Submit your Article

No surprise that the richest man in Nepal, Binod Chaudhary, finds himself in the company of 15 other Nepalis whose illegally stashed wealth abroad has been exposed. The Nepali Congress parliamentarian and the head of the Chaudhary Group (CG) likes to boast of his adeptness at using loopholes in Nepali laws to expand his business empire abroad. The latest exposé by the Washington DC-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) identifies CG and Golcha Organization, two of Nepal’s biggest conglomerates, as among the companies that have set up shells in international tax havens, apparently to launder money.

Chaudhary has built companies in the British Virgin Islands under his and family members’ names—his wife Sarika Devi, and three sons, Nirvana, Varun, and Rahul. Likewise, those related to Golcha Organization—chairman Lokmanya Golchha, his two brothers Mahendra Kumar Golchha and Diwakar Golchha, their cousin Chandra Kumar Golchha and Diwakar’s son Hitesh Golchha—set up similar companies in the BVI. Among other prominent names flagged by the ICIJ report are Ajeya Raj Sumargi Parajuli, Arjun Prasad Sharma, and Sudhir Mittal, all of whom have parked wealth outside the country by breaking Nepali laws.

Also read: Editorial: KP Oli’s misgivings

Despite such repeated exposures of their wrongdoing—before this, most famously in the 2016 Panama Papers—nothing happens. These ultra-rich businesspersons buy their way out of any kind of legal trouble. In the past decade, in particular, the influence of money in politics and even in the judiciary is getting pronounced. Members of the traditionally marginalized communities were supposed to be elected under the PR quota in national and regional parliaments yet many such seats are bought off by powerful businessmen, who invariably also finance the election campaigns of big political parties.

As Gerard Ryle, director of ICIJ, puts it: “The offshore world exacerbates poverty. It leads to inequality… there doesn’t seem to be a purpose to this system except to enrich some people.” This visible inequality fuels anger and resentment, which in turn offers the perfect platform for the rise of authoritarians. Such shameless wealth inequality, if left unaddressed, could well doom the nascent Nepali democracy.

CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli feels aggrieved that the media does not do enough to rein in the excesses of the Sher Bahadur Deuba government. In a meeting with editors on September 28, he said the previous government he led had benefited from the media’s scrutiny. It is thus incumbent on the media to similarly hold the new government to account. He was particularly unhappy about the ‘little’ media coverage on the Deuba government’s undemocratic ordinance brought with the sole purpose of ‘splitting’ the UML party.

But the mainstream and even smaller media outlets have mostly condemned Deuba’s bypassing of the parliament in his introduction of an ordinance that made it easier for political parties to split. The common theme in these reported pieces and editorials is that the Deuba government appears no better than its error-prone predecessor. Post-1990, Nepali media have always been critical of the incumbent government, irrespective of the parties in power. And rightly so, as the rulers over the years have invariably trampled on democratic norms in the pursuit of personal goals.

Also read: Editorial: PM Deuba, missing in action

Frankly, given the excesses of the Oli government—including its disbanding of the parliament on dubious constitutional grounds, twice—Deuba’s mistakes seem benign by comparison. It’s common knowledge that Deuba as government head has many failings. But while people had high expectations of the two-thirds government Oli led, they expect little from Deuba. Doubts are already creeping in about whether Deuba can successfully conduct the three-tier elections, which was his only mandate.

Oli crying wolf at Deuba’s wrongdoings would have been more credible had his own government heeded the media’s voice. Whatever the opinion-makers and media houses said, PM Oli was determined to have his way. So rather than asking the media to do its job, Oli, as the leader of the main opposition, should play a more constructive role in ensuring that the parliament resumes its business and this government successfully conducts the elections. Dissolving the parliament now, which Oli seems intent on, would only invite more uncertainty, and make timely polls less, not more, likely.

Sher Bahadur Deuba has given a poor account of himself in his two months as prime minister. The holder of 17 ministries has even failed to give a full shape to his cabinet. CPN-UML, the main opposition, has been an obstreperous foe, and yet Deuba too has failed to play his part to clear the parliamentary logjam. Devoid of a foreign minister until September 22, his government bungled on key foreign policy issues like the MCC Compact and the drowning of a Nepali national by Indian border forces.

During his four previous tenures as prime minister Deuba was reputed as a consummate wheeler-dealer who could do just about anything, including distributing expensive SUVs, to keep his coalition partners happy. In his latest stint as prime minister, there is nothing to suggest he has learned from his previous mistakes. On the contrary, he seems determined to regain the Nepali Congress presidency by misusing the PMO.

Dozens of bills are pending in the legislature, government spending has come to a halt, and the economy is crying out for a stimulus. No one knows what the prime minister is doing to improve things on these fronts. Having been appointed prime minister by the Supreme Court, things were never going to be easy for him. Even so, it is hard to give a better example of incompetence than his continued failure (reluctance?) to expand his cabinet and get the ministries up and running.

Many are starting to doubt whether Deuba can successfully hold the constitutionally mandated elections by the November 2022 deadline. They also worry about his lack of commitment to federalism as dozens of bills to make it functional continue to languish in parliament. Six years since the promulgation of the new constitution, the implementation of the federal project has been woefully slow, including under this government.  

Even if there are to be elections soon, Deuba, as prime minister, is doing Nepali Congress no favor whatsoever. In its current form, anti-incumbency could weigh heavily against the party. Moreover, his demonstrable incompetence—following hot on the heels of another unsuccessful prime minister from the main opposition—will add to the appeal of the political forces arrayed against the post-2006 progressive changes. 

The House deadlock that threatens to freeze government spending perfectly highlights the irresponsibility of our major political forces. The Sher Bahadur Deuba-led government kept delaying the parliamentary endorsement of its budget bill fearing that it didn’t have the requisite numbers.

The government decided to press ahead with the bill only when it became certain of a majority. On the other hand, CPN-UML, the main opposition, has been disrupting house proceedings accusing Speaker Agni Prasad Sapkota of bias as he refused to dismiss 14 renegade UML MPs. UML has also boycotted Sapkota’s initiatives to reopen the house. This is not a battle that appears ripe for an early resolution.

As a result, for the first time in the democratic history of Nepal, government spending could come to a halt, even as the country is neck-deep in the Covid-19 crisis and an urgent outlay is vital for timely procurement and distribution of vaccines. All development activities will stop. Meanwhile, the ruling as well as opposition parties, seem determined to tire each other out.

The previous government of KP Oli was much maligned for playing fast and loose with democratic norms before the Supreme Court ordered its ouster. Yet the current Deuba government seems no better in terms of misusing state offices and coffers. Oli, at the same time, continues to cross new frontiers every day by using the most disparaging language against his political opponents and by encouraging his MPs to act violently inside the parliament.

Deuba’s time in office should have been used, first and foremost, to clear the way for the three tiers of elections which must be completed before the November 2022 constitutional deadline. Yet it is hard to see the country head to elections in such a toxic political climate. Given the course of events over the past year or so, there is a possibility of a constitutional vacuum, come November 2022. Hopefully, our major political actors will pull back from the brink while they still have time. Their current strategy of smashing democratic norms to smite their opponents is self-defeating.