Bidya Devi Bhandari: No immediate plan to return to active politics

Bidya Devi Bhandari served as the President of Nepal from 2015 to 2023, becoming the country’s first female head of state. She takes pride in being the first president associated with Nepal’s communist movement. After completing her tenure, she has not been actively involved in national politics. In an interview with Kamal Dev Bhattarai and Akhanda Bhandari, she discussed her presidential tenure and future plans. Excerpts:

What was your presidential experience like?

Serving the country through the highest position has been a source of great joy and satisfaction. I hope that, like me, sons and daughters of ordinary Nepali people also get opportunities to serve their country. I prefer not to compare myself with the monarchy and the king because it is a different system.  

Even in advanced democracies, very few women have had the opportunity to become president. Do you think our democracy is progressing?

I believe our democracy is already quite advanced. Occasionally, the actions of those in top positions might give a different impression, but our public opinion consistently supports democracy. As for the opportunity I got, multiple factors played a role. I do not believe I became president solely because I am a woman. Given the current state of our society, a woman holding the highest office is undoubtedly a positive development. Other equally important factors should also be considered. Within the context of Nepal’s communist movement, I am a member of the Madan Bhandari family and have been following his political legacy since his tragic death. 

The eighth General Convention of the CPN-UML has recognized people’s multiparty democracy as the party’s guiding principle, which is a new dimension from a Marxist perspective reflecting current realities. In this context, I have always been a visible figure within the party. It is equally important to note that I am the first democratically-elected female president, who is part of Nepal’s communist movement. The broader society also acknowledged and accepted me as a suitable candidate for the presidency. The intra-party dynamics at the time also played a significant role, and the party’s decision was the result of various factors.

Some senior leaders are reluctant to become president, thinking that it means retiring from active politics. Your thoughts?

The position of the head of the state is highly prestigious and respected. A president can contribute significantly, but not in isolation. With a competent team and a determined president, much can be achieved for the people and the country.

Any major misses as the head of the state?

During my tenure, I did everything in my capacity as the president. Many achievements depend on the type of government in power. A good relationship between the presidential office and the government is essential for progress in areas like expanding Nepal’s international relations, amplifying the people’s voices and contributing to the preservation of cultural, civilizational and linguistic heritages. With proper support, a sense of national unity and pride can be enhanced.

Do you think there’s a need to amend certain constitutional provisions regarding the powers of the president and the prime minister?

I do not think that the constitution is ambiguous. We need to implement it effectively, that’s all. As per Article 81 of the constitution, there is a requirement for the prime minister to brief the head of the state on certain issues, both national and international. It is the responsibility of the prime minister to formally inform the president about contemporary issues as well as cabinet decisions and bills before presenting the latter in the Parliament. The constitution has envisaged that the head of the state can raise concerns. The president cannot dictate the prime minister, he or she can only offer advice and if there is coordination, there would not be any gap. 

If these provisions are diligently followed, the president can express concerns and provide suggestions. Once I  wrote a letter to the prime minister to remind him of these key constitutional provisions, particularly focusing on Article 81. Proper implementation of these provisions would eliminate trust deficit, if any, between the president and prime minister.

Can you please share your stance on the Citizenship Bill?

I would like to pose a question to everyone: What role should I have played in this matter? I took steps for the sake of the country and constitution.  This is a new constitution. The issues I have identified in the citizenship bill are linked with the history of Nepal. 

The constitution is for the nation, and we should not weaken the country in the name of implementing it. Citizenship should be viewed from a national perspective, not through the lenses of ethnicity and geography. It is essential to consider the historical context, as the Citizenship Act is directly tied to our sovereignty, national identity and nationalism. We must also acknowledge the reality of open borders and the flow of immigrants. 

While we may provide refuge on humanitarian grounds, we cannot accommodate refugees on a large scale. We need a sustainable solution, and the laws related to citizenship should not be subjected to frequent changes. I have not favored any specific group but have acted in the interest of the country. All political leaders agreed with this at individual meetings. I am very much clear in my position that the constitution cannot be implemented in a way that would affect the country. I am ready to defend my position everywhere, including in the court of law.

What are your future plans?

Looking back, I have completed all tasks entrusted to me. I introduced new visions while serving as a Minister for Population and Environment for seven months. Later, I took on the responsibility of the Ministry of Defense, and fulfilled that role. As the head of the state, I contributed to the country with utmost integrity. In terms of my contribution to my party, I first ran for election in 1991 after working in different capacities. As a legislator, I worked in various areas, including women’s empowerment and worked diligently to ensure 33 percent representation for women in state apparatuses. Having shouldered all the responsibilities assigned to me, I don’t believe I should re-enter active politics at this stage.

But there are reports suggesting that you might return to active party politics.

Friends have been asking me about this, offering their suggestions, and I am listening to them. I believe that vibrant political parties are essential for our nation and democracy. However, I have not made up my mind about returning to active politics. When I became the president, there were certain speculations and these days also, I hear similar things. Friends air their concerns with me and I listen to them with patience.  

Are you considering taking a leadership role in the party?

To be honest, I have not made a decision regarding a return to active politics at the moment. The question of who succeeds KP Sharma Oli within the CPN-UML is an internal matter of the party. It is premature to discuss leadership after Oli, as we still have a long way to go before the convention. Working to acquire power for oneself as the leader after Oli is not the right approach. I suggest my UML colleagues to focus on strengthening the party rather than hankering for power for individual gains. The time to discuss the future leadership of the CPN-UML has not come.

If all your friends in the party ask you to take on a leadership role, what will your position be?

If the discussion takes place within the party, and if there are unanimous decisions, it would be a different matter to consider. I have not given it any thought, though I am aware that there is much talk about it outside. It is not a priority issue now. Instead, all parties should ponder over national problems and issues.

How do you view the current state of the country?

We are practicing democracy, but some wrong practices have taken root. For instance, the trend of forming pre-election alliances against one party is not a healthy and good practice. I urge political parties to amend their current approach to politics for good. First, you have to build your party and assess popular support, and then, based on that, your party moves ahead from the grassroots to the center. Cooperation and coordination among the parties is a good practice, but it should not be targeted against a particular party with the aim of isolating it. The largest party should not resort to electoral alliances before the elections. This is not national politics in a true sense; it is power-centric politics that goes beyond the boundaries of our imagination. I suggest that all political parties correct such flawed approaches.

How do you see the emergence of new parties in national politics?

I do not want to comment much on the new political parties; there are no such distinctions between big and small parties. Even a single individual holds importance in politics. Parties need to nurture them continuously.

Your take on the current economic crisis?

As the head of the state, I frequently advised the government to pay attention to the economy in dire straits. I encouraged all governments to focus on increasing internal production capacity, addressing trade imbalances and striving for self-reliance. Though an agricultural country, we continue to import agricultural products, our trade deficit is growing, and the trade balance remains skewed. It is concerning that our youth are seeking employment abroad. I have urged all governments to take measures to improve the country’s education system.

Any parting suggestion/comment? 

The practice of nurturing near and dear ones at the expense of deserving people must be stopped. Our focus must be on public welfare and peace. Politicians and the government should pay attention to these matters.