Monarchy , Democracy, and Nepal
But what everyone, including Dr. Amaresh Kumar Singh, understands is that the history of the monarchy is a living history in the context of Nepal. Because King Gyanendra is alive till 2065 BS, he is among the Nepalis. The events are all in the recent past. There is no need to go back too far, that is, two hundred years. King Gyanendra supported the agenda set by the Congress, the Communists and the Maoists for political change in Baishakh 2063 BS by announcing the restoration of the dissolved House of Representatives. Girija Prasad, the leader of the protesters, has been sworn in as the caretaker Prime Minister by the King. After that, the troubles started by the leaders who came to power, In the heat of the South and West, the 'Declaration of the House of Representatives' came on 4 May, in which the point of making Nepal 'secular' was introduced in a charming manner. That is why Tilsami had to say that it was not in the draft of the Prime Minister's address. Well-known leaders, including Shekhar Koirala, have been speaking publicly. Television also showed Prime Minister Girija, who was present in the house, giving the written speech to Speaker Subash Nembang due to sudden illness. When Nembang read it, he mentioned 'secularism' which had not been discussed till then. Since Nembang, who studied law, is also alive, he may have revealed the truth. In the announcement of that day, if the first child of the king was a daughter, there was even talk of appointing himself as the heir to the throne. That is, the plan to sideline the monarchy was not made until then. Such thinking and the tensions that follow are probably the result.
After all, the monarchy in more than 40 countries of the world was not something that could not be tolerated in Nepal.
Public opinion was not understood before deciding to separate the established monarchy from the machinery of the state system along with the establishment of modern Nepal. No referendum was held. If the result of the referendum had gone against the monarchy by such practice, the question of monarchy would have been solved at the same time. Because the monarchy would not exist if the majority of the people did not want it. But without any such credible practice of seeking the opinion of the people, the Interim Parliament has set a mandate to institutionalize the republic from the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly. It was a parliament in which members nominated by the Maoists played a decisive role.
The question of legitimacy
Another ridiculous step was seen in May 2008 when a meeting was held to announce the implementation of the republic. If the newly elected Constituent Assembly had to set its own agenda, it was bound to proceed according to the agenda set by the previous (mixed nominees) parliament. It is pointless for a dissolved parliament to set an agenda for a later elected assembly. Another unfortunate thing was that Krishna Prasad Sitaula, who was defeated in the Constituent Assembly elections, was the presenter to present the proposal to sideline the monarchy. Where is the legitimacy? Another undemocratic act was committed at that time: there was not even time for a general discussion before passing such an important resolution. Even Chandra Bahadur Gurung did not get enough opportunity to disagree. At that time, senior Congress leader KB Gurung repeatedly asked what kind of pressure he had to conduct the meeting. Have been saying in interviews. Needless to say, there is a big difference between forcibly established legitimacy and Mechi-Mahakali-supported political legitimacy.
It is not uncommon for educated parliamentarians like Amaresh Kumar Singh to discuss the 'possibility' of restoring the monarchy rather than 'making history'. He said that the only reason for Paras's face being public was his disgust towards the monarchy. This is really a grassroots concept. When it comes to successors in the future, ordinary Nepalis have become indifferent, fearing that Paras will be the first to become the prince. There must be an initiative from his father to remove this doubt. The acceptance of the monarchy should not be affected due to filial piety. Because the Shah dynasty's commitment to rule according to popular consensus is an established belief like that of Pravinarayan Shah.
The Interim Parliament, which did not hold the election of the Constituent Assembly, set the mandate to institutionalize the republic from the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly without any credible practice of seeking the opinion of the people.
It is to be recalled that King Virendra had snatched the title of 'Prince' from his younger brother Dhirendra. In Birendra's time, a woman named Ketki was also expelled from the royal family for cultural deviation. In the face of the needs of the nation, the dignity of the individual becomes secondary and must go. Elsewhere, tough decisions have been made from time to time, with Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom removing her son and grandson from the line of succession. His successor, Elizabeth, succeeded George VI as king.
