PM Karki: Deconstruct institutionalized impunity

Nepal’s history contains a graveyard of political upheavals—one revolution, two people’s movements, and one armed struggle—all of which promised profound changes. Yet, despite immense sacrifice, none succeeded in truly transforming the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy; each ultimately headed to the graveyard due to compromise and impunity. The 104-year-long fraternal succession system of the Rana family, which was autocratic, came to an end as a result of the February 1951 revolution, restoring democracy. Likewise, the people’s movement of April 1990 dismantled the Panchayat system. A decade and a half later, another people’s movement culminated in the abolition of the monarchy in May 2008. However, these revolutions, movements, and conflicts—despite their scale and significance—failed to bring about the deep, structural transformation the nation desperately needed. They did not transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. It is in this context that Gen-Z launched a movement in September 2025, the outcome of which the entire country now awaits with bated breath. On the other hand, after the protests in Sri Lanka, President Rajapaksa and his family were expelled from the country in July 2022. Similarly, due to protests in Bangladesh, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled the country in August 2024 and was sentenced to death in November 2025. These countries show signs of significant transformation. There has been no change in the political system in neighboring India since independence in 1947, while in most prosperous countries, once the political system changes, it does not repeatedly change within a few decades as in Nepal. However, for ordinary Nepalis, political change every few decades has started to seem normal. But these political changes come and go without transforming the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. The following lines attempt to discern why all these revolutions, people’s movements, and armed conflicts failed to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy and assess the prospects of success for the Gen-Z movement from this perspective. 1950-51 Revolution The Nepali Congress and Praja Parishad launched a revolution against the autocratic Rana regime. The regime executed Shukra Raj Shastri, Dharma Bhakta Mathema, Dashrath Chand, and Ganga Lal Shrestha in January 1940 to suppress the revolution. (To commemorate their execution, Martyrs’ Day is celebrated every year in January.) In this backdrop, King Tribhuvan took refuge in the Indian Embassy in November 1950 and was subsequently taken to Delhi, where talks were held between Indian Prime Minister Nehru and representatives of the Rana regime. Finally, a proposal sent by the last Rana PM, Mohan SJB Rana, in January 1951 was approved by King Tribhuvan and Nehru. The Rana regime then issued a press release and began reforms by releasing all political prisoners. Eventually, King Tribhuvan returned to Kathmandu and announced the restoration of democracy on February 18, 1951. Strangely, the Nepali Congress and Praja Parishad, which had led the revolution, were excluded from the negotiations in Delhi, which were held solely between Nehru and representatives of the Rana regime. Astoundingly, in the cabinet formed after the restoration of democracy, Mohan SJB Rana was appointed Prime Minister, while Babar Shamsher, a son of former PM Chandra SJB Rana, was appointed Defense Minister. In essence, the 1951 Delhi Agreement was a