Submit your Article

Barely a heartbeat after seizing his third term as Prime Minister, CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal swore to buckle down, vowing to steer clear of the glitzy public spectacles that so often distract our leaders. He promised nothing short of groundbreaking achievements during this tenure.

Yet, in less than a fortnight, he quietly confessed to a select group of news editors that resisting the siren call of public events was a battle he couldn’t win. “Yes, I understand these functions take up precious hours, but there's an undeniable obligation that makes it agonizingly difficult to decline,” he admitted, betraying the fragility of his resolve.

Fast forward to January, he unleashed a 30-point ultimatum upon government secretaries, demanding immediate service delivery enhancements. He even brandished the sword of accountability, threatening bureaucrats with consequences if they failed to step up within 30 days. However, nine months have passed, and the service delivery landscape remains as desolate as a barren field. Promised improvements in the nation's economy and resolution of its financial woes have evaporated like a mirage in the desert.

Consider these recent months, and it becomes alarmingly apparent that the needle has not budged an inch—in any direction. The economy languishes, public service quality nosedives further, and inflation rears its ugly head. Meanwhile, the exodus of young talents to foreign shores swells unabated, stoking the ire of the populace. Anger simmers against the ineffectual government and ruling factions, thanks to their failure to deliver and the skyrocketing cost of daily essentials.

Yet, the prime minister’s daily itinerary paints a picture of blissful oblivion. He appears perennially ensnared in public galas or political conclaves, leaving Parliament in the lurch. He’s even been known to dedicate five leisurely hours to a reality TV show in Godavari while his coalition partners grappled with the opposition’s House obstruction. Sadly, the lure of gratifying speeches and social gatherings seems to have become an inescapable hallmark of our political elite.

An executive prime minister shoulders the pivotal responsibility of overseeing government entities and chairing vital committees. Experts insist that a monthly tête-à-tête with these agencies could work wonders. Yet, when the prime minister squanders time on unproductive pursuits like event-hopping and oratory displays, it's the people who bear the brunt as state agencies falter.

Throughout these nine months, Dahal’s calendar appears chock-full of events, petty coalition skirmishes, and meddling in provincial governance, as exemplified by the Koshi Province Assembly fracas. To add to his agenda, he’s swamped with events hosted by the Socialist Front across all seven provinces. Now, he’s suddenly fixated on projecting himself as a transitional justice champion.

Alongside this political maelstrom, he dabbles in sundry pursuits like inaugurating schools, hospitals, and administrative buildings at the grassroots, presiding over book launches, cutting ribbons at road openings, and even gracing sporting occasions. Dahal himself begrudgingly confessed that the Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers currently resemble mere specters of effectiveness. During an Aug 4 meeting, he admitted: “We’ve fallen short in a multitude of matters, inviting public scrutiny.” The experts concur; small-scale events should be promptly discarded from his agenda

While his administration earns accolades for unearthing corruption scandals involving the fake refugee haven at Lalita Niwas and gold smuggling, Dahal faces allegations of shielding politicians and micro-managing minor government officials. Several vital bills languish in Parliament, yet the prime minister struggles to secure the approval of both coalition allies and opposition forces. To make matters worse, he hasn’t even assembled a cohesive team, despite deploying Maoist loyalists in various roles. His passport might be stamped with visits to India, and preparations underway for trips to China and the United Nations, but foreign affairs advisors remain conspicuously absent. Furthermore, his rapport with the Nepali Congress, a crucial coalition partner, teeters on the brink, marred by corruption disputes and discord with party leader Sher Bahadur Deuba.

Khem Raj Nepal, former secretary:  The prime minister has to engage a lot on policy issues in coordination with vital state institutions such as National Planning Commission and other agencies under him.  He has to monitor the functioning of all ministries. Now, it appears that he is misusing and abusing his position because he is attending to very small and trivial functions and issues. Actually, a code of conduct should be formulated which identifies the dos and don’ts of the prime minister and other ministers. 

Gopi Nath Mainali, former Secretary: The prime minister has a lot of tasks on his plate, mainly to coordinate with the government institutions from center to local office .The main tasks of the prime minister’s office are maintaining governance and preparing the draft of laws. There are some divisions in the prime minister’s office to conduct the sectoral tasks, but the prime minister has to oversee the overall tasks. 

Eight years after Nepal issued a new constitution with federalism and republicanism as its guiding principles, a disquieting note of discontent is reverberating both in political and public spheres. Calls for dismantling provincial frameworks in the name of reducing economic burden are growing louder by the day. Joining this chorus are the leaders of Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, and CPN (Maoist Center), the three political behemoths of Nepal who spearheaded the constitution drafting process. Publicly, they pledge allegiance to federalism, but their actions paint a starkly contrasting picture.

The cumbersome and languid pace of lawmaking serves as damning evidence of the parties' tepid commitment to the federal structure envisioned by the 2015 constitution. Nearly a decade since the promulgation of the constitution, and yet the legal groundwork for its implementation remains woefully incomplete.

The first federal parliamentary elections were held in Dec 2017, which gave Nepal the most powerful government to date in the form of Nepal Communist Party (NCP), a party born out of a merger between UML and Maoist Center. The government and parliament had a significant task at hand: implementing the constitution. Alas, the journey of the erstwhile NCP government, led by Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, was fraught with one controversy after another.

