A loss of authority has plunged our country into the most serious crisis since the 1814-16 Anglo-Nepal War. We are seeing a steady erosion of authority that could threaten the very existence of this nation.

t would have been a pleasant thing to say that after ten years of democracy we are moving towards the establishment of a new Nepal: that the needs of the ordinary citizens have been fulfilled, that the country is making reasonable progress. Unfortunately, we cannot. Most major political actors have not adhered to the spirit of the Constitution. In fact, only one institution, the monarchy, has abided by the Constitution.

At the end of ten years we find the leaders of the two major parties destroying the funda-mental values and norms of democracy. In a recent book, Domestic Conflict and Crisis of Governability in Nepal, Prof Dhruba Kumar writes: "In the absence of any carefully thought out strategy to realise its objective, democracy becomes disastrous. A decade of democratic experience in Nepal suggests this end." Various writers in this book point out that the main cause for the failure of democratic consolidation is the inertia of leadership, their greed, corruption and even involvement in criminal enterprises. Political parties, they say, have pursued their narrow partisan ends to such an extent that they have wrecked the civil service, the police and many other institutions by misusing them for partisan interests. They say elections have become increasingly unfair: the objective now is to win by hook or by crook and use state power and money to bring the party in power back in power. As a result, violence, booth capturing and the expenditure of vast sums of money have become the norm for elections.

The other disease that plagues the polity is factionalism which has reached such proportions that even when a party has a majority of 113 in a house of 205 it suffers from instability. Even the speaker, Tara Nath Ranabhat, admits the government has failed to deliver because there is a "predominance of corrupt people and smugglers in the party and the government" and they have been encouraged by top leaders when toppling governments. None other than the prime minister recently made the remarkable disclosure that "parliament is invaded by smugglers" even though it was he who allocated the tickets for elections. Contributors to Kumar's book mentioned earlier agree with Krishna Hachhethu's conclusion that "the role and performance of parties have become a major impediment towards democratic consolidation in Nepal".

We have a government that is hardly functioning, in fact it seems so engrossed in intra-party strife that it may have forgotten that there is actually an insurgency of dangerous proportions going on. Despite all declarations to end corruption, it seems to reach new heights every day. We have the extraordinary case of the Lauda deal, where the Prime Minister promises the Public Accounts Committee that action will be taken against irregularities, while it is clear that the government defied the PAC directive on leasing the aircraft. Blatant corruption and inefficiency, a total disregard for the problems of the poor and the downtrodden have become the distinguishing badge of the present government. On top of all this, law and order is breaking down and the state is failing in its principal task of providing peace and security of its citizens.

The situation has turned alarming: the Nepali government's writ runs only in a quarter of the country's territory. In effect, the government exists only in the district headquarters and police check posts. Last week, the Maoists declared an alternative government in Rukum. In the areas they control, the Maoists levy taxes in cash or kind, decide cases and make sure that the public schools are free. Now it appears they can close down schools all over Nepal. Even in urban areas people no longer seem to rely on the government's security system, they fear the Maoists more.

This loss of authority has created a crises that Nepal has not faced since the 1814-16 war with the British. This is a crisis
of the first order. What we are seeing is the gradual breakdown of the state while all the major actors (except the insurgents) are watching in numb bemusement.

Such a situation has every Nepali worried. Every citizen is deeply concerned as dark clouds gather over the horizon. How do we safeguard multiparty democracy? Will the country slide into civil war? Above all, Nepalis fear that a continuing decline in security and the collapse of state authority could threaten the very existence of the nation. It should be the duty of the government to consult all the major forces in the country when a crisis of this proportion looms. So far, the government shows no signs of wanting to take anyone's counsel.

The Constitution was the result of a social contract between the Nepali Congress, the communists and the King. Since then, other political forces like the RPP, Sadbhavana and some communists parties that stayed out of the constitutional dialogues have emerged. A new initiative of consultation between all these forces which puts the safeguarding of multi-party democracy as the principal objective has to emerge. If the Nepali Congress does not want to do this, maybe the other parties of the social contract ten years ago should take the initiative. Unusual times require unusual solutions. Otherwise, if the present slide towards disaster is allowed to continue it can only end in tragedy.



Pashupati SJB Rana is the General Secretary of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party.