By Narayan Prasad Mishra

Democracy is a system of government in which power is vested in the people, who exercise it through elected representatives. It is based on principles such as political equality, majority rule with minority rights, free and fair elections, and the rule of law. It allows for freedom of speech, press, and association, enabling citizens to express their opinions and influence decision-making. In a true democracy, institutions are independent, corruption is minimal, and leaders govern in the best interest of the nation rather than for personal gain. 

In a democratic system, parties are essential for people to be united together for common political beliefs, ideologies, and goals and to work together to go to people for winning their support to exercise political power through elections. Political parties aim to influence government policies, represent societal interests, and provide leadership by fielding candidates for public office. 

Multi-party democracy is often seen as the fairest system, where the parties, leaders, and their followers value their manifesto and promise given to people for election and respect democratic values. Democracy is also seen as the best system where the opposition parties play a crucial role in checking the power of the ruling party, exposing corruption, irregularities, and wrongdoings. The beautiful picture of democracy is only seen when the opinions of the government or opposition parliamentarians are given value and welcomed when they are beneficial for the development of the country and the welfare of the people without any bias. When these elements weaken, and the promises are broken, when the ruling party and the opposition parties join hands together to gain their personal and group interests, democracy can turn into a fraud system despite the existence of the political parties, freedom of speech, press, associations, and elections. In these circumstances, democracy turns into an authoritarian system in disguise where real power remains concentrated among a few—leading to corruption, mismanagement, and irregularities. 

Our multi-party democracy, home to 121 registered political parties, is an illusion of democratic governance. While elections are held and coalition governments are formed, the country remains trapped in a system where political elites manipulate power for personal and party gains. The latest election, which resulted in a coalition government between the largest parties, has only deepened this crisis. Instead of functioning as representatives of the people, these ruling parties have monopolized governance, engaged in rampant corruption, and undermined the very principles of democracy. As a result, Nepal’s democracy exists in name only—its practice resembles an oligarchic dictatorship that prioritizes political survival over national progress. 

Coalition governments are typical in parliamentary democracies, but in our country, they have become a tool for power-sharing rather than effective governance. When no single party secures a majority, alliances are formed based on political convenience rather than ideological alignment or national interest. This system fosters instability, as coalition partners prioritize maintaining power over-delivering governance. Our country has witnessed frequent shifts in government, with party leaders constantly negotiating behind closed doors, making decisions based on personal and party benefits rather than public welfare. 

The result is a political culture where accountability is nonexistent. Ministers change frequently, policies lack continuity, and development projects remain stalled. The government’s primary focus is not governing but ensuring that coalition partners remain satisfied—often through corrupt deals, patronage networks, and misuse of state resources. 

Our ruling coalition has been marred by blatant corruption scandals, further proving that the system functions to serve politicians, not the people. Government contracts, foreign aid, and national resources are distributed among political elites and their allies. The government could not even demonstrate its efficiency in delivering timely justice to the 3.73 million victims of cooperative fraud, who continue to suffer in anguish—a situation that is both pathetic and urgent. High-profile corruption cases surface regularly, yet no meaningful action is taken because those in power protect each other. 

Public services such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure suffer as politicians siphon off national wealth. The judiciary and anti-corruption agencies, meant to act as checks on power, are either powerless or complicit. The common people bear the burden of this corruption through high inflation, unemployment, and declining living standards. 

Though we hold elections, the ruling coalition operates with the mindset of an autocratic regime. Dissent is silenced, opposition voices are suppressed, and media institutions face increasing pressure. Public protests are often met with state force, and whistleblowers exposing corruption risk legal harassment or worse. 

The government’s dictatorial tendencies extend to its control over key institutions. Bureaucratic appointments are made based on political loyalty rather than merit. Law enforcement agencies serve the interests of the ruling parties rather than upholding justice. Instead of creating an inclusive and participatory democracy, Nepal’s political leaders have transformed the state into their fiefdom. 

Nepal’s current system is democratic only in structure, not in spirit. Elections serve as a ritual that grants legitimacy to a system designed to keep power concentrated among a small political elite. The failure of democracy in Nepal lies not in the idea of democracy itself but in its deliberate misuse by self-serving leaders. 

This reality is acknowledged not only by independent individuals like me and parliamentarians from smaller parties but also by leaders and followers of all major political parties. However, the leaders of the major parties speak this truth only when they are out of power—using it as a tool to criticize the ruling party and its leaders, whether they are communists or socialists. 