compromise, and the Ranas—who had oppressed people for over a century and usurped all state revenue—were left scot-free and succeeded retained their immense wealth, accumulated illegitimately and passed on through generations starting from Jang Bahadur Rana (founder of Rana regime) and Dhir Shamsher Rana. Their ill-gotten wealth should have been confiscated, as none of the Rana rulers had legitimate sources of income beyond inheritance or exploitation of state resources. Jang Bahadur Kunwar (who later adopted the surname Rana) was indigent after the fall of PM Bhimsen Thapa in 1837, when his father’s property was confiscated. Similarly, Dhir Shamsher Rana was also poor, and his sons and grandsons while ruling Nepal bilked the country dry for their personal enrichment until 1951. Therefore, all their property should have been confiscated after the restoration of democracy. By failing to do so, the revolution ended in compromise and institutionalized impunity. The Ranas were neither made to flee, and today the descendants of those rulers are among the country’s wealthiest. It is worth recalling that during the declaration of the Republic, the properties of King Birendra, Queen Aishwarya, and their families were brought under the control of the Government of Nepal, and all property acquired by King Gyanendra in the capacity of king was also confiscated. Such measures were never taken during earlier political changes. Furthermore, the last Rana ruler had hastily signed the Peace and Friendship Treaty with India in July 1950 to secure India’s support. The treaty lacked a validity period and had no amendment or review provisions, effectively making Nepal an unofficial semi-colony of India. Despite this anti-national act, Mohan SJB Rana was appointed the first Prime Minister of democratic Nepal instead of being prosecuted for sedition/treason. Therefore, 1951 revolution failed to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. There was one exception: the sovereign power and state authority that Jang Bahadur had usurped from King Surendra in June 1857—and passed down to successive Rana PMs—was returned to King Tribhuvan as a result of the 1951 revolution. True transformation, however, would have required changes in leadership, policies, tendencies, and intentions, which this revolution failed to achieve. Advent of Panchayat System King Mahendra dismissed the democratically elected government of BP Koirala, dissolved parliament, and banned political parties in December 1960. Many have interpreted this incident differently. In reality, however, it may have been triggered by a deeper concern: The 1959 constitution was based on the Westminster model, and Nepali Congress had secured more than two-thirds of the seats in the first general election. As a result, PM BP Koirala began to behave like a Rana-era prime minister vested with sovereign power and executive authority, which likely made King Mahendra apprehensive of a déjà vu scenario, wherein monarchs would again be stripped of sovereign authority. In December 1962, a new constitution was promulgated, establishing the party-less Panchayat system under absolute monarchy. However, King Mahendra failed to prosecute state administrators from 1951 to 1960 for unlawful actions. Nor was the wealth they had illegally acquired confiscated. From the water resources perspective, premier MP Koirala signed the anti-national Koshi Agreement in April 1954, while premier BP Koirala signed the even more detrimental Gandak Agreement in December 1959. Neither was prosecuted for these anti-national acts. Thus, although the party system was abolished and a new political system was introduced, this change too failed to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. Ironically, MP Koirala was rewarded by being appointed Nepal’s ambassador to the United States in July 1961. As long as leadership, policies, tendencies, and intentions remain unchanged, no transformation is possible. 