Submit your Article

In countries with a bicameral system, the upper house of parliament performs certain distinct duties to those undertaken by the lower house. Nepal has had a bicameral parliament since the 1950s, except for a brief hiatus during the partyless Panchayat regime (1960-1990) and the recent political transition (2006 to 2015).

The 2015 constitution has given continuity to the bicameral setup in the form of the National Assembly (NA) as the upper house and the House of Representatives (HoR) as the lower house of the federal parliament. On its website, the NA lists ‘providing expert service’ as one of its major functions. Except for this single task, the two houses perform similar tasks, such as formulation of laws and holding the government to account.

In many democracies, the functions of two houses are clearly articulated by the law so that they perform distinct tasks. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the main duties of the upper House of Lords are ‘examining bills, questioning government action, and investigating public policy.’ Its roles and responsibilities are clearly distinguished from those of the House of Commons.

In Nepal’s case, however, the upper house is struggling to establish a separate identity and there is growing disenchantment about its performance. The very idea of a bicameral legislature is being questioned, particularly after the recent assembly elections that elected mostly partisan, non-experts. 

So do we really need the National Assembly, then? Senior journalist Hari Bahadur Thapa, who also researches Nepal’s parliamentary system, says the core concept behind the assembly is to bring together a mature group of experts with deep knowledge on statecraft. The goal is to get them to offer expert guidance and advice to the government as well as the HoR.

“In a sense, it is a group of senior technocrats who delve into policy and law-making rather than engaging in day-to-day politics,” Thapa says. “But Nepal’s upper house has failed to measure up to its expectation.”

There are various factors behind the NA’s sub-par performance. Chiefly, the major parties are using the assembly to adjust leaders who have lost elections or those who have somehow not gotten respectable positions in the party structures.

For instance, Bam Dev Gautam of CPN-UML and Narayan Kaji Shrestha of CPN (Maoist Center), both of whom lost the 2017 parliamentary elections, are currently assembly members.

Influential political leaders want to be MPs as non-parliamentarians cannot become ministers for more than six months.

In the 59-member NA, an electoral college elects 56 members while the three remaining members are nominated. The three nominated seats have been reserved for experts. But as the government recommends these nominees, they are usually political appointees as well.  

Right now, Khim Lal Devkota, Bimala Rai Paudyal, and Ram Narayan Bidari occupy the nominated seats in the NA. Among the trio, only Devkota is not affiliated to any political party.   

NA member Prakash Pantha concedes that political parties are abusing the assembly to adjust those who lost the 2017 elections.

“The onus lies on political parties to honor the spirit of the constitution while selecting candidates. They should set the criteria for assembly candidates, emphasizing expertise over political allegiance,” he says.

Daman Nath Dhuganga, former speaker of parliament, agrees that the problem is in candidate-selection.

“The parties are reluctant to follow the constitution and are putting partisan interests above national interests,” Dhuagana says. “But then the National Assembly’s leadership is also struggling to assert its authority to safeguard the independence of the house. It is rather submitting to the wills of political parties and their leaders.”

The NA’s leadership was tested when the country faced a constitutional and political crisis after Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli dissolved the HoR in December 2020.

In the absence of the HoR, the assembly, which is a permanent legislative body, should have held the government to account. But it did no such thing. NA chair Ganesh Prasad Timalsena, who is from the CPN-UML, ran the House only for a few days to avoid criticism. After this instance, criticism of the assembly reached new heights. The upper house was accused of being no more than a government rubber-stamp. 

Another reason behind a weak assembly is the constitution itself. The national charter has not given the upper house any exclusive law-making right. As per the constitution, the government can present bills in the two houses of parliament but the assembly can neither approve nor disapprove the HoR-endorsed bills.

The provision of expert assembly members was envisioned to revise flaws and errors in the bills forwarded by the HoR. But then there is a paucity of experts in the NA to analyze the contents of such bills and offer corrections.

The NA must return a bill sent by the HoR within two months, either after endorsing it or recommending changes. When the HoR passed a passport-related bill in 2019, the assembly had pointed out several flaws in it and corrections were duly made. But such corrective measures are not possible without enough experts on board.

The NA’s performance has also been hamstrung by the inadequacies of funds and resources. A recent study report by Democracy Resource Center, an NGO, has pointed to the assembly’s lack of financial, physical and human resources, directly impacting the legislative process. The report titled ‘Legislative Procedures of the National Assembly’ says the assembly is short in computers, high-speed internet and office space.

Despite these inadequacies, the NA members can still work largely unhindered by the larger political upheavals. Unlike in the case of HoR members, assembly members do not have to toe party whip or serve specific electoral constituencies. This freedom allows the NA members to focus on issues of national importance.

Journalist Thapa says it is the assembly’s responsibility to ensure that the bills and decisions emanating from the HoR are not politically motivated, which has not been happening in Nepal.

“The upper house has failed to demonstrate the desired maturity and expertise and has been acting subordinate to the lower house,” Thapa says. “It has been found wanting on crucial tasks such as improving coordination between provincial and local governments.”

But despite the NA’s shortcomings, Thapa is averse to what he calls the radical idea of dissolving the upper house and adopting a unicameral system. “That would be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater,” he says.  