Oli’s ugly power-sharing dispute with his partner at the time, incumbent Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal of Maois Center, and his increasingly authoritative actions dominated much of his tenure as the leader of Nepal. The power wrangling between Oli and Dahal came to the head when the former tried to dissolve the parliament, not once but twice—and much to the frustration and dismay of Nepali citizens. The NCP inevitably underwent a split, Oli was ousted, and a new coalition government was formed, with Nepali Congress and Maoist Center as primary partners.   

The coalition, headed by Sher Bahadur Deuba of Congress, conducted the  second parliamentary elections in Dec 2022, and the NC, UML and Maoists polled first, second and third respectively. Soon after the election results were out, Nepal once again plunged into a political crisis. It was the turn of Deuba and Dahal to get caught in a power-sharing tussle this time. The political spectacle saw the old enemies—Dahal and Oli—come together, fall out once again over the presidential election, and eventual rapprochement between Dahal and Deuba.         

It’s been little over nine months after the second parliamentary elections, and Nepal has seen plenty of political drama, full of intrigue and farce, but the nation still grapples with a legislative void.

Every government since 2015 has shown a conspicuous lack of attention to crafting the essential laws needed for the constitution's execution. This lethargy isn't exclusive to the executive; even the federal parliament—both the House of Representatives and the National Assembly—exhibits a troubling inertia when it comes to formulating indispensable legislation. The absence of crucial laws has spawned a litany of challenges for provincial governments, casting a long shadow over the very relevance of federalism itself.

A recent study conducted by a National Assembly committee unequivocally affirms that both the government and the parliament have fallen far short in taking the necessary steps to draft laws vital for the successful implementation of federalism. While some efforts have been made, they are plagued by a snail-like pace, inadequacy, and incompleteness. The repercussions of this legislative vacuum are acutely felt, with the entire bureaucracy rendered obsolete due to the absence of a Federal Civil Servant Act. Civil servants are hesitant to serve in subnational government agencies.

Furthermore, critical laws pertaining to the health and education sectors remain in limbo. As per the constitution's mandate, the federal parliament should have enacted a total of 151 new laws, yet a staggering 112 of them remain pending. Among these, the Federal Civil Servant Act, Education Act, Federal Police Act, Public Health Act, and legal assistance-related laws demand immediate attention for the effective functioning of federalism. Regrettably, provincial assemblies and local governments have also failed to step up and fulfill their legislative responsibilities.

In Monday’s meeting, Chairman of the National Assembly Ganesh Prasad Timalsina issued a perfunctory direction to the government to expedite the formulation of laws essential for the successful implementation of federalism. 

Constitutional expert and former National Assembly member, Radheshyam Adhikari, says Nepal will never become a full-fledged federal country unless the political parties and their leaders commit themselves to working as per the spirit of the 2015 constitution.

He says the primary impediment to the sluggish law-making process lies in the politicians' lack of clarity or willingness to adhere to the constitution's clear directives. Although the constitution confers rights and resources to provinces and local governments, politicians appear reluctant to embrace these provisions, mirroring the stance of civil servants who resist relocating to the local level in a bid to retain central control.

Experts warn that failure to implement the constitution could embolden anti-federal voices. Provincial governments, in particular, voice their displeasure at the ongoing delays. Beyond merely crafting new laws, they advocate for swift amendments to existing legislation to address the numerous ambiguities hindering effective governance.

The parliament’s inability to devote adequate time to the law-making process, coupled with intra-party disagreements on the content of bills, has exacerbated the situation.

In the past nine months, the parliament has managed to pass just one law related to loan sharks, which is a stark testament to Nepal’s glacial pace of legislative progress.

Suresh Ale Magar, NA member: Many laws, including those related to granting rights to women, Janajati and marginalized communities, are yet to be formulated even after eight years. I draw the attention of Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and his government to take the report of the National Assembly seriously and take necessary measures to formulate the crucial laws.

Bhairab Sundar Shrestha, NA member: Successive governments have missed the deadlines to pass important legislations. The federal government needs to get down to business and formulate 39 crucial laws at the earliest. We need human resources so that the provincial and local government can function smoothly, and for that we need to formulate necessary laws. 

Anita Devkota, NA Member:  Lack of laws means, we are denying rights to the people that have been guaranteed by the constitution. All laws related to fundamental rights should have been formulated within the three years of constitution promulgation. In the absence of these laws, many people, including landless and marginalized communities, have been deprived of their rights.

Prime minister calls for wider accountability to implement constitution

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal has said that his government has prioritized the enactments of remaining laws as demanded by the constitution. In a meeting of the National Assembly on Tuesday, Dahal spoke about the study report on laws pending formulation as envisioned by the constitution. “The government is proactive in building a legal structure required to establish a rule of law by institutionalizing democratic republic,” he said. He added that it was the responsibility of the government, parliament and stakeholders to make citizens experience good governance, development and prosperity through the effective enforcement of the constitution.
The prime minister also informed the upper house that since the promulgation of the constitution in 2015, 191 Acts (new and revised) have been formulated while specific attention has been given for the formulation of legislations to implement the fundamental rights.  