1990/91 People’s Movement After the 50-day People’s Movement in 1990/91, the party-less Panchayat system was abolished and replaced with a multi-party democracy under constitutional monarchy. However, despite another major change in the political system, there was still no substantial transformation. Leadership, policies, tendencies, and intentions remained unchanged, and consequently, this change too failed to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. The culprit was the institutionalized impunity. Although the Mallik Commission was constituted to investigate the abuse of state authority, repression, excesses, murder, and human rights violations committed during the Panchayat era, its report was never implemented. As a result, leaders who had held positions such as Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, or Minister during the Panchayat period assumed the same positions repeatedly under the multi-party system. Maoist Armed Struggle Babu Ram Bhattarai, on behalf of the United People’s Front, Nepal (later transformed into the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist), submitted a 40-point demand to the Sher Bahadur Deuba government in early February 1996. Eight days later, an armed struggle was launched, citing the government’s failure to meet the demands. The armed struggle ended in November 2006 after a 12-point agreement was reached in Delhi between seven political parties and the Maoists. More than 18,000 Nepalis were killed, nearly 2,000 went missing, and about 17,000 were injured. Additionally, many women were raped. Both Maoists and the state were responsible for these atrocities. Banks and private property were looted, and weapons of security personnel were seized. To address transitional justice, legislation was enacted and amended several times, and commissions were repeatedly formed and dissolved. However, even two decades later, transitional justice remains unimplemented, failing to dismantle institutionalized impunity. Ironically, Maoist leaders Pushpa Kamal Dahal became Prime Minister three times, and Babu Ram Bhattarai became Prime Minister once, yet they did not implement even a single point from their own 40-point demands. Hence, there was no change in leadership, policies, tendencies, or intentions. Consequently, this change too failed to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. Abolition of Monarchy Nepal became a republic in May 2008, changing the political system once again. The Rayamajhi Commission was formed to investigate the deaths of 26 people and injuries to more than 4,000 during the 2006 people’s movement. The commission found 31 people—including the then King Gyanendra, vice-chairmen of the Council of Ministers, assistant ministers, etc.