Thapa suggests reforming the NA, for instance by tweaking the current appointment system. “But as the custodians of the democratic process, things won’t improve much unless our political parties internalize the importance of a free and independent upper house.”

The Westminster parliamentary government has a long history in Nepal. Even before the establishment of democracy in 1951, the then Rana regime had envisaged a bicameral system in Nepal’s Interim Constitution 1947. The 1959 constitution also provided for a bicameral system. It was only during the Panchayat period that the country was under a unicameral Rashtriya Panchayat. The 1990 constitution again adopted bicameralism. 

After the political changes of 2006, the role of the country’s parliament was taken up by a Constituent Assembly elected to draft a new constitution. Between 2006 and 2015, Nepal had another period when it did not have two chambers of parliament with the CA performing the tasks of a legislative body as well. In 2015, the country once again adopted a bicameral system through the new constitution.

Balaram KC, a former Supreme Court judge, believes the bicameral legislature should not be discarded just because the current upper house has not been up to the task.

“Getting rid of the upper house could have bad consequences. The monopoly of a single chamber is never desirable. The idea does not sound democratic,” KC says. “As a democratic society, we should instead build pressure on our leadership to reform the house. Our political parties should also be responsible.”

Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba seems bent on tabling the $500-million American grant agreement in the form of the under Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact in the current session of Parliament. He is requesting his coalition partners to allow him to do so. This is exactly what Americans have been saying to Nepal’s major parties: take it or leave it but decide on the compact right away.

Even as other members of the ruling coalition have rather ambiguous positions on the compact, PM Deuba’s position is clear enough: the compact is in national interest and must thus be ratified. As the compact begins to shake the roots of the current coalition, PM Deuba has offered a middle path to his partners CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) to prevent a possible split in the coalition.

Deuba has reportedly told them that he would not ask coalition partners to vote either in favor of or against the compact. He only wants to be able to table it in parliament. But if tabled, the two parties will be in a tricky position of having to potentially vote against a parliamentary bill brought by its coalition partner.

Senior NC ministers are in regular consultations to convince coalition partners. On February 1, senior minister Gyanendra Bahadur Karki held a long conversation with CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Dahal and on February 2, Home Minister Balkrishna Khand held talks with CPN (Unified Socialist) Chairman Madhav Kumar Nepal. Similarly, Deuba, Dahal, and Nepal have been meeting on a regular basis to find a common position.

In a meeting with Dahal and Nepal on February 2, PM Deuba said that he wants to endorse the MCC without breaking the five-party coalition. Discussions are underway to pass the MCC. The PM has sought a list of points that we want to amend, the coalition will remain intact, says Nepal.

Jagannath Khatiwada, the spokesperson of CPN (Unified Socialist), says PM Deuba is unlikely to push the compact at the cost of unraveling the ruling coalition. Deuba rather wants to table it and show the Americans that he did what he could, says Khatiwada.

CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal is under pressure to take a position on the compact. On the one hand, Dahal, dispatching a letter, has assured the Americans that the compact would be endorsed by forging consensus. On the other hand, he has trained his cadres that the compact in its current form is unacceptable. The latter is also the formal position of the Maoist party.

According to leaders, Dahal would prefer to discuss the compact only after elections, with the society bitterly divided on it. But the Americans have repeatedly conveyed that they cannot wait till elections and the compact must be endorsed from the current parliament session.

In this context, Dahal is consulting party colleagues to find a face-saver. He has shared with his close aides that the party could choose not to impose whip in the voting process, allowing lawmakers to use their conscience. Similarly, Dahal has told party colleagues that Deuba has agreed to endorse a parliamentary resolution motion stating that the compact is not a part of the Indo-Pacific Strategy and Nepal will as such not join any military alliance.

Says NC leader Pushpa Bhushal, this option has been considered in the political circles for a long time. “The first order of business is to table the MCC bill in the full House. Only after that will the resolution motion and other issues be discussed,” says Bhushal.

This, Dahal believes, could provide another face-saver. Another coalition partner CPN (Unified Socialist) led by Madhav Kumar Nepal agrees. Of late, Nepal has not spoken publicly about the compact but senior leader Jhala Nath Khanal has been insistent that it can be endorsed only after amendments. Khanal also claims to have received some new documents, which will take some time to study. But the office of MCC in Nepal has clarified that there are no such documents that remain to be studied.

At the same time, Speaker Agni Sapkota has hardened his position on the compact. To table the MCC bill in full House, Sapkota has set three conditions, according to a member of his secretariat: consensus among parties, addressing of public issues over the compact, and lifting of UML’s parliament obstruction as the compact cannot be endorsed otherwise. So, without an agreement among Deuba, Nepal, and Dahal, the speaker is unlikely to cooperate.

But the ball is still largely in Deuba’s court. If he is determined to endorse the compact irrespective of its consequences on the coalition, an entirely new political scenario could emerge. First, if the speaker refuses to budge from his position, PM Deuba has to remove the speaker and for that he needs the support of UML, which means a breakdown of the ruling coalition. 

