Submit your Article

Ever since the powerful communist govern­ment of KP Sharma Oli took office nearly a year ago, there have been fears that the gov­ernment could abuse its powers to curtail free speech and stifle press freedom. The communist coalition, which later morphed into the Nepal Commu­nist Party, had come to power on the twin promises of ‘stability’ and ‘prosperity’. While the NCP seems to have ensured the former with its thumping two-thirds majority in the federal parliament, as well as effective control of six of the seven provincial assemblies, it is a long way from achieving the latter.

The Oli government’s performance thus far has been disappointing. The economy is in a shambles. Even as Nepal’s exports dwindle, imports continue to pile up, leading to a whopping Rs 82.32 billion balance of pay­ment deficit in the first five months of the ongoing fis­cal. None of the big-ticket infrastructure projects has come through. Melamchi has been left high and dry. Progress on two international airports at Bhairahawa and Pokhara is patchy, while controversy rages over the proposed international air-hub in Nijgadh. Mean­while, corruption is increasing and impunity is at an all-time high.

But instead of getting its act together, the Oli govern­ment seems intent on silencing its critics. The latest manifestation of this is a new bill on advertisement regulation recently tabled in the federal upper house. If it passes, for the first time in Nepal’s democratic his­tory, any deviation from the official advertisement pol­icy will be a criminal offense, punished with up to Rs 500,000 in fines and up to five years in jail, or both. A producer of advertisements that promote gambling or Ponzi schemes will get the maximum sentence. So will the makers of ads deemed a threat to national sovereignty, territorial integrity, nationalism, relations between provinces and to a whole host of other real or imagined national interests. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Information has introduced measures to restrict jour­nalists’ access to inside dope in government agencies.

The government’s intent seems clear enough. While the cheerers of the Oli government in the media will get lucrative ads and every other kind of government support, critical outlets will be endlessly hounded and be deprived of their chief income source. This attempt to kill the messenger smacks of an authoritarian streak. The press fraternity and the civil society should speak as one against this mission creep—before it is too late.

That corruption is increasing in Nepal hardly needs confirmation. As we go to press, Dr Govinda KC is on his 16th fast-unto-death, as a part of his campaign against the corrupt bureaucrats and politicians who have deprived mil­lions of Nepalis of affordable and reliable healthcare. Just this past week, the Center for Investigative Journal­ism, Nepal published the names of 55 Nepali nationals who have amassed ill-gotten wealth in tax havens, and described how this money is being laundered back into the country. The national flag-carrier is under par­liamentary investigation for iffy transactions related to its purchase of two Airbus aircraft.

And now, the Transparency International, the global anti-graft watchdog, has released the 2019 Corruption Perception Index (CPI). Nepal has slipped two places from last year, to 124th, well below neighboring India (78th), and even troubled Pakistan (117th). The CPI says Nepal’s political parties and bureaucracy are the most corrupt entities in the country. In other words, the communist government with a two-thirds majority at the center is contributing to the institutionalization of corruption in high places. Rather than using its vast powers to clamp down on corruption, it is rewarding unscrupulous contractors and fixers.

One often gets to hear about how the whole govern­ment machinery operates under the ‘system’. While earlier individual government officials asked for small kickbacks for ‘pushing the file forward’, nowadays one or two officials pocket lump sums which are later dis­tributed down the line. Corruption now is thus less visi­ble but more prevalent. Even foreigners are not spared, as our story this week on the ordeal of the first foreign couple to register their marriage in Nepal illustrates.

For Nepal to make a significant dent on this bur­geoning edifice of corruption, it is vital that its chief anti-corruption bodies like the CIAA and the National Vigilance Center (NVC) get, first, the right manpower, and second, the autonomy to carry out their respon­sibilities freely and fearlessly. Yet the intent of the Oli government seems to be on cowing these institutions to do the government’s bidding, as putting the NVC under the Prime Minister’s Office suggests. The cul­ture of ‘political consensus’ that flourished following the 2006 political change has also been detrimental to the health of our public bodies. Even as the ruling and opposition parties appear bitterly divided over some issues, they are united in the shared knowledge that each has closets full of skeletons.

