Submit your Article

With the formation of this government, we have embarked on a journey of political stability and economic prosperity. I do not want to com­ment on the performance of the government here. Rather, I want to highlight some issues that are essential to spur economic growth and development. First and foremost, we must cre­ate a robust legal framework in order to attract domestic and for­eign investment. Currently, we lack necessary laws to draw investment. Second, we must redress the poor implementation of law. We do have some good laws on paper, but they are not effectively implemented to create a conducive environment for business and industries.

Third, we need to efficiently resolve the myriad practical prob­lems investors face. If there are dis­turbances in development projects at the local level, our police adminis­tration and other government agen­cies should be able to tackle them smartly and promptly.

In this context, I would like to cite an example from the US. A house-owner signed a contract with a person to paint his home. The contract specified the payment date. But when the painter completed the task and approached the owner on that date, he couldn’t find him. He sued the owner for breach of contract and won the case. We need to have such a robust legal contractual system in Nepal if we want to attract more Foreign Direct Investment (FDI).

This government, with a two-thirds majority in the parliament, is trying to attract more FDI, but there has not been a substantial increase in FDI from previous years. For sig­nificant economic growth, we have to attract both domestic and foreign investment and focus on creating lots of jobs. We can ill afford to focus only on spending the annual budget.

We must create a robust legal framework in order to attract domestic and foreign investment

We are talking about attracting investment in the hydropower sec­tor, which is a good idea. But at the same time, we need to have big projects in place so as to make use of the electricity. In the absence of such projects, we cannot utilize the power generated.

Agriculture has always been regarded as a key engine for eco­nomic development. We have to formulate a clear policy on mod­ernizing agriculture. An enhanced agriculture sector would contribute tremendously to our prosperity. Similarly, the government should promote entrepreneurship. It should encourage investors who can create jobs. The media have a vital role to play here. They often bring big investors into the lime­light, without due consideration of how they got rich. As a result, even those who earn money by hook or by crook gain attention, while gen­uine investors go unnoticed. The media should highlight the work of bona fide investors, even if they may not have made it big yet.

Let’s talk about infrastruc­ture development. We obviously need roads and other physical infrastructures, but they should con­tribute to the country’s economic growth. Before we construct roads, we should consider whether and how farmers can use them to sell their products.

Nowadays there is plenty of investment in non-productive sec­tors like the share market and real estate. Neither can create jobs, nor contribute much to the country’s economic development. Increasing the nation’s capital base should be our top priority. The rule of eco­nomics is production and distribu­tion. But we lack clarity on our pro­duction sector. What is our priority? Agriculture? Energy? Or is it some other goods?

Official data show our trade deficit is going up, which does not bode well for the country’s eco­nomic development. To address the problem of our trade deficit, we need to focus on the production of goods. Without an increase in production, we cannot maintain a stable balance of trade.

Surendra Pandey is a federal lawmaker from the ruling NCP and former finance minister

Like most people, I thought monks were those who only meditated high up in the mountains from within the walls of their monasteries. That changed when I met some of them in the mon­asteries dotting the Great Himalayan Trail. My search for the Sherpa culture had taken me to Jun­besi, a Sherpa village in the Solukhumbu district. This is one of the oldest Sherpa vil­lages in Nepal. There I met a group of monks from Serlo Gumba who invited me to visit their monastery. Little did I know how much this experience would affect me.

The next day I went to the monastery where I got to have lunch with the Rinpoche, Fengmo, and all the other monks there. Apparently the Rinpoche also liked photography, and so we got along well and had something in com­mon to talk about. Fengmo was the high teacher there who helped me access information about Sherpa culture. Although uniquely knowledgeable, the men were down to earth and easy to approach.

So what’s it like to live in a monastery? What do the monks do there?

What I understood from the conversations with the monks is that living in a monastery is very much like living in school dorms. The young monks are there to study, and must under­take a rigorous course of Tibetan and ancient Tibetan scriptures. Their day typ­ically starts with morning classes, breaking for lunch at 11am before heading back to study. Puja takes place every day at 5pm, before the students have dinner at 6pm. Every monk is assigned a broad array of activities: cooking, clean­ing, chopping wood, taking care of the library, and even playing instruments during the puja.

To my surprise these monks were very much like those of us outside the monastery walls. They enjoyed playing football and other sports, they love art, and yes, they love social media too. The teachers didn’t have a similar opinion to social media, however. So disciples are allowed to use their phones only once a week. I was fortu­nate enough to be close to some monks during my time at the monastery, and yes, we are now ‘friends’ on social media.