UML may help Deuba remove the speaker but it is uncertain if it will continue to support Deuba as PM. Says CPN (Unified Socialist)’s Khatiwada, UML, in this scenario, may ask for government leadership. Moreover, if Deuba dissolves the parliament, the Supreme Court is likely to restore it. At the same time, Deuba is cautious that a split in the coalition could bring the communist parties together, which will make it difficult for NC to emerge as the largest electoral force.

So there are chances of Deuba convincing Americans that he did what he could, and thus the ruling coalition will also continue.

There are growing concerns inside the Nepali Congress about the electoral consequences of Deuba’s stand in the compact’s favor. Whether the compact moves ahead or not, communist parties are sure to make it a major election plank, much to the detriment of Congress.

As the UML is to take a position on the compact, members of the ruling coalition fear that the party could, in the lead up to elections, heap all the blame for the compact’s endorsement on the ruling coalition.

Leaders of the Maoist Center and CPN (Unified Socialist) are trying to convince NC leaders that it would be prudent to take a final call on the compact only after elections.

As the compact continues to create friction among coalition partners, UML is keenly watching. It has been saying that the ruling coalition has a comfortable majority to endorse the compact, and as such there is no question of its support.

The coming week is going to be crucial, as the prime minister wants to table the MCC bill in Parliament on February 9. Nepali Congress leaders say, in the worst-case scenario, the parliament could be dissolved, again to the benefit of the UML.

Shariful Islam is an Assistant Professor in International Relations at the University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. He is the author of ‘Fifty Years of Bangladesh-India Relations: Issues, Challenges and Possibilities’ (2021, Pentagon Press, New Delhi) and co-author of ‘Covid-19 Global Pandemic and Aspects of Human Security in South Asia: Implications and Way Forward’ (2020, Pentagon Press, New Delhi). His research interests include foreign policy of Bangladesh, blue economy Diplomacy and economic diplomacy. Kamal Dev Bhattarai spoke to him to solicit his views on how Bangladesh deals with big powers, and particularly China.

Bangladesh occupies an important position geopolitically. How does it deal with big powers?

The location of Bangladesh makes it geo-strategically important for both regional and extra-regional powers. In addition, for many, Bangladesh has become a ‘development miracle’ from an ‘international basket case’. This rising socio-economic status of the country also attracts big powers. In fact, Bangladesh is one of the few countries that maintain warm relations with regional and extra-regional powers. Bangladesh sees big powers—i.e. US, Russia, China, Japan, India—as opportunities to strengthen the existing development and economic partnership.

How is Bangladesh maintaining balanced relations with India and China?

Bangladesh, under the current Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina (2009-present), follows the foreign policy philosophy of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, i.e. ‘friendship to all, malice to none’. Therefore, Bangladesh under Sheikh Hasina views India and China as friends, as development partners. Bangladesh prioritizes economic diplomacy, the well-being of the people in formulating its foreign policy objectives. Therefore, Bangladesh is maintaining warm relations with both India and China, which is beneficial to the people of the country and beyond.

What lessons can Bangladesh offer to other South Asian countries on dealing with China?

In fact, every country’s context, geography, location and other foreign policy parameters are different. So there is no ‘one size fits all’ approach. But Bangladesh is an interesting case to study how it maintains warm relations with both India and China. China and India are two largest trading and development partners of Bangladesh. In this case, the leaders of Bangladesh and their foreign policy philosophy helped develop warm relations with these two Asian giants. The current Prime Minister of Bangladesh is the daughter of Bangabandhu, the founding father of Bangladesh who formulated Bangladesh’s earlier-mentioned foreign policy principle.

Bangabandhu’s foreign policy principle helped Bangladesh emancipate its people from poverty and hunger, and to make it self-reliant. Therefore, Bangabandhu’s emphasis on economic diplomacy has inspired the current prime minister as well. Thus, Bangladesh prioritizes economic diplomacy in its international relations including in its relations with China which helped the country be a ‘development miracle’. In addition, Bangladesh negotiates and calculates well while taking Chinese loans so it does not fall under the so-called ‘debt trap’.

In fact, South Asian countries cannot afford to neglect China. They need to engage China constructively for economic gains, for the welfare and benefits of the people, rather than for the narrowly defined interest of a particular regime. In case of loans from China, South Asian countries including Nepal need to negotiate well for a better deal. The case of Sri Lanka should not be repeated.

Relations with India and China often become a domestic political agenda in South Asian countries. How is it in Bangladesh?

Some previous regimes in Bangladesh, particularly the BNP-Jamaat regime, used India, China for their political purposes. For instance, existing literature suggests that the ‘anti-India’ stand was a common feature in Bangladesh politics during the BNP-Jamaat regime. But after Sheikh Hasina came to power in 2009, Bangladesh deepened its ties with both India and China as the Hasina regime realized the importance of these two countries for the socio-economic uplift of the people of Bangladesh. And consequently, Sheikh Hasina’s ‘friendship to both India and China and malice to none’ policy helped Bangladesh move forward. This is the reason that even though Sino-Indian rivalry has impacted many countries, Bangladesh is not that affected.

How should Nepal deal with emerging China?

