and the restrictions in press, makes one wonder is there will ever be true democracy in Nepal. Though the position in Nepal currently seems to have improved, one never knows when the next battle might begin.

back to History of Nepal

Related Page

Hanuman dhoka.

Upon entering the Hanuman Dhoka Palace Complex you will be greeted by a statue of Hanuman which was erected in 1672. He acts as the guardian of the palace and visitors assist in keeping his face painted red. Lord Narasimha can also be seen near the entrance and is a fascinating sight. The statue, which depicts Narasimha as half lion and half man, is defeating Hiranyakasipu, a known demon. It ...

Moti Azima Gallery

There are so many different things to see and do in Nepal that you will be spoilt for choice when you visit. There are temples, shrines, monuments and statues. Colorful festivals with ancient traditions will brighten even the gloomiest of days, while a visit to one of Nepal’s theaters will inspire, entertain and even educate you. There are many different aspects of the country’s culture ...

Read The Diplomat , Know The Asia-Pacific

• Central Asia
• Southeast Asia
• Environment
• Asia Defense
• China Power
• Crossroads Asia
• Flashpoints
• Pacific Money
• Tokyo Report
• Trans-Pacific View
• Photo Essays
• Write for Us
• Subscriptions

Nepal’s Democracy Enters Another Challenging Phase

Recent features.

Why Is South Korea’s President Yoon So Unpopular?

The Logic of China’s Careful Defense Industry Purge

The Ko Wen-je Case Points to Deeper Problems in Taiwan Politics

Anarchy in Anyar: A Messy Revolution in Myanmar’s Central Dry Zone

The Complex Legacy of Ahmad Shah Massoud

Diplomacy Beyond the Elections: How China Is Preparing for a Post-Biden America

Sri Lanka’s Presidential Manifestos: What’s Promised for Women?

The Global Battle for Chip Talent: South Korea’s Strategic Dilemma

Bangladesh’s New Border Stance Signals a Shift in Its Approach to India 

The Solomon Islands-China Relationship: 5 Years On

Finding Home in Bishkek: Kyrgyzstan’s South Asian Expats

Kashmir at the Boiling Point as Elections Loom

The pulse  |  politics  |  south asia.

The recent Supreme Court order reinstating parliament has put the constitution back on track.

Nepali Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba is Nepal’s 43rd prime minister.

On July 12, the Supreme Court of Nepal overturned Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli’s May 21 decision to dissolve the House of Representatives, and issued a judicial writ to appoint Nepali Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba as the country’s prime minister as per Article 76(5) of Nepal’s constitution.

This is the second time in five months that the apex court is reinstating the House. It had done so on February 23 as well, after Oli dissolved it on December 20, 2020.

The court’s latest order ends Oli’s three-and-a-half-year stint as Nepal’s prime minister.

Back in May, Deuba and other leaders of the opposition alliance had submitted the signatures of 149 lawmakers, including those of 26 legislators of the Jhala NathKhanal-Madhav Nepal faction of the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) to President Bidya Devi Bhandari.

But Bhandari rejected Deuba’s claim to form a new government under Article 76 (5), and went on to dissolve the 275-member lower house at the recommendation of Oli. Snap elections were announced on November 12 and November 19.

Petitions were filed in the court against these controversial decisions. The Supreme Court has ruled now that their decisions were unconstitutional.

According to Bhimarjun Acharya, a lawyer who specializes on constitutional law, the apex court verdict will contribute to “the constitution’s longevity, and with a strongly worded verdict, the court has told the authorities to stop making a mockery of the constitution.”

The ruling, he said “has brought the constitution back on track. All in all, it is the victory of the rule of law, constitutionalism, independence of judiciary and democracy.”

However, the court verdict has also been criticized with some, including Oli, accusing it of judicial activism . Did Nepal’s Supreme Court go overboard in appointing a prime minister?

While the verdict is a victory for Nepal’s constitution it may not bring political uncertainty to an end. Deuba needs to seek a vote of confidence in the House in a month. His position is shaky as Nepal’s largest party, the CPN-UML, is sitting in the opposition. There is no telling what Oli’s next steps will be. Besides, will all the legislators, who backed Deuba, continue to support him in the upcoming vote of confidence?

