News, Views From Nepal

Yuba Nath Lamsal Democracy is collective self-rule. In other words, democracy is the political system that empowers people to govern and handle their own affairs. In the direct democracy which ancient Athenians practiced, every adult citizen could participate in decision making and governance. There used to be a system in the city of Athens that all people of the city were required to assemble in a public place and would take decision with approval of every one assembled there. This is called a practice of direct democracy in which each and every citizen have a say and directly participates in the decision making and governance. With the advance of time, the society slowly grew complicated. Direct democracy became almost impossible to manage, which gave rise to indirect democracy in which people elect their representatives to make decision on their behalf. Although the concept of democracy has gained more currency in the modern day, which has become a political lingua franca

Yuba Nath Lamsal Some pundits tend to portray Nepal’s present scenario as the syndrome of a failed state. This breed of people includes both Nepalese citizens as well as foreigners, who claim to be Nepal expert. It is their wishful thinking because they want to reap benefit from chaotic state of the country. We have many donor-funded NGOs and donor-driven projects. Such projects do not necessarily tend to work in Nepal’s national need and interest rather than serve donor’s own agenda and interest. The condition of Nepal is definitely not satisfactory. But it does not mean that it was better in the past. The downward spiral in the economy and political uncertainty had started right from the Panchayat. The Panchayat was a closed system which restricted freedom of expression and other rights of the people. As a result, people were not aware of the situation in the absence of free press. Now the society is open and media is robust and vibrant that keeps us informing every aspec

Yuba Nath Lamsal Politics of the country seems to be still in bizarre and uncertain state. Until Dr Baburam Bhattarai was in the helms of affairs, opposition parties namely the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML raised hell to oust the Maoist-Madhesi coalition government. A new formula was brokered to replace the Bhattarai-led government, which installed the sitting chief justice on the saddle of power. Under this formula brokered by four major parties, there is no party representative in the chief justice-led non-party and non-political government; instead, it would be composed of ex-bureaucrats, which is further strange in the multi-party political system. Good or bad, the so-called neutral and non-political government is in place. There are opinions both for and against this new political arrangement. The four major parties—the UCPN-Maoist, the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and the Madhesi Front— have called this government as a product of the doctrine of necessity. However, the cr

Yuba Nath Lamsal By the time this write up gets published, Nepal’s politics may have taken a new turn. Every time, something new and unexpected has taken place in our political spectrum. This has made things more complicated thereby making our politics more uncertain and unpredictable. It had been expected that the decision of four major political forces on the formation of the chief justice-led government would bring all political parties on board and create the atmosphere for fresh election. But this decision has created more complex situation not only in politics but also in every sphere of life. The opinion in the country has been sharply divided with some parties raising the constitutionality, legitimacy, intention and ability of the present government. In the beginning, public opinion had been sharply divided on issue concerning whether the chief justice should lead the Executive without relinquishing the position of the chief of the Judiciary. This issue was raised