I am afraid that I am not an expert on Nepal. But as a foreign policy student, I can say Nepal’s geo-strategic location is very important for big powers including India and China. This location can be used for the country’s socio-economic development. Nepal can study Bangladesh and shape its policies if that suits it, though Nepal’s own context will determine its foreign policy orientation. One thing I want to emphasize is the role of political regimes and visionary leaders, which are essential for Nepal. In the case of Bangladesh, the visionary and patriotic leader Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and later her daughter Sheikh Hasina changed the fate of tens of millions of people in the country, and changed the global status of the country by following peaceful international relations.

Thus the regimes in Nepal need to think about long-term welfare and benefit of the Nepali people while dealing with emerging China. Here it can be reiterated that every country in South Asia including Nepal needs to engage China constructively. The bottom-line is that Nepal needs to maintain a balanced approach with China and India with economic diplomacy as a priority. In this case, the role of the media, academia, and other civil society organizations and people at large becomes necessary.

Following the formation of the five-party coalition government led by Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba last July, Nepal and India have held a series of meetings. In this period, high-level American officials visited Nepal to consult on bilateral issues including on the much-debated Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact.

But with China, except for a phone conversation between the two foreign ministers and a few bilateral mechanism-level meetings, there has been limited engagement. Both sides blame Covid-19 for such a situation, but then high-level Chinese officials have been touring other countries even in this period.

Observers say some issues that evolved over the past few years have created mistrust between Kathmandu and Beijing. The pace of engagement with China was already down when CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli was the prime minister. “That downward trend has continued even after the formation of the new coalition government under Deuba,” says Upendra Gautam, General Secretary at China Study Center, a Kathmandu-based think-tank.

Many believe the current government has, instead of building trust, upset China, for instance by raising the issue of China’s alleged border encroachment without consulting Beijing. A few weeks after taking over government reins, PM Deuba formed a panel to investigate alleged Chinese encroachment in Humla district. The panel subsequently flagged some issues.

Foreign Policy analyst Rupak Sapkota says many in China saw this as an attempt to divert attention from the ongoing border dispute with India: it is not only with India that Nepal has border disputes but also with China. “The government further fueled this narrative by raising the Humla issue, which did not go down well in Beijing,” says Sapkota.

Nepal’s reluctance to appoint its China envoy has also raised eyebrows in Beijing. After recalling the ambassadors appointed by the previous government , the Deuba government nominated new ambassadors to India, the US, and the UK, but not to China. This suggests China is not its priority. A Maoist leader, speaking on the condition of anonymity, says coalition partners have been pressing PM Deuba to appoint the ambassador to China but PM Deuba continues to demur.

Travel restrictions imposed by China to control the spread of Covid-19 have also limited bilateral exchanges. Direct flights between Kathmandu and Beijing are yet to restart, severely affecting people’s movements. Hundreds of Nepali students have been barred from joining physical classes in Chinese universities. Similarly, movements at two major border points at Tatopani and Rasuwagadi have been restricted.

Moreover, there has been mistrust between Nepali Congress and CPN-UML on foreign policy over the past two years—and this mistrust has continued. In 2021, a Congress team led by Jeevan Bahadur Shahi, now the chief minister of Karnali province, visited the Nepal-China border at Humla district and came up with a report concluding that China has encroached on Nepali lands, much to the latter’s chagrin. The Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu then dispatched a letter to Congress expressing serious reservations.

Similarly, Chinese state mouthpiece Global Times ran a series of reports slamming the border report and dubbing Congress ‘pro-India’. Even after Deuba became prime minister, Global Times had on July 19 ran an article under the title ‘China-Nepal ties solid despite pro-India leader.’ The article by Zhang Jiadong, a professor at the Center for American Studies, Fudan University, said “Deuba's rise to power may tilt Nepal a bit toward India, but he will not change the basic idea of multilateral balanced diplomacy between China, India and the third-party countries.”

Another issue that is creating suspicion is China’s close involvement with Nepali communist parties, culminating in the 2018 merger between CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center). Many in Congress have come to believe that China tilts towards communist parties. Even now, China is pushing for the unification of Nepali communist parties, suggesting it prioritizes party-to-party relations instead of state-to-state relations.

But then China is keen on highlighting the Congress party’s historical contribution to cementing Nepal-China ties. NC and China have enjoyed cordial relations since the 1960s. During his Nepal visit in 2019, Chinese President Xi said: “The Chinese people will not forget the Nepali Congress Party's important contributions to the development of China-Nepal relations during the party’s ruling period.” A China watcher requesting anonymity says China has often failed to understand Nepal’s multi-party character, and thus its emphasis on communist unity. 

Growing geopolitical tensions and changing balance of power may be another reason for limited Nepal-China engagement. The China watcher says as the US, India and other western powers are closely watching or providing prescriptions on Nepal’s dealings with China, the current government is also under pressure to minimize engagement with the northern neighbor.

Not everything is downhill though. Despite the mistrust at the top political level, there has been steady communication between the two countries. When Deuba was appointed prime minister on 13 July 2021 following a Supreme Court order, there was no immediate response from the Chinese government. But on Julgauy 28, Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang sent a congratulatory message to PM Deuba, soon after he secured the vote of confidence in parliament.