—guilty of abuse of power, excesses, human rights violations, and misuse of the national treasury, and recommended legal action. But no action was taken, allowing institutionalized impunity to persist. Those who had been Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, or Ministers during earlier regimes continued to occupy the same positions under the republic. The system changed, but leadership, policy, attitude, and intention remained unchanged. As a result, even after becoming a republic, this change too failed to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy and Nepal’s condition worsened rather than improved. Gen-Z Movement Institutionalized impunity, rampant corruption, and an epidemic of nepotism and favoritism compelled Gen-Z to revolt on September 8, forcing the Oli government not only to resign but also to flee with the help of the Nepal Army (though unlike in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, they were not exiled). Because the Oli government underestimated the movement, 76 innocent people were killed within 36 hours (more than two deaths per hour), and 2,300 were injured—a record in terms of the speediest massacres in Nepal’s history. Incidentally, King Birendra had agreed to abolish the Panchayat system in April 1990 to prevent further loss of life. Similarly, he refrained from deploying the then Royal Nepal Army against the Maoists for about five years, deploying them only after the insurgents attacked army posts in November 2001. Likewise, King Gyanendra reinstated parliament in April 2006 rather than risk further deaths. The outcome of the Gen-Z movement is still uncertain, and the entire country awaits the results with bated breath. The Sushila Karki government, formed in the wake of the Gen-Z revolt, has a golden opportunity to transform the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy. Only time will tell whether the Karki government will utilize this opportunity or continue the status quo. However, the early signs are not encouraging. The government displayed a lack of seriousness by forming an Inquiry Commission under the existing Inquiry Commission Act, which only requires submission of a report and without power to prosecute. The fate of this commission’s report will likely mirror that of the Mallik and Rayamajhi commissions. The government should have promulgated an Ordinance establishing an all-powerful commission with authority to prosecute those responsible for the September killings. Both the then premier Oli and Home Minister Lekhak have defended themselves by claiming they did not order security forces to kill. However, they are responsible because they failed to order the security forces not to open fire. Of the two core demands of Gen-Z, the outgoing government fulfilled the one related to social media. It is now incumbent upon the Karki government to fulfill the second—curbing corruption and ensuring good governance. Unfortunately, the government has so far failed even to ensure basic good governance. Until a few years ago, it was standard practice for the Prime Minister and Ministers to make their property details public, which this government has not done. To strengthen good governance, this government should have demonstrated the courage to publish both property details and their sources. Nepal remains on the FATF grey list due to previous governments’ failure to address deficiencies in combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and enforcing relevant laws. The Karki government should have taken the initiative to meet FATF requirements by promulgating ordinances, which would not only curb corruption and improve governance but also remove Nepal from the grey list. The government has less than three months to seize this opportunity. It is nearly certain that the next government will not take these steps, and consequently, Nepal may be blacklisted by early 2027—an outcome disastrous for the nation, people, and economy. Instead of addressing