The government is also preparing to present the Federal Civil Service Bill and Education Bill, among others, to the Federal Parliament in the near future. 

Prime Minister Dahal apprised the National Assembly that the government was working on bills that turned inactive due to the expiry of the previous term of parliament. 

“Regarding the citizenship law as pointed out in the report of the Legislative Management Committee, the Nepal Citizenship (First Amendment) Act, 2079 BS, which was issued after being certificated on 21 May, 2023, has paved the way for the implementation of the constitutional right relating to citizenship,” he said. 

“The government is also actively working to prepare and present a separate bill related to free legal aid as per the policy adopted by the constitution and the government. The process to amend the Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Elimination) Act, 2071 BS has also started.”

Prime Minister Dahal also informed the upper house that the National Land Commission is working to implement the constitutional provision to provide land to the landless squatters. He added that the bills including the Media Council Bill, the Mass Communications Bill and the Information Technology Bill are also being prepared. 

To ensure job opportunities to citizens, the prime minister said that the Right to Employment Act, 2075 is being implemented, and the government has launched various employment programs including the Prime Minister Employment Program. 

“The study carried out by the Legislative Management Committee, and suggestions and recommendations based on the study would be an important guideline to the government to make laws,” said Prime Minister Dahal. 

‘Delay in devolution of power as per constitution questions federalism’

People’s representatives from Madhes province have said federalism is under question because the federal government has refused to devolve power to provinces as per constitution.
During an interactive seminar in Janakpur, Chief Minister of Madhes Saroj Kumar Yadav pointed out the need to wipe out ambiguity in law so that jurisdiction of all three tiers of government would be clear. 

“Although the three tiers of government are supposed to work in harmony, the federal government has not empowered the provinces, which has hindered the overall growth and development,” said Chief Minister Yadav, emphasizing the need to broaden the authorities of provinces as envisioned by the constitution.   

Speaker of Madhes provincial assembly, Ramchandra Mandal said expected results could not be delivered because the federal government and political parties are still plagued with a centralized mindset. 

“It’s been eight years since we got a new constitution, yet the provincial and local governments are toothless in many aspects. Rights and resources have not been distributed in a just manner,” he said.

Provincial Minister for Physical Infrastructure Development Krishna Prasad Yadav argued that there was no point in discussing responsibilities of three tiers of government when the center has refused to empower subnational governments. 

“Madhes province is suffering the most, as it was not allocated adequate resources including budget based on population, and human development index,” he claimed. 

Other speakers including the chair of Municipality Association, Pradip Yadav said the provincial governments cannot work independently and effectively as long as the federal government continues to deny them the authority to control and regulate their economy and create their own security apparatus.

Secretary at the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Minister, Krishna Hari Puskar, said that the federal government was making necessary laws to empower the provinces in the spirit of federalism.
The program was organized by the secretariat of the National Coordination Council, Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers to collect feedback from the provincial government.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has triggered a debate regarding Nepal's commitment to non-alignment policy. As the world watched, Nepal voted in the United Nations’ proposal that condemned Russia's aggression, while neighboring South Asian countries, including India, chose the path of abstention.

This divergence of stance stirred criticism from foreign policy experts and communist parties, who vehemently posited that Nepal's vote in the UN resolution represented a stark deviation from its enduring non-alignment doctrine. They contended that Nepal, like several regional counterparts, should have maintained a resolute neutral position.

In recent months, a fresh discourse has taken root among foreign policy luminaries and political leaders, probing the question of whether Nepal should relinquish its non-alignment policy in light of the ever-shifting regional and global power dynamics. Yet, some proponents of this shift offer their case without specifying what should supplant the non-alignment policy.

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), born in the cauldron of the 1950s and 1960s, had at its heart the notion of eschewing alignment with either of the two prevailing blocs: the democratic realm led by the United States or the communist sphere headed by the Soviet Union. Following the fall of the Berlin Wall, the bipolar world transitioned into a unipolar landscape under US dominion. Currently, there are 120 members that follow the non-alignment policy. 

Nepal has enshrined it in its constitution of 2015. Article 51 of the constitution explicitly mandates Nepal to conduct an independent foreign policy based on the United Nations Charter, non-alignment, Panchasheel principles, international law, and world peace norms. It underscores the overarching imperative of safeguarding Nepal's sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence, and national interests.

Those advocating for abandoning the non-alignment policy often cite India as an example. They argue that India has embraced a multi-alignment doctrine in recent years. India's reduced emphasis on global non-alignment conferences is seen as a testament to this shift. Experts assert that India has deftly carved a path of strategic autonomy and multi-alignment, all while preserving the core tenets of non-alignment.

In the context of the Russia-Ukraine war, India's steadfast neutrality and ongoing engagements with both Russia and the US have underscored the nuanced nature of its foreign policy. Professor of international relations, Khadka KC, contends that even India has not categorically severed ties with non-alignment, hinting that Nepal, in its own way, has been practicing a form of multi-alignment since the 1960s, all while upholding the principles of non-alignment.

It's argued that Nepal actively pursues economic benefits from major global powers, including Russia, and, since 1960, has remained untethered to military alliances. Experts assert that the current non-alignment doctrine does not preclude Nepal from engaging with any nation to further its national interests. However, the unique geography of Nepal necessitates a cautious avoidance of taking sides in global conflicts.