In his message, the Chinese primer said, “China and Nepal are friendly neighbors linked by mountains and rivers,” while also hailing the two countries' solidarity and mutual help in the face of difficulties. Before that, on July 16, three days after Deuba became prime minister, China announced an additional two million doses of vaccines in grant. Both in terms of grant and commercial purchases, China has become the largest vaccine exporter to Nepal. According to Xinhua, along with the first 800,000 jabs of China-donated Sinopharm Covid-19 vaccines that arrived in Nepal on 29 March 2021, Nepal has so far received 13.8 million doses of Chinese vaccines.

On 19 October 2021, the two sides discussed each other’s concerns at length, for the first time since the formation of the new government. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi held a long phone conversation with his Nepali counterpart Narayan Khadka, including on the border. He expressed a willingness “to share China's development opportunities with Nepal and jointly build the Belt and Road Initiative with high quality, help boost Nepal's economic and social development, and build a closer China-Nepal community with a shared future.” The Chinese side also requested Nepal to participate in the China-led Global Development Initiative aimed at supporting the development of developing countries, promote post-pandemic global economic recovery and strengthen international development cooperation.

Though the current state of relationship under the Deuba-led government may not significantly affect overall ties, it may create an imbalance in Nepal’s foreign policy. “There is an all-party consensus in Nepal that we should have a balanced relationship with at least the major powers, which the current trend could undermine,” Sapkota notes.

Gautam of CSC also suspects Covid-19 pandemic is not the only reason behind the thinning of engagement. For instance, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi recently went to Maldives and Sri Lanka but did not come to Nepal. For the Chinese, implementation of foreign agreements during President Xi’s official visits remains a priority. The Chinese side is of the view that agreements reached between the two countries during Xi’s visit to Nepal in 2019 should be thoroughly implemented, says Gautam. “But our unwillingness to implement the agreements has raised questions about our country’s credibility,” he adds.

Box

Where is the railway?

The much-hyped cross-border railway is not making any headway. Both the sides blame the pandemic for the delay in starting its feasibility study. In the first week of January, there was a virtual meeting between Nepal’s Department of Railway and China’s National Railway Administration about the same.

“Covid-19 has affected the feasibility study even though the two sides agreed to it during Chinese President Xi’s Nepal visit,” says Deepak Kumar Bhattarai, Director-General of Nepal’s Department of Railway. During his visit, the two sides had also reiterated their commitment to extend cooperation on the Kathmandu-Pokhara-Lumbini railway. Funding for the feasibility is yet to be discussed. Nepal has been requesting China to conduct the feasibility study on a grant basis, while China insists that Nepal should share costs.

Despite the slow progress, the Chinese have communicated their commitment to building the railway. In his video message to the International Conference on Nepal’s Reconstruction 2021 held on December 7, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said, “China will make solid progress in the feasibility study of a cross-border railway project, improve the Trans-Himalayan Multi-dimensional Connectivity Network, and help Nepal realize its dream of changing from a ‘land-locked country’ to a ‘land-linked country’.”

In their first five-year tenure, local governments came into limelight for both good and bad reasons. Among the most prominent issues to hinder their functioning were disputes between chiefs and their deputies.

After the last local elections in 2017, women secured 91 percent of the deputy positions—deputy mayors in municipalities and vice-chairpersons in rural municipalities—while men bagged 98 percent of chief positions. This gender disparity certainly contributed to many disputes but there were plenty of other factors as well.

Different places had different root causes of disputes between the chiefs and their deputies. The local units with the chiefs and deputies from separate parties saw most disputes, as they jostled for influence.

Similarly, many places saw an unhealthy competition to take credit for development projects, as each tried to allocate more funds for his or her own constituency. In a classic case, Kathmandu Metropolitan City’s mayor Bidhya Sundar Shakya from CPN-UML famously clashed with deputy mayor Hari Prabha Khadgi from Nepali Congress.

They never had cordial relations. In April 2019, Mayor Shakya accused his deputy of deferring action against the traders who had allegedly encroached on Khulamanch, an open space in Kathmandu. A war of words ensued. Earlier, in 2018, the two had publicly clashed over Ranipokhari reconstruction.

In comparison, the local bodies with both heads and deputies from the same party saw fewer clashes. In Kavrepalnchowk district, all local bodies had chiefs and deputy chiefs from the same parties. “We have seen reports of clashes between the two executives in dozens of local governments but in our district there is relative harmony,” says Udhav KC, chief of the district coordination committee.

There is also a lack of clarity on individual roles and responsibilities. The Local Government Operation Act 2017 provides for many overlapping responsibilities, inviting interference in each other’s jurisdiction.

For instance, the deputy chairs a three-member Judicial Committee that is mandated to settle local-level disputes. But the chiefs have tended to poke their noses into such cases, as they feel entitled to do so.

Moreover, there is a sizable section of chiefs who believe the post of deputies is largely ceremonial as it is they who exercise all executive powers in municipalities and rural municipalities.

In fact, most duties of deputies are related to monitoring, supervision, and work-facilitation, with he or she getting to enjoy executive rights only in the absence of the chief.

Bansalal Tamang, general secretary, National Association of Rural Municipalities, says there have been efforts to clarify the jurisdictions of chiefs and deputies through orientation programs. “Initially, there was a lot of tussle. But with greater clarity over individual jurisdictions, most local-level disputes these days tend to be political,” he says.  

