Submit your Article

Article 93(1) of the Constitution of Nepal, 2015 states that the interval between the two consecutive sessions of the federal parliament shall not be more than six months. The budget session was prorogued in mid-September 2024, meaning that the deadline for convening the winter session has not passed.

Notwithstanding this provision, the winter session should already have begun in accordance with a prevailing practice of convening the session within three months after the prorogation of the budget session.

With over 20 bills pending, lawmakers have their hands full. The parliament will need ample time for deliberations on each bill and for incorporation of concerns coming from lawmakers as law-making in a democracy is not done at the crack of a whip.

So, what is stopping the government from recommending the President to summon the winter session?

Some existential crisis, fear of criticism or some other factor?  

What’s exactly cooking in the corridors of power?

Media reports point out that the government has some other designs. Rather than stepping up preparations for the session, the two major ruling parties—the CPN-UML and the Nepali Congress—are in talks to introduce an ordinance that will actually ‘facilitate’ the splitting of political parties.

 These dark-room negotiations and delay in convening the session have not gone unnoticed. Speaking at a program of the Federal Parliament Secretariat recently, the Speaker of the House of Representatives expressed dissatisfaction over the delay in convening the session. Describing the government as the child of the parliament, he accused the child of sidestepping, undermining and even boycotting the mother.

Lawmakers from the opposition parties have objected to this style of functioning, accusing the government of seeking to rule through ordinances, ignoring the voices of the people and trying to avoid criticism.

On their part, some ministers and ruling party leaders have conceded that inter-party talks on whether or not to present the bill on splitting of political parties during this session are in progress, indicating that the winter session may convene in about a fortnight.

Summing up, the government should learn some bitter lessons from similar misadventures instead of trying to ‘facilitate’ the split of parties for temporary gains, rule through ordinances and undermine the concerns of the opposition and the people if it indeed wants the polity to stabilize and deliver.

At the Tribhuvan University International Cricket Ground in Kirtipur, Nepali cricket made history recently. The credit for this feat—the successful conclusion of the Nepal Premier League (NPL) Twenty20 cricket tournament (Nov 30-Dec 21)—goes to the entire sports fraternity.

It’s a celebration for all, including the government, the winning team, Janakpur Bolts, other participating teams, ace cricketers from Nepal and beyond, the organizers (Cricket Association of Nepal), sponsors, national and international media involved in the coverage of the tourney, ground staff, fans and empires.  

Through the maiden NPL title win, Janakpur Bolts have etched their name in history and this win should be an occasion for celebration for the sports fraternity. It is natural for fans of a squad to get disappointed when a rival team wins but this does not allow them to opt for physical violence and racist remarks against the ‘rivals’. Sadly, that’s what happened during and after the final match between the Bolts and the Sudurpaschim Royals.

The organizers and law enforcement should learn some humbling lessons from the cricket ground, and so should fans. The fans, diehard and misguided ones in particular, should bear in mind that violence is not acceptable at all, whether on or off the sporting arena.

For law enforcement and the management, it is indeed quite difficult to ensure order in a euphoric, roughly 25000-strong crowd but this does not mean these authorities should not prepare for worst-case scenarios. Now that the unwelcome incident has occurred, the onus is on law enforcement to conduct a free, fair and credible probe, take action against the guilty and come up with preventive measures keeping in mind the possibility of vested interests using such events to stoke up hostilities between different communities living in peace and harmony in a country comprising the Himalayas, the Tarai and the Hills.

With some sobering lessons, the NPL has shown that Nepal, endowed with favorable weather conditions and friendly, cheering people well aware of the sporting culture, has the potential to become a great neutral venue for major international sporting tournaments, including cricket. The time has come to channelize our energies toward that end as well.

For members of the general public, it is getting increasingly difficult these days to know which piece of information is fake and which is not. Recently, a fake video of an incident of manhandling went viral. Apparently, the video was targeted at the country’s top political leadership. 

This, just days after a sustained effort to drag the leadership into controversy over alleged investments offshore.

A cursory reading of unsavory comments in relation to such controversial and often fake contents paints an alarming picture. It shows anarchy reigns supreme in parts of the cyberscape as in several other parts of national life, including in politics. It may be because of poor service delivery on the part of state organs. Worse still, it may be an indication of the direction we are taking as a society. 

In a real democracy, healthy criticism of the government is always welcome. The free press, if it is indeed worth its name, is at the forefront when it comes to taking the government to task. Sadly, there have been instances, in Nepal and elsewhere, where the vanguards of the permanent opposition have paid—and continue to pay—heavy prices for not sparing a government, democratic or otherwise.

Rulers, regardless of their hues and shades, often fail to realize that they should not shoot the messenger just because they don’t like the message. Even those at the helm in great democracies tend to forget that the media is a watchdog, not a lapdog. 

This selective amnesia comes from state powers, unbridled or otherwise. Indeed, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The freedom of expression, the freedom of the press and several other freedoms are enshrined in our Constitution. These freedoms come with boundaries attached. 
Notwithstanding the red lines, cyberspace has become a mute spectator as outlets, in their desperate bids to go viral, cross the limits and resort to misinformation, disinformation and fake news, often targeting high-profile figures, among others. There’s an ecosystem behind it all, with links beyond the national jurisdiction.

Alarmingly, recent days have also seen attempts to malign Nepal as an unsafe neighbor and destabilize the polity by predicting that the government will collapse pretty soon.

In the face of misinformation, disinformation and fake news spreading like wildfire amid proliferation of advanced technologies like AI, our government seems to be in deep slumber.

Time has come for the government to wake up and rein in this sorry situation by safeguarding freedoms enshrined in our charter and improving its poor service delivery, which seems to be the root cause of rising discontent in social media and beyond.

Almost a decade has passed since an earthquake-ravaged Nepal adopted a federal democratic constitution, exhibiting strong political will in the face of adversities, seismic or otherwise. The charter aside, the country has not been able to introduce laws that can make way for a smooth transition from an ages-old unitary system of governance to a federal system.

Let’s go 15 months back, at least, when the National Assembly, the upper chamber of the bicameral parliament, drew the attention of the government of the day, directing it to do the needful for making laws. The directive and successive governments’ commitments to drafting the laws aside, there are, at present, only two regulations under the consideration of the lower chamber of the parliament (the House of Representatives): School Education Regulation, 2080 and Federal Civil Service Regulation, 2080. The process of making scores of laws is ‘moving’ at a snail’s pace, giving an indication of the status of implementation of the new constitution.   

Out of these laws, the Center has been literally sitting on the task of making around 40 laws, followed by provinces (24) and local levels (6).  

The laws awaiting the light of the day cover a wide range of important topics such as citizenship, right to property, acquisition and compensation, and impeachment motion. 

They come under the ambit of different ministries such as home, law, justice and parliamentary affairs, and finance. 

Department ministries aside, it is the ultimate responsibility of the top government leadership to draft these laws and present them in the Parliament, making way for enlightened discussions, changes and authentication. 

Delays, inadvertent or otherwise, in introducing laws will only come in the way of devolution of state powers so crucial for taking the state at the doorsteps of the citizenry. Not only that, such delays will only bolster forces opposed to federalism and the new constitution, thereby contributing to a growing disenchantment against the system and its destabilization. 

So, the onus is on the government leadership to take decisive steps toward implementation of the new constitution by giving momentum to the stalled lawmaking process.