For instance, the Nepal Communist Party (UML) leaders voiced this truth when the coalition government of the Nepal Communist Party (Maoist) and the Nepali Congress was in power. The Nepali Congress leaders did the same when the Nepal Communist Party (Maoist) and the Nepal Communist Party (UML) ruled the country. Now, the Nepal Communist Party (Maoist) continues to speak this truth while the nation is governed by the Nepal Communist Party (UML) and the Nepali Congress. We have seen this cycle repeat itself time and again. 

Had democratic values, culture, and promises not been broken—had the president acted as an impartial head of state rather than a puppet of his party—had democracy not been reduced to an authoritarian system in disguise, where real power remains concentrated among a few, leading to corruption, mismanagement, and irregularities—no one would have considered an alternative, as some truth-speaking leaders have suggested. If Nepal were functioning as a true democracy, people in the streets would not be calling for the return of the monarchy. On the other hand, King Gyanendra would not have shown interest in returning and reclaiming the throne. 

Since childhood, I have been happy to embrace a democratic culture. I have always stood for truth and justice. I have never shied away from democratic values—whether in speaking, writing poems and articles, or demonstrating them through my behavior and conduct. Still, I was denied my due promotion during the Panchayat period. Despite our active, dynamic, and diligent service, my beloved wife, Shanti Mishra, and I lost our jobs at Tribhuvan University—9 and 14 years before our retirement age—soon after multi-party democracy was introduced during the prime ministership of Girija Prasad Koirala under the Nepali Congress government in 1992. I was deeply saddened to witness that distorted picture of democracy from then on. 

During the Panchayat period, I wrote many poems with titles such as पञ्चायती गीता (Panchayati Gita), प्रजातन्त्र बुझिन्दैन ( Unclear Democracy), यो माटोलाई धिक्कार छ ( I Denounce This Soil ) यहाँ यस्तै छ. ( Here Is Like This ) कुन क्रान्तिको हलो जोत्ने विचार नगरी हुँदै भएन ( What Type of Revolution to Plow? It Is an Urgent Need to Think ), and many others under pseudonyms, pointing out the wrongdoings of the Panchayat system at considerable risk to myself. In this context, I also wrote the following poem, **काँचो प्रजातन्त्र** (*Raw Democracy*), expressing my discontent over the government's failure to show due concern and respect for B. P. Koirala—the most respected leader of our nation and the first elected Prime Minister—upon his sad demise. I have never-ending high regard for him. 

During the Maoists' armed struggle, when they compelled the government to talk about negotiating through the strength of gunpower, I even wrote the poem कसले सुन्छ? सत्य र तथ्य ( Who Listens to the Truth and Fact ) प्रणाम छ तिमीलाई Salutations to You ) appreciating their courage and struggle for rights and justice—though not their crimes and killings. I have never been biased against anyone in appreciating goodness or condemning wrongdoing. I firmly believe that speaking the truth based on facts in any situation is an authentic democratic value. Because of this, I am exposing the flaws in our present democracy as I have witnessed them—not because I am against the system.

For Nepal to escape this cycle, several fundamental changes are necessary. The government system and structure, as presented in protests, must be changed to be cured. I believe the aim and objectives behind the recent demands and protests of pro-monarchy parties and groups—for a constitutional monarchy instead of a party-aligned presidential system, **Sanatan Dharma** instead of a secular state, and a decentralized political system instead of a federal structure—are intended to promote good governance, a less expensive system, and more significant checks and balances to reform the current democracy, which is authoritarian in disguise, as described above. 

This movement is certainly not about serving a person or family named King, Queen, or the Royal Family, as in the past, like servants or blind supporters. However, there is a risk that a constitutional monarch could turn into an absolute ruler, as stated by some anti-monarchy leaders and people, as we are witnessing now even the government under the multi-party democracy with the most democratic constitution has turned to the undemocratic performance. To prevent this, it may be necessary to include provisions in the constitution that firmly restrict the King’s powers, ensuring that despotism is not possible. At the same time, electoral reforms should prevent the same corrupt politicians from returning to power repeatedly. Independent institutions must be strengthened to hold leaders accountable. The people must demand greater transparency and refuse to be manipulated by empty promises during elections. 

Nepal stands at a crossroads. It can either continue down the path of a pseudo-democracy that enables dictatorship in disguise or fight for an alternate system that truly represents and serves its people. The future of Nepal’s democracy depends on whether the citizens choose to accept the status quo or challenge it with the power of their voice and vote.

    narayanshanti70@gmail.com