There have also been instances of the male chiefs questioning their female deputies’ work and education credentials. The Act envisions voluntary transfer of some power from the chiefs to his deputies but that is hardly happening.

In some other places, there have been disputes when the deputies asked for the same kind of facilities that the chiefs were getting.

The local bodies in (now) Madhes province saw most tussles between chiefs and deputies, as they were invariably from different parties. Prabhakar Yadav, Chief of District Coordination Committee Saptari, gives the example of the Chhinnamast Rural Municipality, where the municipal council has not sat in two years due to the internecine disputes between the chief and deputy.

Speaking to ApEx, vice-chair of Chhinnamasta Rural Municipality Usha Kumar Mandal confessed to her long-standing problems with chair Surya Naryan Mandal. “Our development projects and service-delivery have been badly affected due to the chair’s monopoly, and it is difficult for me to work as vice-chair,” she says.

There have been similar cases in local governments of Rautahat district. In Yamunamai Rural Municipality, the tussle between chief Shree Prasad Machida and deputy Gita Devi Sah has for years crippled the rural municipality’s functioning.

There are no mechanisms to look into the disputes between the chiefs and the deputies. This is one issue that must be resolved ahead of the next local elections. But till date the federal government seems noncommittal. Journalist Gita Chimoriya, who closely tracks local level disputes across the country, speaks of the urgent need to set up a mechanism that closely and continuously monitors such disputes and offers solutions.

“In the course of my study of local bodies, I have come across instances of nasty disputes. In some places, the chiefs and deputies do not even speak to each other,” says Chimoriya.

Basanta Adhikari, spokesperson at the Ministry of Federal Affairs and General Administration, says resolution of such disputes falls under the jurisdiction of provincial governments, not the federal government.

Major duties of chiefs

·         Organizing and leading the meeting of the municipal executive committee

·         Presenting and endorsing the list of agenda in all meetings

·         Preparing annual budget and program 

·         Calling the meeting of Municipal Assembly

·         Overseeing and monitoring day-to-day functioning

(The chief has 12 major ‘concrete’ responsibilities)

Major duties of deputy

·         Coordinator of Judicial Committee

·         Coordination of programs related to non-governmental organizations

·         Coordination of activities related to consumer welfare

·         Monitoring, supervising, and reporting local government’s programs

·         Member of local resource estimation and budget ceiling determination committee 

(Deputy has eight, mostly ill-defined responsibilities)

Source: Local government operation Act 2017

Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba is under immense pressure to announce local elections dates. On January 25, the Election Commission issued yet another statement, urging him to soon fix the dates.

Other Nepali Congress leaders, members of civil society, and media are warning him against paralyzing local governments by deferring polls. But then his key coalition partners want to postpone local elections from April/May to November. CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) are of the view that elections should be held six months after the expiry of local bodies’ terms in May this year.

Says Nepali Congress Central Working Committee member Min Bishokarma, PM Deuba is making utmost effort to convince coalition partners to agree to April-May local elections. “As the prime minister is in favor of holding local elections by removing legal ambiguities, it is incorrect to imply that he wants to defer elections,” says Bishokarma.

The main opposition, CPN-UML, is in favor of timely elections. On January 23, UML came out with a strong statement against postponing elections under any pretext. But the best way for UML to ensure timely local elections, say Congress leaders, is to agree to reopen the parliament.

UML chief whip Bishal Bhattarai does not think the opposition has a substantive role in creating an environment for elections. “We are in favor of holding timely elections but some parties in government fear losing and want to postpone them,” he says.

Deuba fears that a unilateral decision on elections could split the coalition. Says Bishokarma, though Deuba is in favor of timely elections, he does not want to upset coalition partners either, which means Deuba won’t announce poll dates without consensus within the coalition.

There are also other issues on which there are divergent opinions inside the ruling coalition, affecting Deuba. For instance, he wants early parliamentary ratification of the MCC compact. But his coalition partners particularly CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) oppose that. They say the MCC compact can be endorsed only after its amendment.

Also read: Local level facing an acute shortage of civil servants

Deuba also wants to avoid the possible communist re-unification or alliance ahead of the upcoming elections. He attributes the NC’s poor showing in 2017 elections to the left alliance formed on their eve. It would be easier for Nepali Congress to emerge as the largest party if communist parties continue to share bad blood. 

To do so, he seems ready to share some seats with left parties, mainly in the constituencies of their top leaders and where NC’s position is weak. Deuba also feels politically and morally obliged to keep the coalition intact: he could not have become the prime minister without the support of the Maoists and Unified Socialist.

Despite his firm commitment to retaining the current coalition, Deuba is not fully optimistic about its longevity either. So, he is also mulling a Plan B.

A few weeks back, Deuba for the first time since becoming prime minister last July reached out to UML Chairman KP Oli and proposed power-sharing along with the endorsement of the MCC compact. But the meeting apparently didn’t serve the intended purpose.

PM Deuba is reaching out to opposition parties to create an environment for elections, says Bishokarma. “Deuba has told UML that lifting of parliament obstruction will pave the way for timely local elections.”  

If the opposition removes the parliament obstruction thus clearing the legal challenges for local elections, the two sides could come together. “In the meeting with PM Oli, Deuba had requested UML join the government and help endorse the compact, he had also shared his difficulties with current coalition partners,” says Bhattarai.