such critical issues, the government has focused on mundane tasks—recalling ambassadors (who cannot be replaced due to lack of parliamentary hearings), firing staff, and canceling construction contracts—leaving a huge governance vacuum. Pointless Mid-Term Election Gen-Z did not demand a mid-term election. It became necessary only due to Sushila Karki’s error in unnecessarily dissolving the House of Representatives (HoR). Now, several demands require constitutional amendments, which are impossible without the HoR. It would have been wiser to follow the precedent set on January 15, 2007, when representatives of the Maoists were inducted into the reinstated parliament and it was renamed the Interim Legislature-Parliament. Instead of dissolving the HoR, she should have inducted representatives of Gen-Z (including herself, enabling her to become an MP—since she is not one now, the constitutionality of her government is being questioned). Since this government has failed to take concrete steps to curb corruption, holding elections now would bring back the same corrupt and incompetent leaders. For example, the Deuba couple were vilified and even physically assaulted, yet Arzoo has already been nominated as a candidate and if her husband too is to contests from Dadeldhura, both are likely to elected due to sympathy votes. The same applies to leaders like Oli, Prachanda, etc. Essentially, without prosecuting corrupt politicians by promulgating necessary ordinances, this government risks “cleansing” them and enabling their return to power. The test by fire for this government is whether it can deconstruct institutionalized impunity. Failing this, the lives of the people, the condition of the nation and its economy, will not improve and may instead descend further into crisis as no changes will come in leadership, policies, tendencies, and intention. Conclusion Until Nepal creates an electoral environment where candidates can compete without burning hundreds of millions of rupees, corruption will remain the country’s default operating system. Nothing will change: not the leadership, not the policies, not the stale habits that have kept the nation’s ambitions in chains. This government, too, risks becoming another chapter in the long anthology of unfulfilled promises, leaving the people, the state and the economy stuck in the same holding pattern. If this structural rot is not confronted head-on, Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s tenure will carry an undeserved stain. Worse, the next generation will inherit a political arena so warped that Gen-Alpha may eventually feel pushed toward its own rupture, a future uprising laced with the tragic possibility of more injuries and more coffins. Ratna Sansar Shrestha Published in People's Review of December 12, 2025. https://mypeoplesreview.com/2025/12/12/pm-karki-deconstruct-institutionalized-impunity/?fbclid=IwY2xjawOpmhNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFCUTlsdVdweWF2N0Y1MnIzc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHgiOtQ-O28CEWsp_l564_8g-C9o1S4IeHjWpe0j_DrY29eBJK73GEGUE_ajM_aem_k_cTjquzO5gaT1Xra_3TnQ

जेन-जी आन्दोलनबाट आमूल परिवर्तन