What did I learn about the life of a monk in my short time at the monastery?

Well, the life of a monk consists of much more than meditation. They are just as human and multi­faceted as everyone else. They love having fun, mak­ing new friends, and travel­ling to new places. Basically everything that you or I love doing! The only difference is that they do all of that, and strive to live a balanced and spiritual lifestyle. This is a key takeaway for me, and something I really needed to learn and apply in my own life.

The progress of Nepal’s peace process has been patchy since its formal beginning in 2006. The faltering transitional justice pro­cess, an integral part of the peace process as well as the Comprehen­sive Peace Accord (CPA), does not augur well. But two other major components of the peace process—management of arms and army of the then Maoist rebels and consti­tution-drafting—have been success­fully completed. Every conflict and peace process is unique. But Nepal’s peace process is still distinct and cannot be compared with that of any other post-conflict country. Peace, constitution-drafting and transitional justice processes are always risky. But Nepal not only concluded the management of arms and army, but in the process also established a unique Nepali model while following international norms and standards.

Positive messages

First, Nepal’s peace process is led by domestic actors; polit­ical parties initiated and led the entire process. There was no third party involvement, as happens in most post-conflict countries. It is worth noting that in a highly polarized society and fractured pol­ity like ours, a cross-party mecha­nism with no experience in a peace process not only took all decisions based on consensus, but also estab­lished a Nepali model of arms and army management.

Second, Nepal’s armed con­flict ended on the back of sus­tained dialogue among political parties. The CPN (Maoist) renounced violence and embraced a peaceful democratic process. The Maoists joined the political mainstream and transformed into a civilian party by dissolving their army and handing their arms over to the government.

Third, despite disagreements on various issues, major politi­cal parties kept talks alive. They shared their views and debated issues to understand one another. Keeping the negotiation process alive ultimately paid off. The political parties followed the prin­ciple of ‘consensus through dia­logue’ which is a unique lesson from Nepal’s political transition.

Forth, Nepal learned from other post-conflict countries but did not import or replicate their model. Instead, it developed its own model of constitution drafting and management of arms and army. Nepal did not follow the technical process of disarmament, demobi­lization and reintegration (DDR) adopted by many post-conflict coun­tries. Rather ex-combatants were demobilized and disarmed. Nepal also did not use the loaded phrase ‘security sector reform’ (SSR), but still followed its principles during the peace process.

Fifth, according to the prevalent international practice, there are two options for ex-combatants: integration into security agen­cies or reintegration into soci­ety. But Nepal introduced a new concept of voluntary retirement. Out of 19,602 ex-combatants, 15,624 chose voluntary retirement rather than integration or rehabilitation. Likewise, 1,422 ex-combatants were integrated into the Nepal Army (NA). Only six opted for rehabilitation. Voluntary retirement was a new and highly risky experiment but it worked in Nepal. It is a Nepali con­cept that can be applied to other conflict-ridden countries.

Sixth, the NA played an exem­plary and instrumental role while integrating its former enemy. Even when political parties had con­tradictory stands, the NA agreed to take in ex-combatants. On this issue, the NA at times seemed more flexible and liberal than the opposition parties. The NA also adeptly carried out all its responsibilities during the inte­gration and training of integrated combatants. Had the NA been hes­itant, integration would have been more difficult. No national army has played such a constructive role in similar contexts abroad.

 Had Nepal also been able to complete transitional justice, the country would have won greater kudos

Negative messages

First, the management of the arms and army is now complete and the constitution has been promulgated. But the process was lengthy and expensive. There is no official data on the expenses of the entire peace process including constitution draft­ing, but everyone agrees that it has been a costly endeavor. However, we shouldn’t forget that peace is less expensive than war.

Second, Nepal’s peace process is heavily focused on integration and rehabilitation. But the govern­ment and political parties did not pay attention to conflict victims. The whereabouts of 1,452 ‘disap­peared’ people remain unknown 12 years after the peace process started. But the government did nothing save distribute some cash relief to the victims, and even then most of the cash ended up with political party cadres. Therefore, the victims are still fighting for truth, justice and reparation.

It took almost eight years to pro­mulgate a controversial transitional justice act, one that is not accept­able to the victims, civil society, and human rights community. The act came into existence because of a marriage of convenience among political parties. The gov­ernment constituted the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission for Investi­gation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP) after 9 years of the signing of the CPA. But for four years those toothless transitional justice bodies could do nothing except reg­ister complaints. Those who com­mitted serious crimes during the conflict should have been brought to justice. But no government has been serious about transitional justice and ending impunity.