The Supreme Court order may have put Nepal’s democracy back on track but enormous challenges remain.

According to Dr. Kyungmee Kim, a visiting researcher at the Department of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University, “the lack of inclusiveness and representation of diverse minorities in the country is a threat to consolidate democracy.”  While Nepal “has made tremendous progress” with regard to democratization over the past decade, “the progress is stagnant if not under threat due to the emergence of political leaders who have autocratic tendencies.”

In addition, Nepal’s democracy is under pressure from right-wing Hindutva forces in India as also from China’s communists. The Nepal Communist Party (NCP) was formed in 2018 with the blessings of China, and the Oli government that was formed as a result and had the support of the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party. Its role in shoring up support for the Oli government throughout the political crisis over the past two years was evident.

As for India, the country is now governed by a right-wing Hindutva nationalist party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), whose ideological driver, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, has often said that it wishes to see Nepal as a Hindu Rastra (state). It is also in favor of the restoration of monarchy in Nepal and the return of ousted king Gyanendra Shah.

A return to the monarchical system or re-establishment of a Hindu state would mean the death of democracy in Nepal, as demonstrations calling for these will intensify as the flow of funding for them grows.

Calls for the establishment of a Hindu state and for restoration of the monarchy are growing in Nepal. This is causing unease among some sections of the Nepali public.

Some leaders of the Nepali Congress support the establishment of a Hindu state. Will Deuba be able to keep them under check? He faces an uphill task in taking Nepal’s democracy forward.

Several tasks, including vaccinating the Nepali population, revitalizing the sluggish economy, curbing corruption, and conducting free and fair elections, await Nepal’s new prime minister.

Oli has been corralled this time around but he cannot be written off. The possibility of Deuba and Oli coming together for the next elections cannot be ruled out. The situation is murky and the future of Nepal’s democracy remains unclear.

Nepal’s Once-and-Future Prime Minister: What to Expect From Deuba’s Foreign Policy

By kamal dev bhattarai.

Can Nepal’s New Prime Minister Navigate Rough Political Seas?

Nepal Gets a New Prime Minister (For Now)

By binaj gurubacharya.

The Return of the Left Alliance in Nepal Changes Regional Power Dynamics

By rishi gupta.

Arakan Army Commander-in-Chief Twan Mrat Naing on the Future of Rakhine State

By rajeev bhattacharyya.

US Air Force Deploys More Stealth Jets to Southeast Asia

By christopher woody.

Islamic Fundamentalism Raises Its Head in Post-Hasina Bangladesh

By snigdhendu bhattacharya.

Kim Jong Un Abandoned Unification. What Do North Koreans Think?

By kwangbaek lee and rose adams.

By K. Tristan Tang

By James Baron

By Naw Theresa

By Freshta Jalalzai

Democratic Practice and Good Governance in Nepal

• First Online: 13 November 2020

Cite this chapter

• Girdhari Dahal 6  

768 Accesses

2 Citations

Nepal was declared a Federal Democratic Republic following the mass movement of 2006 and was institutionalized by the Constitution of Nepal promulgated through Constitutional Assembly (CA) in 2015. It was a dream of people to draft their constitution from the CA since 1951 and to have a responsible and good government. Over the decades, different democratic movements of Nepal had a strong sentiment for good governance in Nepal. However, Nepal faced different problems and issues embedded with good governance. Given this fact, the main objective of this chapter is to explore democratic movements and the practice of good governance in Nepal. It also tries to analyze the role of political movements for democracy, and the relation between democracy and good governance. Democracy and good governance are closely related to one another. Democratic movements in Nepal started from the period of autocratic Rana regime back in the 1940s. Many democratic movements and revolutions held during different periods in the modern political history of Nepal have paved foundation for the establishment of federal democratic republic. However, there were different barriers in democratic movements and the implementation of good governance amid different types of prevailing malfunctions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Emerging Governance Crises in Twenty-First Century Nigeria

Democracy and Political Governance in South Africa

Democratic Governance Reforms in Turkey and Their Implications

Adhikari, Narayan Psd. (2014, February 6). Personal Communication. Pokhara.

