Submit your Article

With the entry of the Sanghiya Sam­ajbadi Forum Nepal, the govern­ment led by KP Sharma Oli now has over two-thirds strength in the federal parliament. It also effectively controls all seven provinces. But even before the Forum’s inclusion, the federal government had a comfortable majority. It could have used this strength to enact vital pro-people reforms, which it has unfortunately failed to do.

It is true that the attention of the ruling CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center) during this period was focused on formalizing their unity, which was import­ant. Without it, clouds of uncertainty would have con­tinued to swirl over the communist coalition, and its twin agenda of ‘stability’ and ‘prosperity’ could have been in jeopardy.

But even after taking that into account, progress has been slow. The government, for instance, repeated­ly promised to bust cartels in all sectors, but some of its actions seemed to support them instead. Likewise, the concentration of powers at the PMO, reportedly to expedite service delivery and make the government more accountable, has also come to a naught. This has made some suspect that the government has an authoritarian bent.

Still, these are early days and we would like to give the ruling parties the benefit of the doubt. But it would be good if the prime minister and his cabinet mem­bers actually focused on deliverables rather than mak­ing big (and ultimately empty) promises. The recently unveiled budget aims to double the per capita income and attain double-digit economic growth, both within five years, but if offers little in terms of how these lofty targets will be met.

Nepalis don’t expect transformative changes over­night. But it’s time for PM Oli to prove that not only can he dream big, but he also has the gumption and the commitment to make his dreams come true. As the most powerful prime minister in the history of demo­cratic Nepal, he can go one of two ways.

He can use his newfound powers to build a stable, united and prosperous Nepal. Or he can abuse the same powers to undercut democratic values and cement his stranglehold on power. We will be closely watching each and every action of this government. The benefit of the doubt many Nepalis have given it should not be considered a carte blanche.

Balkrishna Dhungel, the Maoist leader con­victed of a war-time murder, epitomizes the egregious failure of the Nepali political class to provide justice to conflict victims and thereby to close the bloody chapter in Nepali history in which over 16,000 people were killed. The Compre­hensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2006 had provided for the formation of commissions on ‘truth and rec­onciliation’ and ‘enforced disappearances’ within six months; they took over eight years to come into being. The delay owed to the reluctance of the Maoists to part with their arms and the determination of other parties to ensure that the former rebels did so before they entered mainstream politics.

When at long last the two commissions were formed in February 2015, national and international human rights watchdogs were unanimous in their condem­nation. The TORs of the commissions appeared to provide amnesty even in cases of grave human rights violations. Had the two commissions been formed on time, all conflict-era cases would have been handled by these constitutional bodies. In their absence, the judi­ciary was forced to step in. The Dhungel case seemed headed for a close when the Supreme Court in 2010 upheld the lower courts’ life-imprisonment verdict. But Dhungel managed to somehow escape police cap­tivity before he was finally arrested last November.

The political parties, especially the Maoists, wanted to have their cake and eat it too: they asked for all con­flict-time cases to be handled by transitional justice bodies but they didn’t want any prosecution for those implicated in rights abuses. They lobbied for watering down the mandate of the two commissions. With the issue of the mandate as yet unresolved, the Maoists are now part of the all-powerful government and Dhungel has been given a presidential pardon. A convicted mur­derer is now a free man. (The Supreme Court could have overturned the pardon but chose not to.)

No state organ or political party seems serious about transitional justice. They take heed only because it would be impossible to completely ignore the pressure of the human rights community to come good on the CPA’s commitment. There is now a risk that conflict-era cases like Dhungel’s will continue to crop up, with all their attendant controversy, and the ruling communist party will continue to ram through amnesties, even as the judiciary looks on helplessly. Meanwhile, there will be no end to the prolonged suffering of conflict victims.