Beyond Nepal's borders, the Global South at large grapples with the intricacies of non-alignment and neutrality, particularly in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine war. Despite fervent lobbying by the US and its allies, many Global South nations have refrained from endorsing US sanctions on Russia. The positions of these smaller nations have triggered consternation, as they effectively curtail the impact of the sanctions on Russia’s economy.

Professor KC staunchly advocates for Nepal's continued adherence to non-alignment, affirming that it's intrinsic to Nepal's foreign policy fabric. He emphasizes that geography and evolving regional and global power dynamics underscore the primacy of Nepal's non-alignment policy.  “Nepal can simultaneously reap economic benefits from major powers while remaining committed to non-alignment,” he says.
Former diplomat Dinesh Bhattarai insists that at the core of Nepal's non-alignment policy lies the art of making independent judgments without tilting toward any side, a principle perfectly aligned with Nepal's unique geographical constraints. He dismisses claims that non-alignment stifles development.

“I have heard the contention that non-alignment policy hinders our development. What I say is geography is an omnipotent factor, and taking sides offers no guaranteed path to rapid progress.” 

Mriendra Bahadur Karki, executive director at the Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies, offers a nuanced perspective. “Nepal should reinvent non-alignment to involve active engagement in global affairs while sidestepping military alliances,” he says.  

Karki also defends Nepal's prudent decision to vote against Russia's invasion of Ukraine, portraying it as an embodiment of active non-alignment.

International relations analyst Gaurab Shumsher Thapa underscores that non-alignment does not entail turning a blind eye to regional or global events. “Instead, it beckons active engagement in world affairs without shackling Nepal to any military blocs.”  Given Nepal's intricate geopolitical milieu, Thapa asserts that the relevance of non-alignment will likely increase rather than dwindle in the country's future.

To date, Nepal remains an ardent advocate of the non-alignment policy. In a recent ministerial meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement Coordinating Bureau, Foreign Minister NP Saud reaffirmed Nepal's unwavering faith in the principle of the Non-Aligned Movement. He stressed the imperative of international cooperation within NAM, the strengthening of south-south collaboration, and the fortification of multilateralism with the United Nations at its nucleus, as a means to surmount contemporary global challenges.

Saud maintained: "As NAM members, we must address the root causes of persistent global problems, such as poverty, conflict, and violence. We must champion enduring peace through dialogue and respect for diversity while accelerating our economic development to attain the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development."

Officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in conversation with ApEx, contend that the ongoing debate on non-alignment falls short of mirroring the contemporary reality. In the face of external forces exerting pressure to enlist Nepal in their ranks, they say the most prudent course for Nepal would be to remain steadfast on its non-alignment commitment. 

They firmly assert that Nepal, in view of its unique position, cannot afford to antagonize any nation by picking sides. Critics of non-alignment, they argue, have yet to furnish a coherent alternative.

After the restoration of democracy in 1990, investigating corruption scandals and major crimes through high-level probe panels has been a recurrent practice in Nepal. These panels have ostensibly yielded reports advising government action, yet these documents have largely remained hidden from the public eye, and their recommendations conspicuously unheeded.

In some disconcerting instances, these very panels have appeared to function as protective shields for high-profile individuals entangled in corruption and other ignoble scandals.

This prompts a glaring question: why form such so-called high level probe commission and to what end? Also, what is the point of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), the constitutionally mandated body meant for probing corruption cases?

On Wednesday, political parties represented in the Federal Parliament decided to form yet another high-level panel, this time to investigate all known and unknown gold smuggling incidents. The decision is connected with the gold trafficking incident that took place via Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu last month. 

The Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of Nepal Police is tasked with the investigation of the case, but the main opposition, CPN-UML, looks askance, insisting on a separate high level commission for a fair inquest. The party resorted to obstructing the parliamentary proceedings to press its demand, and the ruling coalition parties led by CPN (Maoist Center) eventually relented.     

Prominent legal figure and former Supreme Court Justice Balaram KC has emphatically criticized this cross-party consensus, deeming it a grievous misstep that threatens to establish a harmful precedent. He says formation of a high level probe commission must be reserved in the case of an unprecedented and complex incident. “Gold smuggling is not a new event in the annals of crime that have taken place in Nepal.”

KC fears that this approach of forming high level probe commissions might be applied to even minor issues in the future. And since this time-honored practice has repeatedly failed, he casts doubt on the prospects of this fresh commission diverging from its predecessors.

The latest agreement to create a new commission comes with the appointment of a sitting judge to lead the inquiry. The commission, formed under the legal purview of the Commissions of Inquiry Act of 1969, is slated to commence its operations on 22nd September.

Section 3 (3) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act provisions that the Judicial Council will recommend a sitting justice to lead the commission. Section 4 of the Act elaborates on the commission's functions, duties, and powers. 

As per the Act, the commission can be given more authority if required. According to Section 5 (a), if the commission has reasonable grounds to believe that any item or document pertinent to the investigation is in possession of a person or situated in a specific place, it can conduct searches, adhering to prevailing laws. The commission can authorize a gazetted officer to execute searches and, if located, seize relevant items or documents, or procure full or partial copies of such documents.