Google Scholar  

Bang, H., & Esmark, A. (2013). A systems theory of Good Governance. ICPP, Grenoble, 45.

Comprehensive Peace Accord . (2006). The Comprehensive Peace Accord Concluded between the Government of Nepal and Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). Retrieved from http:// www.lawcommission.gov.np pdf.

Constitution of Nepal. (2015). The Government of Nepal. Kathmandu: Kanun Kitab Bebastha Samittee.

Dahal, R. (1999). Prospects of Good Governance. In G. B. Thapa (Ed.), Decentralization and Good Governance in Nepal . Germany: Political Science Association of Nepal Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES).

Dahal, G. (2011). Good Governance: Theoretical Perspective. Pragyik Prabhaha, Pokhara, Bi-annual Research Journal, 2 (Year 1st), 1–7.

Dahal, G. (2015). Constitutional Assembly of Nepal Milestone for Peace, Development and Political Stability. KMC Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 4 (1), 70–77.

Dahal, D. R., Uprety, H., & Subba, P. (2002). Defining Good Governance. In Good Governance & Decentralization in Nepal . GDS Center for Governance & Development Studies in cooperation with Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftuing (FES).

http://soscbaha.org/downloads/mcrl2014/mcrl2014.pdf .

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/revolution.pdf .

http://www.gdrc.org/u-gov/escap-governance.htm .

http://www.ipa.government.bg/sites/default/files/pregled-dobro_upravlenie.pdf .

http://www.yourdictionary.com/revolution%20pdf .

https://modernrevolutionsc.podbean.com/e/2006-democracy-movement-in-nepal-by-kristel-and-juliana .

https://modernrevolutionsc.podbean.com/e/2006-democracy-movement-in-nepal-by-kristel-and-julianapdf .

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-politics.pdf .

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/revolution .

Juliana, K. (2008). 2006 Democracy Movement in Nepal .

Karki, B. B. (2001). A Decade of Governance: Constitutional practice, Issues of Governance in Nepal . In A. P. Shrestha & S. R. Dahal (Eds.), Nepal Foundation for Advanced Studies (NEFAS) Coalition for Action on South Asian Cooperation (CASAC) . Germany: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES).

Krause, C. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/mikeklinglerfans/posts/10153915257159289 .

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. (1998). India: Longman Group Ltd.

Mondal, P. (2016). Aristotle’s Theory of Revolution: Causes and Methods to Prevent Revolution. Retrieved from http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/politics/aristotles-theory-of-revolution-causes-and-methods-to-prevent-revolution/40126/ .

Neil, T. O. (2007). Neopatrimonialism and Public Sector Performance and Reform . Retrieved from https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/4393.pdf .

Puspalal Smriti Pratisthan. (2013). Document of Communist Party. Kathamandu.

Shaha, R. (1993). Politics in Nepal 1980–91. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers and Distributors.

Sharma, R. H. (1995). Great man shree Sukrraj Sastri. Martyr Shukra Memory Book. Kathamandu: Ganendrabhadur Kayasth.

The Interim Constitution of Nepal. (2007). Nepal Government, Kanun Kitab Babastha Samittee. Kathmandu

The Constitution of Nepal. (2015). Nepal Government, Kanun Kitab Babastha Samittee. Kathmandu.

United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Retrieved from http://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/good-governance.pdf .

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Prof. Taranath Baral, Department of Political Science, Tribhuvan University, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara, for making a thorough reading of this chapter and for the valuable advice. Similarly, I would like to thank Dr. Prakash Upadhyay, Department of Anthropology, Tribhuvan University, Prithivi Narayan Campus for his valuable suggestions to bring out this chapter in this form and Dr. Min Pun, Department of English, Tribhuvan University, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara, for the language edit.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Political Science, Tribhuvan University, Pokhara, Nepal

Girdhari Dahal

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Public Administration, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi, Bangladesh