The events of 2007 in Nepal are considered historic for many reasons. The past is almost seven years. King Gyanendra, who was declared 'Shri 5 Gyanendra' on the 22nd of Kartik, is still among the Nepalis. That is, they are living history, even if they are history. Meanwhile, Gyanendra became king for the second time in 2058 BS. For the first time, when Baje Tribhuvan suddenly invaded India, Prime Minister Mohan Shamsher ascended the throne to his minor grandson, and for the second time, after the assassination of King Virendra, Gyanendra became 'Shri 5 Maharajadhiraja'. According to 'Political Mirror of Nepal' (author Grishma Bahadur Devkota), Gyanendra has been the king for seven years from Kartik 22 to Poush 23 and Poush 24 to Phagun 4 as King Tribhuvan's 'State Assistant' (Regent). Since Prince Tribhuvan was accompanied by Prince Mahendra and his eldest son Virendra to India, and to keep the throne of the country vacant, Mohan Shamsher continued the tradition of the monarchy by declaring Tribhuvan as 'the former Shri 5 Maharajadhiraj'. Contextually, Jung Bahadur made Rana Khalak a powerful ruler, making him Shri 3. But His Majesty's institution was not destroyed. He may have done so knowing the usefulness of the monarchy for Nepal.
B.P's thoughts
Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala is the name of the person who has been active in the change of BP's vision for seven years and became the first elected Prime Minister of Nepal in May 2016. After Poush 1, 2017, BP had to suffer a lot and constantly struggle for the restoration of democracy. He was also deported to India during rule of King Mahendra. But when he returned to Nepal in 2033 BS with the proposal of 'National Reconciliation', BP conveyed the message that the country's existence can be protected only through cooperation with the King. Mani Rana and I met BP in London in 2035 BS (1979) while undergoing medical treatment abroad. During the interview, BP expressed the view that the role of guardian of the king is indispensable for Nepal. (A radio interview taken at that time but not aired at that time due to various reasons has been made public from 'Baharkhari.com' last year.)
Considering the territory of Nepal, it is understood that BP saw the need for both pro-nationalist and pro-democracy forces in Nepal. Such a belief does not seem to have been formed due to divine power. Adolescent BP may say monarchy is not necessary in 2012, but mature BP itself, especially after 2033, has replaced that belief. BP's 'Last Message', which was included in the book 'King Nationality and Politics' compiled and edited by renowned lawyer Ganesh Raj Sharma in 2063 BS, states: The need is for the king to have a platoon, so not to praise the king ... everyone who wants to keep the country is needed. ' (BP passed away in Shravan 2039, This message was recorded in May. Jurists can compare this to a 'dying declaration' before death.) Similarly, the views of Ganeshman Singh and Krishna Prasad Bhattarai remained the same until later. Prime Minister Manmohan Adhikari, who has always been at the forefront of the communist wave, has also said in press interviews that the monarchy has a clear role to play in Nepal. He is of the opinion that the strategy of a small country between two huge countries should not be based on empty ideological thinking. On the one hand, the communist regime based in the People's Republic of China, In India, on the other hand, the democratic pattern is similar to that of a republic in the West. It would be wise for a small country, which exists in the middle and has a population of many castes and languages, to adopt a mixed system based on the practice on both sides. A few days ago, a gentleman from the Far East, who had reached a high position in the service of the Government of Nepal, spoke to me on the phone and asked me a few days ago: It would be our mistake to assume that the governments of both the neighboring countries are aware of this unique position and position of Nepal.