The commission also holds the prerogative to penalize non-compliance with its directives or extend clemency.  Notably, the commission's mandate pertains not only to gold smuggling through Kathmandu airport but also encompasses a separate case involving the illicit transportation of gold concealed within e-cigarettes. In the latter case, former Home Minister and Vice-chairman of CPN (Maoist Center), Krishna Bahadur Mahara, and his son Rahul have been implicated. It was revealed in the investigation carried out by the CIB of Nepal Police that the father-son duo had repeatedly held telephone conversations and met the Chinese national involved in gold smuggling.

The formation of this commission, operating under the imprimatur of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, vests it with considerable jurisdiction. Beyond influencing policy matters, the commission possesses authority to conduct rigorous investigations, encompassing inquiries, depositions, and searches relating to gold smuggling offenses. Earlier, the ruling parties, particularly the Maoist Center, was reluctant to form the inquiry commission, fearing its authority to summon even high-ranking officials, including the prime minister and ministers, for statements.

The Maoist-led coalition government had to acquiesce to the demand for a powerful commission to probe the gold smuggling case, after the opposition UML and primary coalition partner, Nepali Congress, pressed Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal. 

UML and Congress are not pleased with the arrest of their senior leaders and former ministers—Top Bahadur Rayamahi and Bal Krishna Khand respectively—in connection to another case. Now with one of the Maoist senior leaders implicated in the gold smuggling incident, UML and Congress want the prime minister to take strong action, even if that means arresting his own party leader.  

These developments have also engendered a palpable schism between the coalition partners Maoists and Congress. However, skeptics argue that the latest commission formed to investigate the gold smuggling incident will not bear any fruit. As history has borne witness, a litany of investigative commissions has been convened to scrutinize diverse incidents and irregularities, without any action.

These encompass tragic occurrences like the Dasdhunga accident and the Royal Palace massacre, as well as inquiries into procurement discrepancies, medical supply mismanagement, land allocation issues, and the procurement of wide-body aircraft. Despite the painstaking efforts of such commissions, the ultimate fate of their reports has invariably been obscurity.

However, retired police officer Hemanta Malla Thakuri contends that the prudent course would be to constitute high-level panels following the culmination of Nepal Police investigations. 

“While police investigations are primarily concerned with criminal dimensions, multifarious bureaucratic and political intricacies necessitate a broader investigative ambit,” he says.

Nepal’s transitional justice process has been a long and frustrating saga, seemingly without a foreseeable conclusion. As the two key commissions tasked with investigating war-era human rights abuses—Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons—languish without leadership, victims and international observers alike are grappling with uncertainty.

Rishi Poudel,  the TRC undersecretary, says the commission’s works are at a complete standstill in the absence of its chair and other members. 

The TRC has registered 64,000 complaints from the conflict victims, and has so far managed to muster preliminary investigations for around 4,000 cases. Around 3,000 cases have been left in abeyance due to a lack of concrete evidence. 

Similarly, the CIEDP, tasked with addressing enforced disappearances, has received a total of 3,288 complaints. Out of these, 277 were transferred to the TRC, 292 were put on hold, 136 complaints were found to be duplicative, and 48 cases were resolved. Presently, the commission grapples with 258 active complaints.

Suman Adhikari, a conflict victim, laments that the TRC has slipped down the priority list of the coalition government, instead it is being used as a bargaining chip by political parties. “We are expecting a public statement from top three leaders of major parties Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center) expressing their commitment to TRC and apology for the delay,” he says.

Beyond the immediate vacuum in leadership, a newly tabled bill has thrust the situation into the spotlight. The bill, introduced on March 9 this year, seeks to amend the Enforced Disappearance Inquiry and Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act of 2014. But it is a contentious move, one that has roused skepticism from both victims and the global community alike. Critics are quick to point out the bill's potential shortcomings, raising questions about its capacity to comprehensively address the multifaceted challenges at hand. 

The amendment’s hurried unveiling followed Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s startling statement, where he took ownership of the deaths of 5,000 individuals during the insurgency.

While registering the bill in the House of Representatives, Minister for Information and Communications Rekha Sharma had said, “The transitional justice Act needs to be amended to address a range of human rights violations, and to prosecute those individuals implicated in serious crimes.”

But victims of conflicts and the international community are not convinced. They say if enacted, the law would prevent the investigation of crimes including rape, murder, torture, war crimes and crime against humanity that were committed during the conflict.

Despite glimmers of optimism, such as provisions examining the conflict's root causes and securing reparations for victims, the United Nations experts have voiced concerns that the amendments, if adopted, could inadvertently provide sanctuary for perpetrators of grave crimes committed between 1996 and 2006. This criticism not only spotlights a potential breach of international obligations but also underscores a discord with Nepal's own Supreme Court rulings.

The plight of conflict victims is both a somber reminder of the past and a call for urgent action. The government's recent extension of the commissions' tenure until mid-January 2024 serves as a temporary reprieve, but victims remain undeterred in their pursuit of justice. 

In their ‘Kathmandu Declaration’, the victims have accused the government and major political parties of disregarding the commitments outlined in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed on 21 Nov 2006. 

