We all know that the world is home to many religions and sects—Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and others. None of these faiths or traditions was created with the intent to harm or cause suffering. Similarly, there are various political ideologies in existence today—democracy, liberalism, socialism, communism, and monarchism. None of these systems was conceived with the purpose of committing injustice or oppression.
Just as each religion aspires, according to its beliefs, to serve humanity in the name of God, every political philosophy also aims—at least in principle—to promote good governance, national development, and the welfare of the people through its own framework of policies and institutions.
After the 2006 People's Movement, Nepal adopted a new constitution in 2015 that established a Federal Democratic Republic. There is no inherent reason to label this system as bad. In fact, many countries have achieved remarkable progress and prosperity under similar systems. However, no political system—no matter how perfect in theory—can automatically suit or succeed in every nation. Just as a plant can only thrive in suitable soil and climate, any political system must fit the character, education, and economic condition of the people it governs. Otherwise, it cannot bear good fruit.
Unfortunately, under the current system of governance and administration, the Nepali people are not content. They are burdened, frustrated, and disillusioned. Rampant corruption, bribery, and disorder in government offices; exploitation and oppression; inequality and injustice in the courts; party domination and political patronage; and widespread unemployment have all deepened the people's misery. This suffering and anger have driven millions to the brink of rebellion. Addressing these grievances and steering the nation in the right direction according to the people's aspirations has now become everyone's duty.
The Need to Identify the Root Causes
To solve the nation's growing disorder and irregularities, we must first identify their root causes. From an objective perspective, some faults lie within the system itself, but most of the blame falls on political leaders, parties, and their members. To a certain extent, the general public also shares responsibility for tolerating or enabling such failures.
Chief Justice’s reform initiatives
Whether political theory or global practice accepts it or not, when both the head of state and the prime minister belong to the same political party, their close relationship and friendship can lead to collusion and monopoly of power, allowing them to act as they please, whether appropriate or not. We all know that in the past, governments have issued ordinances and made decisions against national and public interests, as opposition parties in parliament have often pointed out.
To prevent such misuse of power, a clear system of checks and balances must be established. For this purpose, one of these two positions—the head of state or the prime minister—should be independent and non-partisan. Achieving this will require a constitutional amendment.
Flaws in the Electoral and Parliamentary System
Under Nepal's current electoral system, it is improbable that any single party will win a clear majority in parliament. Our experience confirms this. As a result, the country is repeatedly ruled by fragile coalition governments formed through opportunistic power-sharing arrangements. This is a direct outcome of the flaws in our constitution and political system.
Due to these flaws, along with the immoral and unethical behavior of our political parties and leaders, coalition governments are often formed not to serve the nation or the people, but to satisfy the personal and partisan interests of political leaders. It would not be an exaggeration to say that this is the main reason behind Nepal's chronic political instability, the prevalence of large-scale corruption, the tendency to make significant decisions through collusion without fear or accountability, and the lack of impartial investigation and action in corruption scandals.
To end this cycle and ensure a stable, accountable, five-year government, the constitution should be amended to introduce the direct election of the prime minister by the people. With a robust constitutional mechanism for power balance and control, and a truly independent judiciary, such a system would not allow the prime minister to become authoritarian.
However, if members of parliament continue to abandon conscience and act merely as servants and puppets of their leaders for personal benefit, then—under any system—any prime minister could turn dictatorial. Our own history offers ample proof of this danger.
In the current parliamentary structure, the prime minister's appointment and survival depend not on the people's mandate but on the support of a limited number of parliamentarians. This compels the prime minister to constantly appease MPs, fueling a corrupt culture of favoritism and transactional politics—where public resources are traded for loyalty. Ordinary citizens are neglected, and governance becomes a game of "who eats and who feeds." The proposed system of direct election would automatically curb such malpractices.
From Democracy to Party Rule
The degeneration of democracy into party rule or leader rule is not the fault of the constitution itself, but of the political leadership. The problem lies in the leaders' selfishness, moral decay, dishonesty, nepotism, and favoritism. Because of this, we see unqualified and dishonest individuals being appointed to constitutional commissions and public offices, while capable and honest individuals are sidelined.
Through these manipulations, political parties have captured nearly all institutions—the anti-corruption commission, the judiciary, education, the police, and more—turning democracy into partyocracy. To stop these problems, it is essential not only to introduce necessary reforms in the constitution, laws, and regulations, but also for the people themselves to become aware and reject corrupt political parties and leaders through their votes.
Federal System and Reform
In Nepal's current federal system, it has become increasingly evident that the state legislature, government, ministries, and various offices exist mainly to serve the pride, prestige, and interests of political leaders and parties. This structure has imposed a heavy financial burden on the nation, while contributing little to the development of villages, districts, and provinces. Services available in the capital have remained mostly confined there—existing in name only elsewhere—and citizens across the country have not received efficient or timely public services.
It would be unwise for any political party to treat criticism of this situation as an attack on its prestige or achievements. Therefore, a thorough study and objective evaluation are necessary to determine whether these concerns are valid and to make the right decision accordingly.
If they are indeed valid, then regardless of what the system is called, replacing the current structure with one that establishes an effective local government in every district and ensures that the same offices and services available in the capital are accessible throughout the country would be truly beneficial for the nation and its people.
Given the ongoing unrest and the growing voice of the people, it is imperative that all concerned authorities reflect seriously on these issues and act without delay to implement the necessary reforms.
The author, a retired official of Tribhuvan University, has written several books and articles in English and Nepali. He can be reached at narayanshanti70@gmail.com