Md. Nurul Momen

Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

Rajendra Baikady

Department of Social Work, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Department of Social Work, Shandong University, Shandong, China

Cheng Sheng Li

Dept of Economic Studies and Planning, Central University of Karnataka, Kadganchi, Karnataka, India

M. Basavaraj

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Dahal, G. (2020). Democratic Practice and Good Governance in Nepal. In: Momen, M.N., Baikady, R., Sheng Li, C., Basavaraj, M. (eds) Building Sustainable Communities. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2393-9_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2393-9_8

Published : 13 November 2020

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-15-2392-2

Online ISBN : 978-981-15-2393-9

eBook Packages : Economics and Finance Economics and Finance (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Political Instability And Uncertainty Loom Large In Nepal

By  gaurab shumsher thapa.

• February 16, 2021

This article was originally published in South Asian Voices.

Nepal’s domestic politics have been undergoing a turbulent and significant shift. On December 20, 2020, at the recommendation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, President Bidya Devi Bhandari  dissolved  the House of Representatives, calling for snap elections in April and May 2021. Oli’s move was a result of a serious internal rift within the ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP) that threatened to depose him from power. Opposition parties and other civil society stakeholders have condemned the move as unconstitutional and several writs have been  filed  against the move at the Supreme Court (SC) with hearings underway. Massive  protests  have taken place condemning the prime minister’s move. If the SC reinstates the parliament, Oli is in course to lose the moral authority to govern and could be subject to a vote of no-confidence. If the SC validates his move, it is unclear if he would be able to return to power with a majority.

The formation of a strong government after decades of political instability was expected to lead to a socioeconomic transformation of Nepal. Regardless of the SC’s decision, the country is likely to see an escalation of political tensions in the days ahead. The internal rift that led to the December parliamentary dissolution and the political dimensions of the current predicament along with the domestic and geopolitical implications of internal political instability will lead to a serious and long-term weakening of Nepal’s democratic fabric.

Power Sharing and Legitimacy in the NCP

Differences between NCP chairs Oli and former Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal have largely premised on a power-sharing arrangement, leading to a vertical division in the party. In the December 2017 parliamentary elections, a coalition between the Oli-led Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist or UML) and the Dahal-led Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Center or MC)  won  nearly two-thirds of the seats. In May 2018, both parties merged to  form  the NCP. However, internal politics weakened this merger. While both the factions claim to represent the authentic party, the Election Commission has sought clarifications from both factions before deciding on the matter. According to the  Political Party Act , the faction that can substantiate its claim by providing signatures of at least 40 percent of its central committee members is eligible to get recognized as the official party. The faction that is officially recognized will get the privilege of retaining the party and election symbol, while the unrecognized faction will have to register as a new party which can hamper its future electoral prospects. A faction led by Dahal and former Prime Minister Madahav Kumar Nepal, was planning to initiate a vote of no-confidence motion against Oli but, sensing an imminent threat to his position, Oli decided to motion for the dissolution of the parliament.

Internal Party Dynamics

Several internal political dynamics have led to the current state of turmoil within the NCP. Dahal has accused Oli of disregarding the power-sharing arrangement agreed upon during the formation of NCP according to which Oli was  supposed  to hand over either the premiership or the executive chairmanship of the party to Dahal. In September 2020, both the leaders reached an  agreement  under which Oli would serve the remainder of his term as prime minister and Dahal would act as the executive chair of the party. Yet, Oli  failed  to demonstrate any intention to relinquish either post, increasing friction within the party. Additionally, Oli made unilateral appointments to several cabinet and government positions, further consolidating his individual authority over the newly formed NCP. He also  sidelined  the senior leader of the NCP and former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal, leading Nepal to side with Dahal over Oli. Consequently, Oli chose to dissolve the parliament and seek a fresh mandate rather than face a vote of no-confidence. Importantly, party unity between the Marxist-Leninist CPN (UML) and the Maoist CPN (MC) did not lead to expected ideological unification.