“Had the government and political parties been serious, we wouldn’t have to wait for so long to get justice,” say the victims. “It’s been eight years since the formation of the two transitional justice bodies, but they remain largely inert and without key office bearers.” 

The conflict victims have also accused the government and political parties of registering the amendment bill by bypassing the parliamentary sub-committee that was tasked with the responsibility of preparing the amendment proposal. 

Criticizing the removal of the definition of forced disappearance from the bill, the victims have urged the government to include the definition, which is in the existing Act. They say many families don't even know the status of their missing loved ones, whether they are dead or alive. 

Likewise, they have sought provisions for compensating victims of torture, sexual violence and conflict-related atrocities, as well as return of the seized properties. The conflict victims have also called for changes in the proposed appointment procedure for officials in the transitional justice commissions. 

“Since past experiences have proved that the existing procedure is faulty, the government should make sure that the committee formed to recommend officials in the commissions should be credible, independent and fair,” they say. 

Furthermore, the conflict victims have demanded retroactive application of legislation to ensure that the perpetrators of serious crimes committed in the past are brought to justice. They have also suggested formation of a special court to handle transitional justice cases through the process similar to the establishment of a high court, rather than forming a three-member Special Court on the recommendation of the judicial council. 

The victims have also demanded for immediate implementation of the second national action plan for UN Security Council Resolutions No 1325 and 1820, which pertain to women, peace, and security. 

They have denounced the controversial amendment proposal to the Criminal Procedure Code, 2074 as well. The proposal, recently tabled  in the Parliament, allows for the withdrawal of ongoing criminal cases involving serious human rights violations. 

As Nepal grapples with its past, navigating the arduous terrain of transitional justice, the nation's commitment to lasting accountability is poised for examination.

The fate of the TRC and the CIEDP, intertwined with political dynamics and international responsibilities, represents the crucible in which Nepal's dedication to justice is being forged. The agony of victims, spanning realms from economic deprivation to emotional distress, underscores the gravity of the challenge—a challenge that can only be overcome with political will and steadfastness.

At present, several vital bills languish in the Federal Parliament awaiting approval. In the lineup, there is a bill seeking to amend the Prevention of Money Laundering Act-2008, another aiming to reshape the Truth and Reconciliation Act, and a comprehensive bill to revise dozens of laws.

This parliamentary logjam underscores a larger issue of functional hindrance. But it does not stop there. The vision for Nepal's federal structures hinges on the formulation of pertinent laws, yet progress seems mired in stagnation. Altogether there are 25 crucial bills stuck in both houses of the Federal Parliament.

For a month now, the main opposition, CPN-UML, has obstructed the parliament proceedings demanding for a high-level investigation panel to look into the gold smuggling case from Tribhuvan International Airport. The ruling parties have refused to form such a panel, deepening the impasse.

The déjà vu of stalled parliamentary proceedings is not new. Over the years, Nepal's Parliament has become a pawn in the hands of a select few top leaders from major parties—CPN-UML, Nepali Congress, and CPN (Maoist Center). In this precarious power dynamic, ordinances have emerged as a crutch for lawmaking in the absence of parliamentary cooperation.

Critics decry Nepal's Parliament as a rubber stamp wielded by a handful of influential leaders. The casualty in this power play is the legislative process itself, casting a shadow over the primary function of Parliament. Only one citizenship-related bill and a handful of budget-related bills have crossed the parliamentary threshold since the general elections of December last year.

The parliamentary speaker's role, too, has been controversial in recent years. Past speakers Krishna Bahadur Mahara and Agni Sapkota faced accusations of partisan bias, foregoing impartiality. The strained relationship between former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and Speaker Sapkota reached its zenith when the latter refused to present America's Millennium Corporation Challenge agreement in Parliament. Current Speaker Dev Raj Ghimire is also under scrutiny for favoring his party, UML, rather than playing the role of a non-partisan arbiter.

The level playing field within Parliament has tilted toward the gravitational pull of political parties. Everyday parliamentary proceedings now rest on the tripartite consensus among Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal of Maoist Center, Sher Bahadur Deuba of NC, and KP Sharma Oli of UML. Meanwhile, smaller parties have seen their influence marginalized.

Top-tier agreements made in Baluwatar among the leaders of these three major parties become binding for Parliament. The speaker's role in mitigating the parliamentary impasse has turned ineffectual.

The art of obstructing Parliament, it appears, has been perfected to a science. A recurrent tactic involves ransoming the legislative process only to agree to its resumption following opaque pacts sealed at Baluwatar. One striking instance revolves around UML's stranglehold on the House, catalyzed by Prime Minister Dahal's remarks concerning an Indian businessman interceding with New Delhi to make him premier. After days of deadlock, UML relented only when Dahal clarified his statements.

This hostage-taking of Parliament by a select few leaders has silenced the voices of lawmakers on critical national matters. The formation of high-level panels and other pressing issues remain stalled as lawmakers are denied their platform.

Experts insist on a lasting solution, suggesting that parties commit to a shared resolution.

Political analyst Geja Sharma Wagle calls for a need to break the cycle of parliament obstruction through commitment among parties to preserve the sanctity of Parliament as a platform for substantive discourse. He says Parliament should be a place for deliberation amidst disagreement.

