By Narayan Prasad Mishra
It has been decades since the majority of people in our land, except a few thousand linked to corrupt parties, have suffered under the dictatorial, self-serving rule of party governments. There is a Nepali proverb: “When the jar of sins fills up, one day that is bound to break ” (जव पापको घडा भरिन्छ, एक दिन त्यो जरूर फुट्छ). For years, I believed that day had already come—that the jar was long overflowing with corruption, misgovernance, injustice, and oppression. Yet, despite waiting, nothing seemed to change. I had been writing about this despair without pause, often with bitterness, just in this August and September, I wrote four articles: Republic of Nepal: A Synonym for Downfall and Corruption (August 12, 2025), We Are Bound to Live in a Smeared Republic (August 19, 2025), Nepal Betrayed: When the Guardians Became Looters (August 26, 2025), and Writing Truth in a Land That Refuses to Listen (September 2, 2025). In the last piece, discouraged and disheartened, I confessed:
“The country lacks people with the courage to act. It lacks citizens willing to say ‘enough’ to power-hungry leaders who exploit their positions while the public suffers in silence. What is the use of speaking and writing in a nation where truth and merit are ignored, and the country’s upliftment is of no concern?” (People’s Review, Sep.2, 2025).
But I was wrong. I underestimated my fellow citizens. Recently, I watched on television—though far from my homeland—the unimaginable courage of the Nepali people rising, driving out corrupt leaders, and confronting tyranny in a way our nation had never witnessed before. It was nothing less than a revolution of conscience. My heart swelled with joy and pride. My only regret was not being able to stand shoulder to shoulder with my people in that historic moment. To all the patriots who made this possible, I offer my heartfelt congratulations. I salute their bravery, their sacrifice, and their unshakable love for the country.
Yet, we must be clear: toppling corrupt leaders is only the beginning. Our greatest responsibility still lies ahead—to erase the corrupt system itself and build a new, just, and benevolent order. For this, we have to have constitutional reforms suitable to our land and culture, but with all the democratic rights that other democratic countries possess. We all know that our country is rich in constitutions but poor in progress. Since 1948, we have had no fewer than seven constitutions—1948, 1951, 1959, 1962, 1990, 2007, and 2015. While the United States has thrived for over 230 years under a single constitution, Nepal has cycled through seven in just over seven decades. Each time, a new document was hailed as a solution. Each time, hopes were dashed.
The truth is that Nepal does not need another totally new constitution. What we need is a system rooted in our own realities, not borrowed wholesale from foreign ideologies. Instead of drafting endless constitutions, we should choose one or two frameworks—perhaps even the Panchayat Constitution and the 1990s Constitution and reform them to suit present needs. By making them a base, we can add or omit according to the people’s present needs and aspirations, and then create a constitution with the help of an expert Committee consisting of known patriots of the country, not the traitors.
The Failure of Party Democracy
Every citizen aspires to live in a benevolent country—one governed not by fear, favoritism, or power but by fairness, compassion, and justice. A truly benevolent nation uplifts its people, ensures equal opportunity, and promotes collective dignity over personal gain. I long to see Nepal become such a country—not through authoritarian rule but through enlightened and ethical governance. Sadly, the multi-party democracy introduced in Nepal led us further away from this dream. Over three decades, political parties have reduced democracy to a contest for plunder. Elections became investments; governance became a transaction. Party elites captured the state for themselves and their networks. Power is monopolized not by the people but by cliques of leaders who distribute positions in civil service, education, hospitals, courts, and enterprises based on loyalty, not merit. Ordinary citizens are invisible. That was not democracy for the people. That was a party dictatorship dressed in democratic slogans.
The Concept of a Benevolent Country
A benevolent nation does not emerge from empty constitutions or party manifestos. It emerges from systems that prioritize the collective good over partisan or personal interest. It is rooted in ethics, justice, and impartial governance. In Nepal, every institution—the civil service, universities, courts, and hospitals—has been corrupted by party control. Capable, honest individuals are systematically sidelined. The result is not progress but legalized exploitation, where laws exist but only serve the powerful. To escape this, Nepal must think beyond the current system.
A Constitutional Monarchy with Safeguards
Some recall that the early years of constitutional monarchy in the country, though imperfect, brought more stability and less corruption than what followed. A monarch above politics can serve as a unifying figure and guardian of constitutional values. But history warns us of the danger of overstepping democratic limits. Thus, if Nepal is to reintroduce a constitutional monarchy, it must be with clear and permanent safeguards ensuring the monarch’s symbolic and non-political role.