Domestic Politics and Geopolitics

Geopolitical factors and external actors have historically impacted Nepal’s domestic political landscape. Recently, in a bid to cement his authority over the NCP, Oli has attempted to improve ties with India—lately strained due to Nepal’s  inclusion  of disputed territories in its new political map—resulting in recent  high-level visits  from both countries. India has also  provided  Nepal with one million doses of COVID-19 vaccines as part of its vaccine diplomacy efforts in the region. However, while India has previously  interfered  in Nepal’s  domestic politics , it has described the current power struggle as an “ internal matter ” to prevent backlash from Nepali policymakers and to avoid a potential spillover of political unrest.

However, India’s traditionally dominant influence in Nepal has been challenged by China’s ascendancy in recent years. Due to  fears  of Tibetans potentially using Nepal’s soil to conduct anti-China activities, China considers Nepal important to its national security strategy. Beijing has traditionally maintained a non-interventionist approach to foreign policy; however, this approach is gradually changing as is evident from the Chinese ambassador to Nepal’s  proactive efforts  to  address  current crises within the NCP. Nepal’s media  speculates  that China is in favor of keeping the NCP intact as the ideological affinity between the NCP and the Communist Party of China could help China exert its political and economic influence over Nepal.

Although China is aware of India’s traditionally influential role in Nepal, it is also  skeptical  of growing U.S. interest in the Himalayan state; especially considering Oli’s push for parliamentary approval of the USD $500 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) grant assistance from the United States to finance the construction of electrical transmission lines in Nepal. In contrast, Dahal has opposed the MCC and has described it as part of the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific Strategy to contain China. Given Nepal is a signatory to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing might prefer development projects under the BRI framework and could lobby the Nepali government to delay or reject U.S.-led projects.

Implications for Future Governance

After the political  changes  of 2006 which ended Nepal’s decade-long armed conflict, it was expected that political stability would usher in economic development to the country. Moreover, a strong majority government under Oli raised hopes of achieving modernization. Sadly, ruling party leaders have instead engaged in a bitter power struggle, and government  corruption scandals  have undermined trust in the administration.

Amidst the current turmoil within the NCP, the main opposition party, Nepali Congress (NC), is hoping that an NCP division will raise its prospects of coming to power in the future. Although the NC has  denounced  Oli’s move for snap elections as unconstitutional, it has also stated that it will not shy away from elections if the SC decides to dissolve the lower house. Sensing increasing instability, several royalist parties and groups have accused the government of  corruption  and protested on the streets for the reinstatement of the Hindu state and constitutional monarchy to reinvent and stabilize Nepal’s image and identity.

The last parliamentary elections had provided a  mandate  of five years for the NCP to govern the country. However, Oli  decided  to seek a fresh mandate, claiming that the Dahal-Nepal faction obstructed the smooth functioning of the government. Unfortunately, domestic political instability has resurfaced as the result of an internal personality rift within the party. This worsening democratic situation will not benefit either India or China—both want to circumvent potential spillover effects. Even if the SC validates Oli’s move, elections in April are not confirmed. If elections were not held within six months from the date of dissolution, a constitutional crisis could occur. If the Supreme Court overturns Oli’s decision, he could lose his position as both the prime minister and the NCP chair. Regardless of the outcome, Nepali politics is bound to face deepening uncertainty in the days ahead.

This article was originally published in  South Asian Voices.

Recent & Related

About Stimson

Transparency.

• 202.223.5956
• 1211 Connecticut Ave NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
• Fax: 202.238.9604
• 202.478.3437
• Caiti Goodman
• Communications Dept.
• News & Announcements

Copyright The Henry L. Stimson Center

Privacy Policy

Subscription Options

Research areas trade & technology security & strategy human security & governance climate & natural resources pivotal places.

• Asia & the Indo-Pacific
• Middle East & North Africa

Publications & Project Lists South Asia Voices Publication Highlights Global Governance Innovation Network Updates Mekong Dam Monitor: Weekly Alerts and Advisories Middle East Voices Updates 38 North: News and Analysis on North Korea

• All News & Analysis (Approx Weekly)
• 38 North Today (Frequently)
• Only Breaking News (Occasional)

Wednesday, 11 September, 2024

Nepal Democracy

Keeping Freedom in Ne's Work

Politics in Nepal: Challenges and Opportunities

Nepal, a small Himalayan country located between India and China, has a complex political landscape. Since the transition from monarchy to republic in 2008, Nepal has witnessed numerous changes in its political system , including the adoption of a new constitution in 2015. However, the country still faces many challenges in terms of political stability and governance.