Subas Nembang, former speaker and UML leader, contends that Nepal's constitution and parliamentary rules failed to anticipate such standstills. While obstruction is not expressly accounted for in legislative provisions, he defends his party’s move by citing a parliamentary precedent for the tactic. Nembang posits that while not explicitly codified, this system obliges the government to address opposition demands when effectively presented.

Daman Nath Dhungana, another former speaker, says the Constituent Assembly's efforts to issue a new constitution have inadvertently sowed the seeds of parliamentary dysfunction. The stranglehold of three dominant political players lives on, perpetuating an environment where political maneuvering takes precedence over governance.

The bad legacy continues, adds Dhungana, with current priorities seeming to center around preserving government, exemplified by Prime Minister Dahal's focus.

The stalemate does not solely impact the full House; it cascades down to the Parliamentary Committees as well. Regarded as mini parliaments, these committees are now relegated to the sidelines, lacking both leadership and a clear agenda. The challenge deepens as committee members grapple with a lack of expertise within their working domains.

The very foundation of democratic governance stands challenged by a recurring cycle of obstruction and partisan strife, which threatens to undermine the nation's progress. It is a disservice committed by the three major parties to the people.

Over a decade ago, Nepal embarked on an earnest mission to fortify journalistic safety and uphold press freedom. A spirited endeavor sought to erect a comprehensive nationwide framework safeguarding the integrity and security of those entrusted with the mantle of holding power accountable. Yet, despite fervent determination and resolute global support, the realization of this noble undertaking remains tantalizingly elusive, emblematic of the chasm between aspiration and realization.

This chronicle finds its genesis in 2012, when Nepal’s vision coalesced into the framework for a journalists’ safety mechanism. Years of meticulous labor culminated in late 2019, with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the custodian of fundamental rights, promulgating protocols harmonized with the tenets of the Human Rights Act of 2012. However, the path from conceptualization to actualization has been punctuated with complexities and challenges.

Despite the concerted support of international organizations, lending their intellectual and financial weight, concrete advancement remains a chimera. Underpinning the stipulated guidelines was a triumvirate of mechanisms, conceived not only to shield journalists but to uphold the bedrock of unbridled expression.

At the epicenter of this vision stands a steering committee, envisaged as the linchpin of the entire edifice. Chaired by a distinguished NHRC member, this committee convenes stakeholders from diverse realms, including the Nepal Bar Association, the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, the Federation of Nepali Journalists, and the Nepal Police.

In 2021, the mantle of coordinating this pivotal committee was bestowed upon NHRC member Manoj Duwady. Yet, substantial progress remains an elusive quarry. Despite three meetings, the initiative languishes in its embryonic state. “Scarce resources, pivotal for the mechanism’s activation, are a critical constraint,” says Duwady.

Nestled within this overarching framework, the inception of a task force within NHRC was envisaged. However, an opaque veil shrouds the mechanics of these mechanisms, leaving stakeholders and the public grappling for clarity. Concurrently, the swift deployment of a rapid response unit, tasked with assuaging the predicaments of local-level journalists ensnared in challenges, remains more an abstract concept than a tangible reality. Regrettably, NHRC's vows remain stuck in the realm of verbal commitments, yet to materialize in the form of a functioning committee.

Laxman Datt Pant, a proponent of international media rights and chairperson of Media Action Nepal, leaves no room for equivocation in his censure of NHRC’s inertia. “The commission’s avowals to safeguard journalists and uphold the freedom of expression sound increasingly hollow,” he says. “Inaction not only corrodes the institution’s credibility but also underscores a palpable dearth of authentic commitment to the very ideals it professes.”

With a clarion call for action to supplant rhetoric, Pant implores NHRC to translate verbal declarations into palpable efforts, echoing the spirit of the ambitious UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity.

Having taken root in 2013, this initiative has garnered international solidarity, with prominent entities like UNESCO and stalwarts from the Nepal International Media Partnership providing vital technical counsel to NHRC.

In the face of NHRC’s assertions of constrained resources, a senior official acknowledges an intriguing absence of outreach to international channels for funding.

Ironically, despite multimillion-dollar investments by international entities, the journalist safety mechanism languishes in a state of inertia. Consequently, journalists grappling with danger at the grassroots level find themselves bereft of the prompt succor they direly require.

Bipul Pokhrel, the chairman of the Federation of Nepali Journalists, says that the operational blueprint of the steering committee remains an open question.

“Deliberations are underway to enhance the efficacy of these mechanisms,” he says. Emphasizing the imperative of inclusive stakeholder representation within the steering committee, Pokhrel underscores the significance of financial underpinning.

“With the mandate to safeguard journalists from tangible threats, financial support stands as a cornerstone. Thus, meticulous groundwork emerges as a decisive determinant in guiding the mechanism to realization.”

As Nepal’s chronicle spans over a decade, its odyssey to safeguard its journalistic guardians emerges as a narrative of soaring ideals tempered by intricate implementation. As stakeholders navigate this intricate terrain, the watchful gaze of the press, human rights advocates, and the global community remains riveted, poised for the transformative juncture when words transmute into resolute action.

Former prime minister and CPN (Unified Socialist) leader Madhav Kumar Nepal cut short his Europe visit to return home after the Supreme Court ordered the authorities to investigate all individuals whose names have been associated in the Lalita Niwas land grab case.