नेपालमा २००७ सालमा क्रान्ति भएर एक सय चार वर्षसम्म चलेकोे जहानिया राणा शासन अन्त्य भएपछि पनि पटक पटक जनआन्दोलन, सशस्त्र द्वन्द्व आदि हुँदै दुई सय ४० वर्षसम्म राजतन्त्रात्मक रहेको यो देश २०६५ जेठमा गणतन्त्र बन्यो। तथापि देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन नआएकाले मुलुक, जनता र अर्थतन्त्रको अवस्थामा तात्त्विक सुधार भएन। बरु देशको अर्थतन्त्र क्रमिक रूपमा रसातलउन्मुख छ र मध्यम तथा निम्नवर्ग कष्टप्रद जीवन यापन गर्न बाध्य छन्। राजनीतिक व्यवस्था त परिवर्तन भए, तर नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियतमा खास परिवर्तन नभएकाले यस्तो भएको हो। यसअघिका सबै परिवर्तन सम्झौतामा टुङ्गिएका थिए, विस्थापित राज्य सञ्चालकहरूले पूर्णतः उन्मुक्ति पाए, दण्डहीनता संस्थागत भयो। विस्थापितको व्यवस्थाको दुर्गन्धित अवशेषहरू नामेट नगरी देश, जनता र अर्थतन्त्रको अवस्थामा तात्त्विक परिवर्तनको अपेक्षा गर्नु मूर्खता हो, जुन यथार्थ धेरै देशबाट देखिन्छ। यसैले गर्दा नै गत भदौ २३ गते नवयुवा (नाति–नातिनी पुस्ताः जेनजी)ले समेत आन्दोलन गर्नुपर्ने अवस्था आयो, जसकोे परिणाम भने गर्भमा नै छ। सुशीला कार्कीको सरकार बनेको तीन महिना पुग्न लाग्यो र उनले देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन गर्न सक्छिन् कि सक्दिनन् भन्ने थाहा पाउन केही महिना प्रतीक्षा गर्नै पर्छ। श्रीलंकामा भएको आन्दोलनपश्चात् २०७९ असारमा त्यहाँका तत्कालीन राष्ट्रपति राजापक्षे सपरिवार देशबाट खेदिए। त्यस्तै बंगलादेशमा भएको आन्दोलनले गर्दा त्यहाँकी तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री सेख हसिना २०८१ साउनमा देशबाट भागिन् र गत कात्तिकमा उनलाई मृत्युदण्ड दिनै फैसलासमेत भयो। यी दुई देशमा राजनीतिक परिवर्तनसँगै नयाँ सुरुवात हुने लक्षण देखियो। छिमेकी भारतमा ७८ वर्षअघि राजनीतिक परिवर्तन आएपछि कुनै परिवर्तन भएको छैन भने बहुसंख्यक समृद्ध देशमा एक पटक राजनीतिक परिवर्तन भएपछि केही दशकको अन्तरालमा नेपालमा जस्तै पटक पटक राजनीतिक व्यवस्था परिवर्तन भएका छैनन् तर नेपालका सर्वसाधारणका लागि हरेक केही दशकमा राजनीतिक परिवर्तन हुनु सामान्य जस्तो लाग्न थालेको छ र राजनीतिक परिवर्तन न हर्ष न विस्मातको अवस्था बनेको छ। २००७ सालको क्रान्ति नेपाली कांग्रेस, प्रजा परिषद्जस्ता दलहरूले जहाँनिया राणा शासनविरुद्ध गरेको क्रान्ति २००७ फागुन ७ गते टुङ्गिएको थियो। जहानियाँ राणा शासनले क्रान्तिलाई दबाउन शुक्रराज शास्त्री, धर्मभक्त माथेमा, दशरथ चन्द र गंगालाल श्रेष्ठलाई मृत्युदण्ड दिएको थियो, जसलाई सहिद मानेर हरेक वर्ष माघ १६ गते सहिद दिवससमेत मनाइन्छ। राजा त्रिभुवन २००७ कात्तिकमा भारतीय दूतावासको शरणागत भएपछि तिनलाई दिल्ली लगिएको थियो, जहाँ भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री नेहरू र श्री ३ मोहनशमशेरका प्रतिनिधिबिच वार्ता भएको थियो। अन्ततः २००७ पुसमा तत्कालीन श्री ३ मोहनले पठाएको प्रस्ताव राजा त्रिभुवन र नेहरूले मञ्जुर गरेपछि माघ ४ गते राणा सरकारले प्रेस विज्ञप्ति जारी गरेर सबै राजबन्दीलाई रिहा गर्नेलगायतका काम गरेर सुधारको सुरुवात गरेको थियो। अन्ततः फागुन ४ गते राजा त्रिभुवन दिल्लीबाट काठमाडौं फर्केर फागुन ७ गते नेपालमा प्रजातन्त्र बहाली भएको घोषणा गरेका थिए। स्मरणीय छ, दिल्ली वार्ता नेहरू र राणाहरूबिचमा मात्र भएको थियो। क्रान्ति गर्ने नेपाली कांग्रेस र प्रजा परिषद्लाई उक्त वार्तामा संलग्न गराइएको थिएन। प्रजातन्त्र बहाली भएलगत्तैको मन्त्रीमण्डलमा श्री ३ मोहनशमशेर नै प्रधानमन्त्री बनाइए भने श्री ३ चन्द्रशमशेरका छोरा बबरशमशेर रक्षामन्त्री नियुक्त भए। जहानिया राणा शासन कालमा जनतालाई दमन गर्ने, राज्यको सबै राजस्व निजी बनाउने राणाहरूमाथि न कुनै कारबाही गरियो, न उनीहरूले राज्यको दोहन गरेर जम्मा गरेको अकूत सम्पत्ति जफत गरियो। ती राणाहरूले कुनै इलम व्यवसाय गरेर अकूत सम्पत्ति जोडेका थिएनन्। पहिलो श्री ३ बन्ने जंगबहादुर कुँवर (पछि राणा लेख्ने थालेका) विपन्न थिए किनभने १८९४ सालमा तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री भीमसेन थापाको पतनपछि जंगबहादुरका पिताको पनि सर्वस्व हरण भएको थियो। त्यसपछि श्री ३ बन्ने वीरशमशेरका पिता धीरशमशेर पनि गरिब नै थिए र उनै धीरशमशेरका सन्ततिले २००७ सालसम्म राज्यको दोहन गरेका थिए। त्यसैले तिनीहरूको सबै सम्पत्ति प्रजातन्त्र बहाली भएपछि जफत गरेर राज्यको कोषमा दाखिला गरिनुपथ्र्यो, तर गरिएन र दण्डहीनताको सुरुवात भयो। साथै राणाहरूले भाग्न पनि परेन र अहिले तिनै राणा शासकहरूका सन्तानको रजगज देशमा व्यापक रूपमा चलेको छ। स्मरणीय छ, नेपाल गणतन्त्र घोषणा गर्ने क्रममा राजा वीरेन्द्र, रानी ऐश्वर्य र तिनका परिवारको सम्पत्ति