Lack of experience is one reason behind the failure of the Nepali Congress to play the role of an effective opposition. Nepali Con­gress leader Gagan Thapa admitted as much (See Interview). In fact, in over 28 years since the 1990 democratic change, the Congress has been in power for nearly 20, barring brief spells of active monarchy and short-lived CPN-UML-led governments.

Governments in Nepal changed after an average of nine months until the formation of the second Oli gov­ernment in February 2018. Congress or communists, the opposition is just not used to waiting patiently for the government to serve out its five-year term, which is primarily why no post-1990 government could survive for long. No surprise that Congress leaders are getting antsy after less than a year in the opposition’s bench; they have already had enough of the Oli government.

But they have no other option. Yes, they could align with the rightist forces campaigning for the restoration of the Hindu state and possibly even the monarchy, and there is growing pressure for them to do so from the grassroots. In the most unlikely scenario, with the help of these rightist forces, and possible support of one of our two big neighbors, they could conceivably engineer a divide in the ruling Nepal Communist Party. But such short-termism will backfire.

True, the government of KP Sharma Oli has failed to meet public expectation, and some of its actions have betrayed its ambivalence about democratic free­doms. But then, as Gagan Thapa suggested, the Con­gress should also learn to play the role of a responsi­ble opposition. In fact, all its moves appear reactive. After Dr Govinda KC sat down for yet another hunger strike, it wanted the government to fulfil his demands. But couldn’t it have raised a strong voice in the par­liament against tinkering with the Medical Education Bill before Dr KC started his 16th fast-unto-death? The same pattern—initial apathy followed by righ­teous anger—marked its handling of other high-profile national cases like Nirmala Pant and the grand corrup­tion in the national flag-carrier.

For the democratic system to work its major political actors have to be adept at playing the roles of both the government and the opposition. As interna­tional experience shows, if a government can serve out its full term, the one after it is also likely to. Meantime, why doesn’t the Nepali Congress work on strengthen­ing its organization and putting its leadership under greater scrutiny?

The crackdown on the ‘illegal’ operators of two ride-hailing apps, Tootle and Pathao, started only when local cabbies complained that they were seemingly being put out of business. Tootle has been in operation for two years. Pathao has been around for just four months. Between them, the two have around 30,000 registered ‘riders’, the owners of private two-wheelers who get paid for taking people around town. Strictly speaking, the two services are illegal. An old law bars private vehicles from doubling as taxies. It is disingenuous of Tootle and Pathao to try to escape oversight by claiming they are only app-developers.

But if there was ever a case of a baby being thrown out with the bathwater this had to be it. If these ride-hailing apps were operating in a grey zone, the focus should have been to better regulate them, and bring them under the proper tax net. They could have been given some time. But suddenly making thousands of vehicles that people relied on for daily transport out of their reach was, in effect, restricting their freedom to travel.

Following the ban, one line of argument was being repeated over and over on social media. The cabs are expensive partly because they seldom go by the meter. And many commuters don’t feel comfortable in the overcrowded public transport. The bike-hailing apps catered to this middle-range customers composed largely of women, mid-ranking professionals, students, and people with disabilities. And most were satisfied customers.

For their own good, Tootle and Pathao should stop pretending they are not into transport business and agree to be regulated. For instance, it is not clear how much tax they pay. Is each of their transaction taxed or do they only pay a nominal lump sum? But the cabbies are in no place to accuse Tootle and Pathao of taking away their bread and butter when they themselves are openly fleecing the people—and supposedly with the connivance of some in the government. Thankfully, Prime Minister KP Oli seemed to have enough sense to overturn the ban following immense public criti­cism. One good thing the row did was highlight the sorry state of public transport in Kathmandu. Banning innovation that enhances public mobility is no solu­tion. Following the overturn of the ban, the next line of action should be to make our public transport provid­ers more accountable, be they freewheeling ride-hail­ing companies or overcharging taxies.