Misleading thoughts
The notion that democracy does not last in a country with a monarchy is not correct. The United Kingdom and Japan are countries where democracy has flourished by maintaining constitutional monarchies. The Queen of England is the President of 15 other countries, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand. These countries have not been hindered in their monarchy and democracy. In Malaysia, one person from nine families is elected king every five years. The monarchical traditions of Thailand and Bhutan are somewhat different. Gulf monarchies, including Saudi Arabia, are an exception. Swaziland and Lesotho in Africa are no exception. In Europe, in countries like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Belgium, monarchies have given a level of stability that is hard to find in republics everywhere. In Spain, the monarchy was restored in 1975 after a gap of 40 years. The current King of Cambodia in the shadow of China, Naroddam Sihamoni, is the head of the restored monarchy.
Incumbent Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli was probably not uncomfortable working with the king in the past. Perhaps Oli would not have allowed the organizers to invite King Tupou VI of the Pacific island nation of Tonga VI during the much-discussed Asia-Pacific Summit (Holy Wine Conference) in Kathmandu in December 2075. Prachanda, the commander-in-chief of the armed Maoist insurgency, said during the uprising that he would agree to a Cambodian-style monarchy. When the offer of talks came, Prachanda said, "I want to talk to the master and not to the servant."
After all, the monarchy in more than 40 countries of the world was not something that could not be tolerated in Nepal. Why should the leaders who are taking the lead in implementing the federal system adopted in 26 small countries out of 193 countries of the United Nations be stingy in protecting the monarchy which is maintaining the unique identity of Nepal like Mount Everest and Lumbini? The tradition of the Shah dynasty dates back to two and a half centuries, but the history of the Malla, Licchavi, Kirati, Gopal, etc. dynasties seems to be very long. Buddha himself was born as Prince Siddhartha. Even so, the tradition of 26 hundred years of monarchy can be found.
Culture and practice
In Nepal, where there are more people of Hindu religious faith, the king has played a role in some cultural practices. There are many types of festivals and celebrations in the Kathmandu Valley, including visiting the living Goddess Kumari in Indrajatra, seeing Rato Machhendranath's Bhoto in Patan, visiting Navdurga in Bhaktapur, exchanging swords in Pachali, and performing proper worship. In festivals like Baradshah, it is customary to first comment on the public only by respecting the king. The work assigned by the king should not be done by others. This was the statement of Jagman Gurung. Only priests and the king of Nepal are allowed to enter the sanctum sanctorum of the temple in some places of pilgrimage in neighboring India. This religious-cultural formula is highly valued by more than one billion Hindus in India. The dignity of his faith and devotion to Lord Pashupatinath cannot be underestimated. Nepal-India relations at the grassroots level have been frozen since Nepal was declared secular. It is ironic that this happened when the BJP, a party that shows the importance of Hindutva in India, came to power. Prime Minister Narendra Modi must have been upset by this.
'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam' is the Hindu belief that the whole world is one family. Inspired by such a belief, Nepal was a Hindu kingdom and no other country or society was harmed in any way. It is not that the voice has been raised from the grassroots level that it should be met and the country should be made secular. If it had been raised, the hastily compiled suggestions would not have come in favor of Hindu Rashtra when the draft constitution was in its final stage. Another fact is that the minorities of Nepal, including Muslims and Christians, were allowed by the old constitution, laws and regulations to practice their religion and related acts from time immemorial. Mosques, churches were not obstructed. The ban was only on conversions. The introduction of generosity can be understood from the operation of a mosque near the palace of the Hindu king. So it should be From time to time, the leaders of the Muslim community demand that Nepal should be a Hindu nation. Similarly, in the name of secularism, Christians other than foreign preachers with the mentality of spreading atheism and social evils are advocating for the establishment of Hindu Rashtra in Nepal. Dr. KB Rokaya is a well known name in this perspective. The Hindu Rashtra, the Shah Dynasty and the Nepal Army are the assets of Nepal. KB Rokaya is an instantly recognizable name in this perspective. The Hindu Rashtra, the Shah Dynasty and the Nepal Army are the assets of Nepal. KB Rokaya is an instantly recognizable name in this perspective. The Hindu Rashtra, the Shah dynasty and the Nepal Army are the assets of Nepal.
No comments