Upon arrival, Nepal told the media that he decided to return to quell the rumor that he fled the country to avoid investigation. He also claimed that he had not taken any bribe when his Cabinet took some decisions concerning the Lalita Niwas property, and that he was willing to help with the investigation. 

The SC order has opened the way for the Central Investigation Bureau of Nepal Police to investigate the alleged roles of Nepal and another former prime minister, Baburam Bhattarai, in the land misappropriation case. Publicly, top leaders including Nepal have expressed their support to the ongoing investigation. But as more and more politicians are coming under the investigation, top leaders of major political parties are reportedly trying to sabotage the probe.

Soon after returning home, Unified Socialist leader Nepal was involved in a series of meetings with Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba. In these meetings, Nepal reportedly expressed objection over the SC ruling to investigate the former prime ministers and high level government officials. 

Nepal, who believes that the ongoing investigation is ‘politically motivated,’ also held a one-on-one meeting with Deuba. Earlier this week, Deuba also held a meeting with Home Minister Narayan Kaji Shrestha, who has so far maintained that the ongoing investigation into corruption cases should not and will not be influenced by any political party.

Likewise, former prime minister Bhattarai has also expressed displeasure over the SC order. A few days back, he said that there should be an investigation into the alleged corruption that took place during the management of the Maoist cantonment after the party entered the peace process. Of course, Bhattarai was referring to Prime Minister Dahal, chairman of the ruling CPN (Maoist Center). 

The anti-corruption drive launched by the Dahal-led government has sent shockwaves inside major political parties.  As more and more politicians are being dragged into corruption cases, a silent consensus is building among the parties to retard and eventually drop the investigation.  

NC President Deuba in particular is under immense pressure from his party members to protect them from CIB investigation. Congress senior leader and former home minister, Bal Krishna Khand, is already under police custody for his alleged role in the fake Bhutanese refugee scandal. CPN-UML leader Top Bahadur Rayamajhi is also under arrest in connection to the same case.

More recently, NC lawmaker Sunil Sharma was also arrested in a case of fake academic certificate distribution. Many NC leaders believe that Prime Minister Dahal has been selectively targeting Congress by opening corruption probes. NC President Deuba, in his recent meeting with Dahal, expressed dissatisfaction over the CIB probe into the fake refugee case and suggested transferring some investigating officers.

The main opposition, UML, has also accused the Dahal government of selectively opening old corruption files to its leaders. A few days back, UML Chairman KP Oli said that Prime Minister Dahal was adopting a ‘Pakistani model’ of arresting opposition leaders on trumped-up corruption charges. 

The ongoing probe into corruption scandals is also gradually creating distance among the ruling coalition partners. The Unified Socialist has already expressed dissatisfaction and is seeking intervention to prevent investigation against its chair Nepal. A rift is also developing between the NC and the Maoists. 

Some NC leaders have even suggested that the party leadership should reconsider its participation in the government, if Dahal continues to target Congress leaders. The NC currently holds nine ministries in the coalition government. However, there is a growing belief among NC leaders and members that the party's influence within the government is waning. Some leaders say that the party should consider forming a new government by aligning with the UML.  

Another coalition partner, the Janata Samajbadi Party (JSP), has also expressed discontent with the government following the decision to initiate investigations into the 2007 Gaur massacre. Though Prime Minister Dahal later assured to halt the investigation, the JSP remains unconvinced.

The anti-corruption scandal took a new turn after a recent ruling by the apex court concerning the Lalita Niwas land grab scandal placed the ruling coalition in a precarious position. In its Aug 7 ruling to probe everyone involved in the Lalita Niwas land grab case, the Supreme Court said that initiating action only against those government officials who executed decisions while sparing the ones who made those decisions would be unjust. The court has ordered the law enforcement agency concerned to investigative the case from the top down. Along with former prime ministers Nepal and Bhattarai, the SC ruling has also paved the way for the CIB to investigate four former ministers and a number of former secretaries.

Meanwhile, the ruling Maoist party itself has found itself in a fix, as its leader Krishna Bahadur Mahara has been dragged into the July 20 gold trafficking case. The main opposition, UML, has demanded for a separate high-level committee to investigate the case. Some leaders within the Nepali Congress have also supported the idea of forming an independent probe panel. But Home Minister Shrestha, from the Maoist party, has said that the CIB itself will look into the case.

Prime Minister Dahal is being criticized for reportedly trying to protect Mahara by refusing to form an independent panel to investigate the gold smuggling case.    

Quotes

KP Sharma Oli: “The government has initiated the politics of revenge. Though the arrest of some individuals is a normal thing, the government is adopting the Pakistani model of politics. If someone speaks against the government, they are arrested on some pretext.”

Baburam Bhattarai: “I am ready to cooperate with the government agencies on Lalita Niwas case. We should form a high-level investigation panel and all corruption-related scandals should be investigated in a fair way. But the government should not use the corruption file as a tool to terrorize political opponents.”  

Madhav Kumar Nepal: “There should be a fair and impartial investigation and I am ready to fully cooperate with the government agencies. I am not involved in any bribery so I am not nervous about it.”