Political System 

Nepal is a federal democratic republic with a bicameral parliament and a multi-party system.  However, debates and controversies regarding federalism, representation, and minority rights continue despite the adoption of a new constitution in 2015.

Political Parties 

Nepal has a vibrant political party system with more than 100 registered political parties. The major parties include the Nepal Communist Party, Nepali Congress, and Rastriya Janata Party. However, the frequent changes in political alliances and leadership have led to instability and uncertainty in the political landscape.

Political Challenges 

Nepal faces major challenges in its political system including corruption, which has negatively impacted economic development and social welfare. Other challenges include inadequate infrastructure, limited access to education and healthcare, and issues related to human rights and gender equality.

Opportunities for Political Reform 

Nepal has opportunities for political reform and development, including a young and growing population, a strategic location, and abundant natural resources. The country has also made significant progress in political stability and democratic governance since the end of the civil war in 2006.

Government Opportunities

The government in Nepal is exploring new initiatives to promote sustainable transportation, including incentivizing the use of eco-friendly options like the Electric Scooter. These efforts can help reduce Nepal’s carbon footprint and improve the health and well-being of its citizens.

Additionally, the government can leverage this opportunity to promote economic growth and job creation in the clean energy sector. By teaching on how to wash Mi Electric Scooters to properly maintain it. Nepalese citizens can contribute to the success of this initiative and help shape the future of sustainable transportation in their country.

The political landscape in Nepal is complex and multifaceted, with both challenges and opportunities. 

Addressing the challenges facing the country will require a concerted effort from all stakeholders, including the following:

Civil society

Private sector.

By working together, Nepal can harness its potential and achieve greater political stability, social welfare, and economic development.

As the result of a decade-long civil war that ended in 2005, the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal changed from a monarchy to a multiparty representative democratic republic in 2008. In 2004, International IDEA and the State of Democracy in South Asia/Nepal Chapter carried out a survey on the state of democracy in Nepal. Three years later, they conducted a follow-up survey to gauge changing perceptions of democracy. The 2004 assessment, done at a time of armed conflict and civil war, set a precedent for research to be performed in conflict areas, which had previously been excluded. The 2004 and 2007 assessments revealed cultural shifts; those surveyed were substantially more committed to democratic ideals and a progressive agenda in 2007 than in 2004. The 2007 assessment was also instrumental in setting an agenda for the post-conflict reconstruction of the Nepali state after its political transition. The findings of both assessments were debated publicly in print and electronic media.

In June 2013, the interim government of Nepal announced that elections for a new Constituent Assembly would be held in November of that year, as any further postponement of the election would only deepen the current political crisis. In this context, the State of Democracy in South Asia/Nepal Chapter of the Nepal Center for Contemporary Studies and International IDEA undertook a third field-based survey, The Citizen Survey: Nepal in Transition in 2013, to explore citizens' views on the current democratic processes. This survey analysed responses to the same set of questions asked during the first two assessments.

The state of democracy in Nepal was also assessed in the region-wide State of Democracy in South Asia report. This is the only regional report to date that has been produced as a result of the cooperation of experts from India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. The State of Democracy in South Asia project sought to locate democracy in the context of that region in order to discover what South Asians think about democracy and how they have adapted its ideas to their specific circumstances.

Assessment Reports

• Nepal in Transition- A study on the State of Democracy
• SoD Summary - State of Democracy in South Asia: Nepal

Submit feedback

Submit questions or comments about the Data or Tool

How did you find out about this? What do you like about it? What did you expect but did not find in using the Data or Tool?

To see how we handle your personal data, please read our Privacy Policy .

Cookie Notice

Our Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy have changed. Please read them to understand your rights and obligations, including how you can use our resources.

By continuing to use this site, without changing your settings, you are indicating that you accept this policy.