Preventing the King from Becoming a Dictator
To avoid past mistakes, the following constitutional and institutional safeguards must be implemented:
( a) Clearly Defined Role: The monarch must be strictly limited to ceremonial duties— representing national unity, cultural identity, and religious harmony—without involvement in executive, legislative, or judicial affairs.
( b )Constitutional Guardian: The monarch may act only to uphold and defend constitutional values during crises—under the direction and supervision of a constitutional body.
( c ) Parliamentary Oversight: Like all public institutions, the king must report annually to a designated parliamentary committee and is subject to financial audit.
( d ) Accountability Clause: The monarch should enjoy immunity only when acting within constitutional bounds. If these are violated, a constitutional court must have the authority to suspend or remove the monarch.
( e ) Code of Conduct & Transparency: The monarchy must adhere to strict ethical standards. Transparency about finances, activities, and succession is essential.
( f ) Legal Recourse for Citizens: Citizens must be empowered to file constitutional petitions if they believe the monarchy has overstepped its role.
These provisions would allow Nepal to retain the symbolic benefits of monarchy while eliminating the threat of authoritarianism.
A Non-Political Prime Minister and Council of Ministers
In this new system, Nepal would have a non-partisan executive branch headed by a non-political Prime Minister directly elected by the people. This Prime Minister would be independent of any political party and barred from joining one even after completing their term.
Structure and Functioning:
1. A supermajority of the general electorate elects the Prime Minister.
2. The Prime Minister nominates a Council of Ministers (no more than 25), 20 from among the members of both houses of Parliament and five from among the reputed citizens who are known academicians and experts in different aspects.
3. The King formally appoints these ministers based on the Prime Minister’s recommendation.
4. Ministers are accountable solely to the Prime Minister and can be replaced at any time.
5. The Prime Minister serves a fixed term with full executive authority but must remain politically unaffiliated.
This model would establish a non-political government while maintaining accountability and public trust. The Prime Minister would serve as the conscience of the nation, not a representative of any party. This system preserves the neutrality and unity of the executive while separating governance from partisan manipulation.
A Reformed Parliament with Limited Scope
Nepal would retain its two-house parliamentary structure—an Upper House and a Lower House—but with half the number of members compared to the current system. Parliament’s powers would be strictly limited to legislation. Parliament would not be involved in forming or toppling the government, thus removing the temptation for vote-buying, coalition corruption, and party trading. By separating legislative functions from executive appointments, this model reinforces Parliament’s dignity while ending its misuse as a political battleground.
Seven Provinces, Countless Problems: Rethinking Nepal’s Federal Structure
The current Constitution of Nepal created seven provinces, each with a unicameral legislature (the Pradesh Sabha), its own provincial government led by a Chief Minister and Council of Ministers, and a Governor appointed by the President as the ceremonial head. However, this federal structure has proven to be more of a burden than a benefit. It has led to excessive government spending on political positions and imposed unnecessary taxes on citizens, without delivering meaningful services or improvements. Practical experience suggests that Nepal would be better served by a streamlined system of local governance—retaining the structure of Village Development Committees and Municipalities, with some reforms—while replacing the seven provinces with a network of 75 administrative districts, each headed by a senior official. This official could be titled Governor, Provincial Head, or District Chief, depending on preference, but the goal should be efficient, accountable, and cost-effective administration, not bloated political bureaucracy.
The System Must Serve All—Not Just the Few
Nepal’s tragedy is not the absence of laws or institutions—it is the capture of those institutions by party interests and the erosion of public trust. Whether monarchy or republic, the essential question remains: Does the system serve the people or merely the powerful?
If Nepal is to become a truly benevolent country, this answer must change. Governance must be reimagined—not as a competition between parties, but as a solemn service to the nation. Only then will we see democracy not just in theory but in practice? Only then will we move from constitutional rights to fundamental dignity, from political slogans to just governance.
A benevolent country is not built through speeches or manifestos. It is built through ethical leadership, impartial institutions, and an empowered citizenry. That is the Nepal we must now strive for.
The day the jar breaks is not just the end of tyranny; it must also be the beginning of a benevolent country.
Comments:
Leave a Reply