Moreover, there is a strong sentiment in the NC that the party should rethink the coalition’s continuation. They fear the communist parties in the government are using the Congress party to create an electoral environment in their favor.

On January 24, the Shekhar Koirala faction of Nepali Congress concluded that one, elections must take place on time and two, that the party should not ally with communist parties.  Says senior NC leader Jagadish Narasingh KC, the government is preparing to postpone elections without any discussions inside the party.

It would be suicidal to take vital decisions on local elections and amendment of laws without holding consultations inside the party, says KC. NC and PM Deuba apparently have little to gain but a lot to lose by deferring polls. On the other hand, the main opposition’s principal strategy at this point is engineering a split in the coalition to turn the electoral balance in its favor.

Even if there is an agreement in the ruling coalition on poll dates, its partners will start to bargain with Deuba on a small-scale electoral alliance. But, again, there are strong voices inside NC that the party should not strike any alliance with communist parties.

Deuba may be in a comfortable situation in and outside the party but national politics could lose way if there is a crack in the coalition. For instance, if the coalition splits and UML does not rescue him, Deuba could dissolve the Parliament.

The first elections of local governments in 2017 to be held under the new constitution were mostly smooth even though they had to be conducted in multiple phases to accommodate Madhes-based parties. Initially, due to reservations over the constitution, they were reluctant to join the electoral process.

In a sense, the 2017 elections were a story of stability and contributed to deepening democracy at the grassroots. The tenure of local governments elected in 2017 expires on 19 May 2022, and there are doubts over timely elections. The Election Commission (EC) has proposed April 27 as the election date. If the ruling parties are committed to timely elections, the government needs to announce a date this week: the commission needs at least 120 days for preparations.

Major parties are under pressure not to create a vacuum at the local level. Until two weeks ago, some members of the coalition were reluctant to hold timely elections. Following widespread pressure, their tone and tenor have changed. A meeting of the ruling coalition on January 18 committed to local level elections as per the constitutional and legal provisions. But the commitment meant different things to different parties. 

The Local Level Election Act (2017) says there should be no vacuum at the local level and elections must be completed before the expiry of the local bodies’ tenure, which contradicts the constitution which says elections can be held within six months of the expiry of term. The commission decided to follow the Act to forestall a possible political vacuum in local governments. But some parties are trying to delay elections, arguing that the constitution should prevail over other laws.

So, despite their commitment, there is still no surety of timely elections to forestall a vacuum. Until now, only two parties—Nepali Congress and CPN-UML—are clear that elections must be held by April. Initially, Congress Chief and Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba was in favor of federal parliament elections. But now Deuba thinks holding local level elections first would allow him to stay in power for another year and half at the least.

Also read: Ruling coalition agrees to hold local level elections in April

If parliamentary elections are held first there could be a change in government leadership and NC could be denied a chance at holding local elections, says a leader close to the PM. So Deuba is putting pressure on coalition partners to agree to timely local elections. NC calculates that the split in CPN-UML could work to its advantage.

The civil society is cautioning political parties on possible political vacuum at the local level. PM Deuba is cautious about his image and does not want to take the blame for derailing the democratic process at the local level, something he has communicated to coalition partners. Historically, Deuba has been blamed for making local bodies defunct after 2002 when he was also the prime minister. The tenures of local representatives had ended that year.

At the time, a legal provision allowed the local bodies’ tenure to be extended by a year but Deuba still choose to end their terms and hand over local leadership to unelected civil servants. But he could not hold elections due to the raging Maoist insurgency. Deuba does not want to repeat the mistake in the final years of his political career. Similarly, the main opposition UML also wants timely elections. But will Duba’s coalition partners CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) agree?

The two parties want to buy time to strengthen their organizations. They fear that if they fare poorly in local elections, their national election campaigns could also be affected. Maoist Center and Unified Socialist seek an electoral alliance. “An alliance among coalition partners is a condition for holding three-tier elections,” says Ganga Lal Tuladhar, deputy general secretary of Unified Socialist.

In the 2017 elections, of 753 local governments, UML won 297, Congress 274, CPN (Maoist Center) 107, and the remaining parties won 76 seats. After the UML split, around 10 percent of its elected representatives deserted to the new Unified Socialist led by former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal. By holding local elections first, NC wants to benefit from the UML split.

Also read: Rural municipalities, municipalities urge government to fix date of local level elections pronto

Maoist Center and Unified Socialist are not opposed to local elections but they want to exploit the constitutional provision to buy time.

As per this plan, there will be a political vacuum at the local level after May 19. Unified Socialist leaders say election dates should be announced only after harmonizing Local Elections Act and constitutional provisions. There are also voices that the local level vacuum would facilitate free and fair federal and provincial elections, as incumbent local government heads could otherwise misuse their offices to influence voters.

If the parties stick to constitutional provisions, April elections are unlikely. Says Maoist leader Dev Gurung, in principle, parties have agreed to hold local elections within the framework of constitution and relevant laws. “But the confusion over the constitution and the laws should be first settled to clear the way for elections,” says Gurung.