Third, the government offered attractive cash packages to verified Maoist combatants. But what about the 4,008 disqualified combatants? The government did offer them a small package, which they declined because it came too little too late and because the ‘disqualified’ tag still hung over them. Female com­batants and their children were also badly neglected.

Conclusion

Despite the faulty transitional jus­tice process, Nepal will always be credited for working out a unique model of constitution-drafting and management of arms and army. Had Nepal also been able to complete the transitional justice process, Nepal would have won greater kudos. Still, that does not detract from its remarkable achievements in the peace process thus far.

Geja Sharma Wagle played an active part in the integration and rehabilitation process of former Maoist guerillas and is still involved in the transitional justice process

If you have read the review of Baber Mahal Revisited in the main issue this week, you might be interested in finding out a bit more about Rana architecture, sometimes referred to as ‘white elephants’. First of all, who were the Ranas? The name ‘Rana’ came about when Bir Narsingh Kun­war was given the name Shree Teen Maharaja Sir Jung Bahadur Kunwar Rana by the then prime minister, his uncle. The uncle whom Jung Baha­dur then assassinated at what turned out to be the bloody Kot Massacre. Yes, there is a bit of controversy sur­rounding the Rana dynasty! In fact many people believe it had a negative impact on the country—its founding being the Kot Massacre in 1846; the reduction of the Shah monarchy to a figurehead, and the making of the position of prime min­ister and other government posts hereditary. But others believe there are benefits—the establishment of Durbar High School and Bir Hospital for example. The Ranas ruled Nepal from 1846 until 1951, so the history is still within living memory of many.

Meantime, during the Rana reign a number of grand residencies were built by high-ranking dignitaries. These palaces stood in the middle of large landscaped grounds, and are still easily recognizable as they are commonly plastered white and built in the Neoclassical or Baroque European architectural style: four wings with French windows, Gre­cian columns and large courtyards. Things from the West were becom­ing synonymous with ‘modern’ and the grandeur of palaces in Europe caught this ruling classes’ eye.

Sadly, out of the 38 or so palaces built during the Rana dynasty, a large number have fallen into dis­repair. After the fall of the Ranas, many palaces were taken over by the government or came into pri­vate ownership. Today some palaces have been restored, or converted for other uses. The rest have been destroyed or lie in ruins.

Rana architects

So who exactly built these palac­es? In fact, the majority of the Rana palaces were built (more correctly, commissioned) by the same people. Here are just a few of them to be getting on with:

Jung Bahadur Rana (1817-1877): The founder of the Rana dynas­ty himself commissioned several palaces, including the Thapathali Durbar, Singha Mahal, and Char­burja Durbar, all found within the (earlier) Thapathali complex. The designer/engineer he employed was Ranasur Bista, who was among the pioneer master masons in introduc­ing European building style with tra­ditional Vastu Shastra (Hindu style of architecture).

Bir Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana (1852-1901): The 11th prime minister of Nepal, as well as starting a new line of succession prime min­isters, made reforms and infrastruc­ture improvements, such as estab­lishing Bir Hospital and Bir Tower, among other famous institutions. As for the Rana palaces, at the end of the 1800s he commissioned 12, including Narayanhiti Durbar, the home to the Royal Family until the current Narayanhiti Durbar was built by King Mahendra in 1963.

Among others he built, Lal Durbar, which is today the Yak and Yeti Hotel; Pani Pokhari Durbar; Pho­hora Durbar, and Lazimpat Durbar (which was demolished and rebuilt, later becoming the Shankar Hotel). His engineer/ designer was Jogbir Sthapit, a renowned Nepalese archi­tect, master of both Western and traditional Nepali styles. And best known as the designer of (the ear­lier) Narayanhiti Royal Palace, and renovator of Swayambhunath Stupa.

Chandra Shumsher Jung Baha­dur Rana (1863 -1929): He is cred­ited with commissioning seven Rana palaces, including the original Baber Mahal. Other notable palaces are Singha Durbar, home to the seat of the government, and Kaiser Mahal, housing the Garden of Dreams. Kumar Narsingh Rana, the first Nepali to qualify as a civil engineer, and his brother Kishor Narsingh Rana, were the architects/engineers.

Want to know more? I am certainly no expert on Rana architecture, and cannot vouch 100 percent for the accuracy of the information here. However, there are several books on the Rana dynasty, if you wish to know more. Among them is ‘Singha Durbar: The Rise and Fall of the Rana Regime of Nepal’, by Sagar S.J.B Rana, published by Rupa, New Delhi in 2017.