• Computational Phylogenetics
• Evolutionary Biology
• Phylogenetics

Democratic Practice and Good Governance In Nepal

• February 2017
• Journal of Political Science 17:18
• CC BY-SA 4.0

• Prithvi Narayan Campus

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Badri Nath Baral
• Khadga K.C.
• Bal Kumar Chaudhary
• Jagadish Oli

• Shishir Shakya
• Subuna Basnet

• Ramesh Kumar KC
• Suman Dahal
• Girdhari Dahal

• Dr Chandra Sharma Poudyal

• FINANC MANAGE
• Nepal Government
• Kanun Kitab Babastha
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Are Americans more attracted to anger or hope? Don Watson reports from the US election trail

Vice Chancellor's Fellow and Professorial Fellow, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University

Disclosure statement

Dennis Altman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

La Trobe University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

In 2016, Don Watson wrote a remarkable Quarterly Essay predicting the success of Trump, when political commentators were largely united in their belief that Hillary Clinton would win the election.

So it’s hardly surprising Watson was back in the United States this year to track Trump’s possible return to the White House. But politics can be a cruel game to follow, and he was clearly caught out by the rapid replacement of President Joe Biden by Kamala Harris – and a very different campaign.

It is too early to analyse the impact of the Trump/Harris debate, but there is little doubt that Harris handled herself impressively and established herself as a viable candidate. How many undecided voters will be put off by Trump’s bluster and boastfulness remains to be seen.

The first half of High Noon , Watson’s new Quarterly Essay on the US election, reads as if Trump’s re-election is inevitable. Watson had no illusions about Biden’s electability in 2024. Whether fairly or not, Biden was widely regarded as too old and unable to defend his record. That said, it is strange Watson has so little to say about Biden’s success four years ago, when he won back some of those voters who had opted for Trump.

Review: Quarterly Essay – High Noon: Trump, Harris and America on the Brink by Don Watson (Black Inc.)

Watson claims Bernie Sanders might have done better than Hillary Clinton in 2016 – but I’m not convinced. The Republicans would have consistently portrayed Sanders as a dangerous socialist, if not a communist – and for reasons Watson himself acknowledges, the dirt would probably have stuck. Against Sanders, Trump would have portrayed himself as the defender of American values in ways he could not four years later against Biden.

Appalled and enchanted by the US

Watson writes in the long tradition of outsiders who have traversed the US in search of understanding the complexities of the country.

At his best, as in his account of life in Detroit and nearby Kalamazoo, Michigan, he combines analysis with poetic prose, often drawing on passing conversations to illuminate perceptions of the world rarely shared by readers of the Quarterly Essays. A taxi driver in Queens echoes Trump’s diatribes against illegal immigrants: “I am very angry,” he tells Watson. “Americans are very angry.”

Rather like journalist Nick Bryant, author of The Forever War , Watson is simultaneously appalled and enchanted by the US.

Like Bryant, he is aware of growing inequality, persistent racism and the extent of its violence, even as he relishes the energy and inventiveness of so much of American life. Like me, Watson knows that entering the US recalls the moment in The Wizard of Oz where black and white suddenly transforms to colour.

He writes that Trump has turned politics into “the wildly adversarial and addictive world” of TV wrestling. We understand “wrestlers are real, but not real […] personifications of good and evil, courage and cowardice, patriotism and treachery”.

As Watson suggests, Trump has created “a fictional setting for his fictions” where “he can be as abusive and as untruthful as he likes” – and where “boasting, posturing and abusing” are expected.

One question dominates High Noon, as it did his earlier essay. Namely: what explains Trump’s ability to capture the Republican Party – and perhaps to become only the second president to be re-elected after losing the election following their first term?

Watson is good at explaining Trump’s ability to channel the discontent and anger of millions of Americans. But he fails to explain the almost total defeat of the Republican establishment, which has so jettisoned its own past that no senior member of any Republican administration before Trump could be found to speak at their convention.

Former vice president Dick Cheney (under George W. Bush) is among the establishment Republicans who’ve recently announced their support for Harris, hardly surprising as his daughter, Liz Cheney, lost her position in Congress due to her antipathy to Trump.