Some in the ruling coalition want November local elections, taking advantage of the constitution’s leeway. The ruling parties may also use the third Covid-19 wave as an excuse to postpone elections. In a ruling coalition meeting on January 19, some leaders had advised PM Deuba to analyze the pandemic before announcing elections. But virologists say April elections should not be affected.

Says virologist Sher Bahadur Pun, the third wave triggered by the new Omicron variant is unlikely to remain active by April even though the situation may not be completely under control. “The experiences of South Africa and other countries suggest infections will go down after four weeks. In Nepal, too, cases will start to decrease after two or three weeks,” he says.

On the face of the third wave, parties have limited their activities. Experts say Covid-19 cannot be used as an excuse to delay elections. In India, even amid the Covid-19 crisis, the country is holding state assembly elections in Manipur, Uttarakhand, Punjab, and Goa in February. So Covid-19 should not hinder elections in Nepal as well.

Timely local elections will also allow for timely polls to national parliament and federal assemblies. But first there needs to be consensus among political parties on election dates.

“Election laws that contradict the constitution must be amended before announcing elections, for which the parliament should be allowed to operate unhindered,” says Tuladhar.

Personality, wit, charm, charisma. These are among the attributes voters look for in leaders of political parties they are thinking of supporting. That is why, when parties head into elections, they announce the names of their prospective prime minister candidates. 

Ahead of the 14th General Convention of Nepali Congress, there were suggestions that the party should select its new leader such that he or she would be capable of taking on a heavyweight like CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli in upcoming elections.

Many in the party were in favor of replacing Sher Bahadur Deuba as party chair after the NC’s humiliating outing in the 2017 elections. Deuba, they reckoned, had lost his mass appeal. In the recent general convention, the likes of Shekhar Koirala, Prakash Man Singh and Bimalendra Nidhi had challenged Deuba for party presidency by making the same argument. 

Yet Deuba won the party presidency again—and comfortably. This again ignited a debate if he would be more of a liability rather than an asset heading into elections. But when youth leaders like Gagan Thapa, Bishwa Prakash Sharma, Dhanaraj Gurung, Badri Pandey and Jiwan Pariwar were elected office-bearers, alongside Deuba, many felt the party had already been rebranded. 

Says political analyst Geja Sharma Wagle, the victory of Thapa and Sharma as General Secretaries has created excitement not only in the party but also among the masses. “They will be NC’s poster boys in NC’s election campaigns. Many neutrals are likely to vote for Congress because of their presence,” says Wagle.

Also read: Can Dahal again revive the Maoist party? 

Kalyan Gurung, NC Central Working Committee (CWC) member, also reckons the new set of leaders will boost the party’s image during the upcoming elections. “What the general convention also showed is that party representatives from across the country still feel Deuba is best placed to win elections for Nepali Congress,” says Gurung, who had also contested party presidency at the convention. 

Even though there is a strong presence of youth leaders in the party’s 15-member officer-bearer team, there are doubts about its effective functioning. Most elected youths are from anti-Deuba camps and they have repeatedly clashed with Deuba on national and party issues.

A senior NC leader requesting anonymity argues the new team under Deuba is better than the previous one. “Deuba can manage election funds while our youth leaders are good orators and visionaries,” he says. But on possible electoral alliance with other parties, Deuba and youth leaders are already at odds. Youth leaders are against any such alliance, while Deuba believes such an alliance is vital to ward off a grand alliance among left parties.

Says NC youth leader and analyst Shankar Tiwari, the presence of young faces as the party’s office-bearers will create a new vibe in the party’s election campaign. “Leaders such as Thapa, Sharma, Dhan Raj Gurung and Badri Pandey can rouse the masses. They are seen as principled politicians as well,” says Tiwari.

Party leaders say Deuba’s re-election does not necessarily mean that he is the only face of NC in the elections. Deuba, who has already become prime minister five times, can still project a new leader as a prime minister to pull voters. 

NC has done something similar in the past. For example, in the 1999 parliamentary elections, then party President Girija Prasad Koirala projected Krishna Prasad Bhattarai as future prime minister. The party secured parliamentary majority and Bhattarai became prime minister. 

Also read: 2021: A year of politicization of democracy 

“To win elections, Deuba should be pushed to project a new face as prime minister,” says Tiwari. Many in and outside NC say Gagan Thapa should be projected as prime minister. But getting Deuba to agree to that arrangement would be nigh-impossible. 

Deuba plans on becoming prime minister again if the NC reemerges as the largest party. “In that case, the situation in the party will favor Deuba,” says the aforementioned senior NC leader. 

As senior leaders like Ram Chandra Poudel, Prakash Man Singh and Bimalendra Nidhi have already thrown their lot with Deuba, Shekhar Koirala is the only leader who can take on Deuba. 

Over the past five years, Thapa has continuously lobbied for Deuba’s removal as party president. But after his election as general secretary, Thapa is in no mood to confront Deuba. Instead, he wants to move ahead by closely working with Deuba. 

Says NC leader Gurung: “Deuba, the five-time PM, is a towering personality who has won his parliamentary constituency every time since 1990. His personality will dominate other office-bearers and CWC members.”

Adds Nainsingh Mahar, another Congress CWC member, “Deuba has all the attributes you need to win elections. His first priority will be to keep the party united heading into national elections. He knows a divided party doesn’t win.”