There are a few good points in the govern­ment’s Programs and Policies, unveiled on May 21, in what is a precursor to the national budget that will be presented on May 29. One good point is the setting of clear deadlines for big infra­structure projects. For example the Gautam Buddha International Airport in Bhairahawa is to be completed within a year while the Pokhara Regional Internation­al Airport is slated for completion within three years. Such clear timelines will help observers evaluate, in real time, if the government is making steady progress.

These are not the only time-bound promises. The government also envisions close to double-digit eco­nomic growth in the next fiscal and sustained dou­ble-digit growth within five years. Similarly, the average income of a Nepali is to double over the next five years, to over $2,000 from today’s base of $1,004. Progress on this front should also be easy to track as the doubling of income can happen only if the economic growth in each of the next five fiscals hovers around 10 percent.

The government’s backers have termed the new programs and policies ‘visionary’, while critics have dubbed them ‘overambitious’. The critics have a point. For instance it took nine years for the average Nepali’s income to double to $1,004; but this government wants to double it again within five years. Likewise, economic growth over the past two decades has averaged a pal­try four percent; the government aims to take it to 10 percent (or thereabouts) within a year.

There is nothing wrong in dreaming big. After all, no other post-1990 government had the kind of resound­ing mandate that the current left government enjoys. Barring a political catastrophe, it will serve out its five-year term. That is important. Chopping and changing of governments every nine months or so wreaked havoc on the economy. The decade-long Maoist insur­gency proved even more costly. Now, finally, there is a semblance of political stability, which bodes well.

Yet the kind of economic turnaround the left gov­ernment aims for will happen only through sweeping reforms. Cartels of all kinds have to be dismantled. It should be easier for businesses to open and close, and to hire and fire workers. Moreover, big hydro projects should come through on time, and new industries set up to absorb the growing labor force. They won’t hap­pen overnight. Can the ruling Nepal Communist Party display the kind of unity and single-mindedness that will be needed to realize these ambitious goals?

A few incidents marred Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s two-day Nepal visit. While welcoming Modi in Janakpur, Province 2 Chief Minister Lalbabu Raut broke every rule in the diplomacy playbook by asking the Indian prime minister to help resolve a purely domestic issue. Later, while Indian journalists were allowed in a joint press meet between the two prime ministers, Nepali journalists were curiously barred. Then there was the unforgettable botch-job with the Nepali flag.

Yet it would be a stretch to say that the visit was fruit­less or that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli somehow ‘surrendered’ before Modi. While the Indian prime minister was in town, the hashtag #BlockadeWasCri­meMrModi was the number one trending theme on Twitter. The common feeling was that Modi should apologize for the five-month-long blockade. While that was understandable, given how much people suffered during those testing times, it was also an unrealistic expectation. Seldom in history have state or govern­ment heads formally apologized for the past misdeeds of their countries. The Americans, for instance, have never apologized for dropping nuclear bombs on Japan or, more recently, for needlessly invading Iraq.

Interestingly, this time too Modi fell short of welcom­ing the constitution. But he congratulated Nepalis for the three tiers of elections—held under the same consti­tution. Modi also unequivocally said India is in favor of an undivided and strong Nepal, dispelling doubts that it is supporting divisive forces here. Another important development has been India’s acceptance of the left merger, undoubtedly at Oli’s urging; until now there seemed to be a feeling in New Delhi that the alliance (and now a unified party) was a ‘Chinese construct’.

In other words, there has been a marked thaw in Nepal-India relations since Oli became prime minister, and he must be given some credit for that. Following Modi’s departure from Nepal, Oli has, moreover, clar­ified that he is as keen on improving ties with China, where he is going soon. Notwithstanding the agree­ments that were (or were not) signed during Modi’s recent visit, his recent dealings with our two import­ant neighbors are marked by a level of finesse that has seldom been seen in Nepali leaders. Even his staunch critics grudgingly accept this. Oli may have more stra­tegic acumen than people give him credit for. Now that he is in charge of a strong, unified party, we may just get to witness that acumen put to even better use.