By Narayan Prasad Mishra We all understand that our primary duty is to work for the welfare and benefit of people. Around the world, people aim to choose and implement political systems that effectively serve the country economically and efficiently. Consequently, offices and portfolios are assigned based on workload and level of work, with careful consideration for people's welfare rather than favoritism towards leaders' relatives, friends, or followers. Similarly, rules and procedures are devised to meet the needs and rights of those they are meant to serve, ensuring they do not cause inconvenience to people. It is widely believed that systems should prioritize serving the welfare and needs of people over their own perpetuation and appearance in bureaucratic or institutional settings. People should never be subordinate to the system; rather, the system should exist to serve the people. In general, we all agree with these principles for the country's development and the welfare of its people. However, we overlooked these principles when adopting the current constitution, which includes a federal system with two houses of the federal legislature—the House of Representatives with 275 members and the National Assembly with 59 members—alongside provincial legislatures and councils of ministers. Many feel that such a federal system, along with its structures, is unnecessary for a small country like Nepal. Similarly, the large number of representatives in the federal legislature is seen as excessive. From our experience, the federal system was established more for political positioning and portfolios rather than effectively serving people. There could be an alternative decentralized administrative system that is more economical and practical. This logic cannot be denied if we are honest with our nation and its people. In government, rules that are too complicated or create too much of a burden can make things harder for people instead of helping them. Bureaucratic systems might focus too much on their own processes rather than giving good services or quickly solving people's problems. Also, when making money becomes more important than treating people fairly or doing what's right, the system can end up using people rather than helping them. In our country, it seems like people often have to support the system instead of the other way around. They're made to pay for things they don't need. Moreover, "people for the system, not the system for people" create situations where organizations prioritize appearances or superficial compliance over meaningful engagement and responsiveness to the needs and voices of people without translating into genuine improvements in people's lives. The creation of unlimited advisors and personal secretaries for the prime minister and sometimes for the ministers unnecessarily are the burning examples of this. This unfortunate situation is evident in our country. We see it with any government - the Nepali Congress Party, the Nepal Communist Party ( UML ), or the Nepal Communist Party ( Maoist ) This, many rules and regulations exploit people, making their lives complex and burdensome in our country. People experience this firsthand when visiting municipal ward offices for various recommendations and paying significant sums - for instance - for water tap recommendations, death certificates, relationship certificates, approach roads to houses, land recommendation certificates, etc. Most of these processes seem more geared towards generating income for ward offices rather than meeting genuine needs. For example, requiring a ward office recommendation for a road or land transfer (Ghar Bato Sifaris) seems unnecessary, as this information could be obtained from a survey map. Yet, such recommendations have limited validity and require reapplication and fees after expiration. Such rules only complicate and burden people's lives, serving the system's revenue interests rather than facilitating services. There are numerous similar examples where unnecessary obstacles are imposed on people, ostensibly to maintain the system rather than improve service delivery. Addressing these issues and prioritizing people's needs should be a fundamental focus. The major political parties, creators of this constitution, and proponents of the multiparty republic, secular state, and federalism undoubtedly celebrate this system as a significant achievement. They are pleased because this system allows them considerable freedom, including actions like designating Nepalese as fake Bhutanese without fear of reprisal. Consequently, they fail to recognize any shortcomings in the system. However, truthfully speaking, since the adoption of this constitution and the introduction of a multiparty competitive federal democratic republican parliamentary system, it is evident that we exist to serve the system rather than the system serving us. It is crucial to reform this system to prioritize people. Therefore, the constitution, laws, regulations, and organizations must be designed and operated with a clear focus on enhancing the well-being and rights of individuals and communities. This requires prioritizing what truly matters and ensuring that systems function effectively, transparently, and responsibly to serve their intended purposes without hindering progress and fairness. narayanshanti70@gmail.com