नेपाल सरकार मातहत ल्याउनुका अतिरिक्ति राजा वीरेन्द्रको शेषपछि राजा बनेका ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई राजाको हैसियतले प्राप्त भएका सबै सम्पत्ति पनि राष्ट्रियकरण गरिएको थियो। यस्तो यसअघि राजनीतिक व्यवस्थाहरू परिवर्तन हुँदा कहिल्यै गरिएको थिएन। साथै मोहन शमशेरले २००७ साउनमा आफ्नो सत्ता जोगाउन भारतसँग हतारमा गरेको शान्ति तथा मैत्री सन्धिले नेपाललाई भारतको अनौपचारिक अर्ध–उपनिवेश बनायो, जुन न खारेज गर्न सकिन्छ न संशोधन नै। उक्त सन्धि पुनरवलोकन गर्नसम्म पनि भारतीय राज्य सञ्चालक तयार भएनन्। किनभने त्यो सन्धिमा न लागु रहने अवधि तोकियो, न संशोधन, न पुनरवलोकनको प्रावधान नै राखियो। तर तिनै मोहन शमशेरलाई नेपालमा प्रजातन्त्र बहालीपछि पनि प्रधानमन्त्री नियुक्त गरेर मत्स्य न्याय चरितार्थ गरियो। त्यसैले २००७ सालको क्रान्तिपछि देशमा कुनै तात्त्विक परिवर्तन आएन। एउटा अपवादबाहेक जंगबहादुरले श्री ५ सुरेन्द्रबाट १९१४ सालमा हत्याएको नेपालको सार्वभौमसत्ता र राजकीयसत्ता २००७ सालको क्रान्तिपछि श्री ५ त्रिभुवनमा फिर्ता भयो। यसरी यथास्थितिले निरन्तरता पाएकाले मुलुक, जनता र अर्थतन्त्रमा कुनै सुधार भएन। राजनीतिक व्यवस्था परिवर्तनसँगै नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियत परिवर्तन भएमा मात्र आमूल परिवर्तन हुन्थ्यो, जुन २००७ सालको क्रान्तिपछि भएन। २०१७ पुसको परिवर्तन राजा महेन्द्रको २०१७ पुस १ को कदमसम्बन्धमा धेरैले बुझे र बुझाइएभन्दा फरक परिवेशको कारण आएको हुन सक्छ। २०१५ सालमा भएको पहिलो आमनिर्वाचनमा नेपाली कांग्रेस पार्टीका दुईतिहाइभन्दा बढी उम्मेदवार विजयी भएकाले तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री विश्वेश्वरप्रसाद कोइरालाले आफूलाई जहानिया राणा शासनका श्री ३ जत्तिकै सम्झन थालेका थिए भने राजा महेन्द्रलाई फेरि एकपटक श्री ५ मा निहित देशको राजकीयसत्ता प्रधानमन्त्रीले हडप्ने आशंका भएकाले उनलाई अपदस्थ गरिएको सम्भावना धेरै छ। २०१९ सालमा निर्दलीय पञ्चायती व्यवस्था लागु गरिएको थियो। तर २००७ सालदेखि २०१७ सालसम्मका राज्य सञ्चालकमाथि कुनै कारबाही गरिएन। न तिनीहरूले अवैधानिक तरिकाबाट जोडेको सम्पत्ति पनि जफत गरियो। उक्त अवधिमा गरिएका कुनै पनि गलत कामको अनुसन्धान छानबिन केही पनि गरिएन र कारबाहीको कुरै भएन। जलस्रोतको दृष्टिकोणबाट तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री मातृकाप्रसाद कोइरालाले २०११ वैशाखमा राष्ट्रघाती कोसी सम्झौता गरे भने तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री विश्वेश्वरप्रसाद कोइरालाले कोसी सम्झौताभन्दा बढी घातक गण्डक सम्झौता २०१६ मंसिरमा गरेका थिए। तर यस्तो राष्ट्रघाती सम्झौता गर्नेहरूलाई समेत कुनै दण्ड नगरेर उन्मुक्ति दिइयो र जलस्रोतमा राष्ट्रघात गर्ने परिपाटी लगभग संस्थागत भयो। अर्थात् दलीय व्यवस्था उन्मूलन गरियो, प्रणाली परिवर्तन भयो तर देश, जनता र अर्थतन्त्रको अवस्थामा आमूल परिवर्तन आएन। बरु मातृकाप्रसाद कोइरालालाई त २०१८ वैशाखमा संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिकाका लागि नेपालको राजदूत पदमा नियुक्त गरेर पुरस्कृत गरिनु विडम्बना नै हो। अर्थात् फेरि एक पटक व्यवस्था परिवर्तन भयो तर देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन आएन। किनभने यस पटकको राजनीतिक परिवर्तनपश्चात् पनि नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियतमा कुनै परिवर्तन आएन। २०४६/४७ को जनआन्दोलन ५० दिनसम्म चलेको २०४६/४७ को जनआन्दोलनपश्चात् निर्दलीय पञ्चायती व्यवस्था खारेज गरेर संवैधानिक राजतन्त्रसहितको बहुदलीय प्रजातन्त्र लागु गरियो। पञ्चायतकालमा गरिएको राज्य शक्तिको दुरुपयोग, दमन, हिंसा, हत्या, मानव अधिकार हनन आदि छानबिन गर्न मल्लिक आयोग गठन गरिए पनि यसको प्रतिवेदन कार्यान्वयन गरिएन। पञ्चायत कालमा नमिता–सुनिता हत्या जस्ता काण्डहरूका अतिरिक्त कार्पेट, सर्पको छाला आदि काण्ड भएका थिए, ठुलो परिमाणमा वनजंगल अवैध रूपमा फँडानी गरिएका थिए। तर पञ्चायती व्यवस्थाको अन्त्यपछि ती काण्डसम्बन्धमा कुनै छानबिन कारबाही गरिएन। फलस्वरूप पञ्चायतकालमा प्रधानमन्त्री, उपप्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्री आदि बनेका नेताहरू नै बहुदलीय