Nepal's political situation has reached an unprecedented level of dysfunctionality and corruption. Since the ousting of the monarchy in 2008 and the subsequent declaration of a federal democratic republic, the nation has seen a rotating cast of political leaders, particularly from the Nepali Congress (NC), the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), and the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist Centre (CPN-MC). Figures like K.P. Sharma Oli, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (also known as Prachanda), and Sher Bahadur Deuba have become symbols of the country's political chaos, manipulating the system for personal gain while the country suffers under the weight of corruption, political violence, and economic instability.
The Emergence of Dictatorship in the Garb of Democracy
Despite being a democratic republic, Nepal’s political landscape often mirrors authoritarianism. Leaders like Oli, Prachanda, and Deuba have concentrated power within their parties, effectively sidelining both opposition members and voices within their own ranks. Although these leaders outwardly endorse democratic principles, in practice, they operate with impunity, suppressing dissent and consolidating control over government institutions.
In Nepal, key political figures control the apparatus of the state to their advantage, functioning in ways that resemble dictatorship more than democracy. K.P. Sharma Oli, for instance, has been notorious for his iron grip on the CPN-UML, consistently stifling internal democracy within his party. While he was Prime Minister (twice between 2015 and 2021), Oli became known for bulldozing opposition voices, controlling media narratives, and preventing judicial scrutiny of his government’s policies. Similarly, Sher Bahadur Deuba, the leader of the Nepali Congress, has served multiple terms as Prime Minister, each term marred by allegations of corruption and inefficiency. Prachanda, a former Maoist insurgent, shifted from revolutionary to political elite, abandoning many of the progressive changes he once fought for.
The result of this political monopolization is an environment where dissent is suppressed, and critics are often jailed or silenced. Activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens who speak out against these leaders face retribution in the form of imprisonment or threats. Numerous accounts have emerged of people being incarcerated under dubious charges, merely for criticizing government policies or revealing corruption.
Goonism and Political Violence
Nepali politics, historically fraught with conflict, took a violent turn during the Maoist insurgency led by Prachanda. The insurgency (1996-2006) claimed around 17,000 lives, a toll that continues to haunt the country. While the civil war has officially ended, the culture of violence lingers. Goonism--a form of political violence where thugs, often associated with political parties, are used to intimidate or eliminate opponents—has become common in the country. These thugs not only intimidate political rivals but also attack anyone who criticizes the ruling class.
This atmosphere of violence has silenced potential critics and allowed the political elite to rule unchecked. Leaders like Oli, Prachanda, and Deuba have been accused of using their influence to protect party-affiliated goons from prosecution, further exacerbating the problem. These networks of violence are used not just for political gain but also to control vital sectors of the economy, including land and resource management.
Moreover, the politicization of Nepal’s law enforcement and judiciary has allowed such acts to go unpunished. The ruling parties have exerted control over the judicial system, manipulating legal procedures to ensure that crimes linked to political violence are either dismissed or delayed beyond a five-year statute of limitations. This legal manipulation has shielded corrupt politicians and violent enforcers from accountability.
Corruption: Nepotism and Misappropriation of Resources
The culture of corruption is pervasive within Nepal’s political class. Leaders regularly engage in the embezzlement of state funds, mismanagement of resources, and nepotism. Ordinary Nepalis face economic hardship daily, with unemployment on the rise, inflation, and basic services in decline. Yet, the nation’s leaders continue to amass personal wealth and misuse public resources.
A glaring example of this misuse is the frequent foreign trips made by top leaders for medical treatments. Sher Bahadur Deuba, Oli, and Prachanda, among others, have been criticized for traveling abroad, often to countries like India or Singapore, for healthcare using taxpayer money. This behavior not only reflects the leaders’ lack of faith in Nepal’s healthcare system but also highlights their disregard for the common citizens who lack access to even basic medical care.
Such acts are not isolated but indicative of a broader pattern of resource misappropriation. While the government struggles to fund critical infrastructure projects, including education and healthcare, state funds are routinely siphoned off to fuel the lavish lifestyles of political elites. This behavior perpetuates underdevelopment, particularly in rural areas, where basic services are sorely lacking.
The Political Instability After the Monarchy
Nepal’s transition to a federal democratic republic in 2008 promised to bring stability and development. However, the political revolution that ended the monarchy has instead led to a period of extreme instability. The country has seen numerous changes in government, with the Prime Minister’s office changing hands over a dozen times since 2008. These rapid changes in leadership, driven by infighting among political elites, have crippled the nation’s ability to implement long-term policies.
The constant reshuffling of power has created an environment where no single government is able to enact comprehensive reforms or see projects through to completion. Political parties have formed fragile coalitions that collapse as soon as one party feels its interests are threatened. As a result, policy implementation has become a secondary concern, with leaders focused primarily on retaining power. This political chaos has severely hindered the country’s economic growth, left critical sectors such as healthcare and education underfunded, and diminished Nepal’s standing in the international community.
Geopolitical Struggles and Declining International Reputation
Nepal’s international reputation has suffered due to its unstable political environment. Historically, Nepal has maintained a delicate balance between its two powerful neighbors, India and China. However, recent years have seen an increase in geopolitical tensions, with different political factions favoring one country over the other. Oli’s government, for instance, took a more pro-China stance, resulting in strained relations with India. Conversely, Deuba has favored stronger ties with India, creating further divisions within the political establishment.
This geopolitical tug-of-war has further destabilized Nepal, making it vulnerable to external pressures and reducing its bargaining power in international negotiations. Moreover, the constant power struggles at home have distracted the government from addressing key international issues, such as trade relations and climate change, thereby weakening Nepal’s global influence.
The Question of Monarchy: Do We Need a King?
Given the failures of Nepal’s democratic leadership, many are now asking whether the monarchy should be reinstated, albeit in a more democratic form. Advocates for the return of the monarchy argue that a symbolic king could bring stability to the country while allowing for democratic governance. They believe that a constitutional monarchy, similar to the systems in countries like the United Kingdom or Japan, could serve as a stabilizing force in the midst of political chaos.
However, others argue that the solution does not lie in reverting to monarchical rule but in strengthening democratic institutions and electing competent, transparent leaders. Figures like Balen Shah, the independent mayor of Kathmandu, have emerged as symbols of hope for many Nepalis. Shah’s popularity stems from his efforts to fight corruption and focus on development. Similarly, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has gained traction for its anti-corruption platform . These new political movements, while still in their infancy, suggest that Nepal can find its way out of the current crisis without reverting to authoritarian rule.
Conclusion: A Way Forward
Nepal’s current political system is broken, but the solution does not necessarily lie in a return to monarchy or the continued dominance of corrupt leaders like Oli, Prachanda, and Deuba. Instead, the country must focus on strengthening its democratic institutions, ensuring transparency, and holding leaders accountable for their actions. The rise of independent leaders like Balen Shah and anti-corruption parties like the RSP shows that there is hope for a better future. However, for real change to occur, Nepalis must continue to push for reforms and elect leaders who prioritize the needs of the country over personal gain.
Ultimately, the question is not whether Nepal needs a king, but whether it can create a political system that works for the people. Only through genuine democratic reform, transparency, and accountability can Nepal emerge from its current political crisis and build a more prosperous future.