There is surprisingly little reflection on the culture wars, which have become central to Republican campaigns over the past decade. And no discussion of abortion or attacks on woke ideologies (gender, critical race theory), which have become staples of the MAGA language and help cement the white evangelical vote for Trump.

I wish Watson had spoken to more women, given the growing gender gap within American politics and the way Harris’ nomination has accelerated that. A recent poll shows Harris leading Trump by 13 points among women. Her success in a couple of key states, including Arizona and Nevada, may hinge on otherwise apolitical women turning out to vote on referenda to ban abortions.

Abortion is for Trump what Gaza is for Harris: an issue that arouses great passions that are impossible to reconcile among people they could normally take for granted. In Tuesday’s presidential debate, Trump equivocated on abortion , making unsubstantiated claims for postpartum terminations while claiming he’s “great for women and their reproductive rights”.

I suspect the last section of High Noon was written after Watson returned to Australia. His account of Harris’ nomination and the early stages of the 2024 campaign lack the firsthand immediacy of the earlier sections.

Capitalism trumps democracy

The overriding question Watson poses is: how can a country that believes itself to be a democracy, the leader of “the Free World”, possibly elect a demagogue like Trump?

In the end, it seems, capitalism trumps democracy. Watson quotes the right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel as saying he no longer believes freedom and democracy are compatible. Harris consistently stresses that Trump’s tax proposals would further increase economic inequality within the US.

“An election,” writes Watson, “is democracy’s effort to outrun the anger and envy arising from its failure to honour the promise of a fair shake for everyone.” My hunch is that Harris understands this. The apoplectic columns in the Murdoch press claiming she is light on policy ignore the fact Clinton lost in 2016 despite an armoury of policies designed to attract working-class voters.

Trump is almost unique in winning (and then losing) by speaking of anger and decline. Harris is in the tradition of both Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama in proclaiming hope. (In choosing the title for his essay, did Watson remember that Reagan cited High Noon as his favourite film ?)

I wish Watson had held off finishing this essay long enough to see whether the Harris campaign’s instinctive sense of how to defeat Trump through positivity over anger, stressing his egoism against her desire to unify the country, pays off.

Why do we care so much?

Is Trump a fascist? Watson skirts around this question. He is correct, though, in pointing to Trump’s admiration for Hungarian authoritarian prime minister Viktor Orban .

In today’s debate, Trump called Orban “one of the most respected men, they call him a strong man” and quoted him as saying “you need Trump back as president”. Trump further claimed China and North Korea are “afraid” of him.

Trump claims he can end the war in Ukraine, but gives no answer as to how he would do this. Neither Trump nor Harris have any obvious solution for the war in Gaza, although Trump claims she would be responsible for the destruction of Israel, again with no clear explanation for this.

The constant attempts by Trump’s supporters to interfere with what we would regard as the basic norms of free democratic elections – including, most dramatically, the attacks of January 6 – suggest a second Trump administration would sorely test those Australian politicians who like to speak of our shared values.

Watson reflects a much larger Australian obsession with the US, ranging from the AUKUS agreement to the extraordinarily high proportion of American speakers who turn up at our literary festivals.

But as Watson writes in his final paragraph: “You have your own life to lead. Why let yourself be lured into theirs?”

It’s a good question, but Watson has provided an answer for why we should pay attention to US politics. He writes: “Once the Democrats allow themselves to be defined by their opposition to Trump, the fight is as good as lost.”

Until Harris became the candidate, it seemed as if this was the only strategy the Democrats had to fall back upon. Her performance in the debate suggests Harris is both willing to attack Trump and to promise a rather different path forward, stressing the need for generational change.

Don Watson’s Quarterly Essay High Noon: Trump, Harris and America on the Brink (Black Inc.) is published Monday 16 September.

• US politics
• Quarterly Essay
• Donald Trump
• Book reviews
• Kamala Harris

University Relations Manager

2024 Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellowships

Head of Research Computing & Data Solutions

Community member RANZCO Education Committee (Volunteer)

Director of STEM