व्यवस्थामा पनि पटक पटक प्रधानमन्त्री, उपप्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्री आदि बने। पञ्चायती व्यवस्थामा गरेको राज्य शक्तिको दुरुपयोगमा कसैलाई कारबाही नभएकाले फेरि एक पटक व्यवस्था परिवर्तन भए पनि देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन आएन। पञ्चायती व्यवस्थाको खारेजीसँगै नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियत परिवर्तन भएको भए मुलुकमा आमूल परिवर्तन हुन सक्थ्यो, जुन हुँदै भएन। सशस्त्र द्वन्द्व संयुक्त जनमोर्चा, नेपाल, जसलाई पछि नेपाल कम्युनिस्ट पार्टी (माओवादी) बनाइएको थियो, का तर्फबाट बाबुराम भट्टराईले २०५२ माघमा शेरबहादुर देउवा सरकारलाई ४० बुँदे मागपत्र बुझाएकोमा ती माग पूरा नभएको कारण दर्साई २०५२ फागुनदेखि सशस्त्र द्वन्द्व सुरु गरेका थिए। पछि २०६२ मंसिरमा सात राजनीतिक दल र माओवादीबिच दिल्लीमा १२ बुँदे सहमति भएपछि सशस्त्र द्वन्द्व रोकिएको थियो। २०८० फागुन १ को नागरिक दैनिकका अनुसार उक्त सशस्त्र द्वन्द्वमा १८ हजारभन्दा बढी नेपाली मारिए भने झन्डै दुई हजार बेपत्ता छन् र करिब १७ हजार घाइते भएका थिए। साथै कैयौं महिला बलात्कृत भएका थिए। यस्तो हत्या हिंसामा माओवादी र तत्कालीन राज्यसत्ता दुवैको संलग्न थियो। बैंकहरू लुटिनुका अतिरिक्त निजी जायजेथा पनि लुटपाट गरिनुको साथै सेना, प्रहरीका हतियार पनि लुटिएका थिए। यसर्थ संक्रमणकालीन न्याय प्रदान गर्न ऐनहरू जारी गरिएर पटक पटक संशोधन गरिनुका साथै आयोगहरू गठन गर्दै विघटन गर्दै गरियो। तर दुई दशक पुग्दा पनि संक्रमणकालीन न्याय कार्यान्वयन गरिएन। यति धेरै जनधन क्षति भएको सशस्त्र द्वन्द्व अन्त्य भयो, तर देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन आएन। विडम्बना त के हो भने माओवादीकै पुष्पकमल दाहाल तीन पटक प्रधानमन्त्री बने भने बाबुराम भट्टराई एक पटक बने पनि सशस्त्र द्वन्द्व सुरु गर्दाको माओवादीको आफ्नै ४० बुँदे मागमध्ये एउटा बुँदा पनि तिनीहरूले कार्यान्वयन गरेनन्। किनभने नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियतमा कुनै परिवर्तन आएन। राजतन्त्रको उन्मूलन अन्ततः २०६५ जेठमा देश संघीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्रमा फेरिएर फेरि एक पटक व्यवस्था परिवर्तन भयो। २०६२/६३ को जनआन्दोलनका क्रममा २६ जनाको मृत्यु र चार हजार जनाभन्दा धेरै घाइते भएको सम्बन्धमा अनुसन्धान गर्न रायमाझी आयोग गठन गरिएको थियो। यसले सत्ताको दुरुपयोग, ज्यादती, मानवअधिकार उल्लंघन, राष्ट्रिय ढुकुटी दुरुपयोगलगायतमा दोषी ठहरिएका तत्कालीन राजा ज्ञानेन्द्रलगायत मन्त्रीपरिषद्का उपाध्यक्षहरूदेखि सहायक मन्त्री आदि समेत ३१ जनालाई दोषी ठहर गरिएको थियो र कानुन बनाई कारबाही गर्नुपर्ने प्रतिवेदनको सुझाव थियो तर कसैमाथि पनि कारबाही गरिएन र दण्डहीनताले निरन्तरता पायो। अर्थात् फेरि एक पटक यथास्थितिको वर्चस्व रह्यो। संवैधानिक राजतन्त्र कालमा प्रधानमन्त्री, उपप्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्री बनेकाहरू समेत गणतान्त्रिक नेपालको प्रधानमन्त्री, उपप्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्री बनेकाले फेरि पनि व्यवस्था परिवर्तन भयो, तर नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियतमा कुनै परिवर्तन आएन। फलस्वरूप नेपाल गणतन्त्र बने पनि मुलुक, जनता र अर्थतन्त्रलाई केही लाभ भएन बरु अवस्था झन् झन् नाजुक बन्दै गयो। नाति पुस्ताको आन्दोलन गत भदौ २३ गते नवयुवाले आन्दोलन गरे। जसलाई ओली सरकारले कम आँकलन गर्दा ठुलो क्षति भयो। ५/७ घण्टामा दर्जनौं निर्दोष मारिए। ओली सरकारले समयमा उचित सुरक्षाको प्रबन्ध नगरेकाले धेरै जीवन क्षति भएको हो। जसको फलस्वरूप विध्वंशकारी तत्त्वले भदौ २४ गते आगजनी, लुटपाट आदिमा संलग्न हुँदा जम्मा मारिनेको संख्या ७६ पुग्यो भने २३ सय जना घाइते भए र तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्रीका साथै उपप्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्रीहरू नेपाली सेनाको सहायतामा भाग्नुपर्‍यो तर श्रीलंका र बंगलादेशमा जस्तै देशबाटै भने भागेनन्। त्यसपछि गठन भएको सुशीला कार्की सरकारलाई मुलुकमा आमूल परिवर्तन गर्ने सुवर्ण अवसर आएको छ। यो अवसरलाई उपयोग कार्की सरकारले कसरी गर्छ वा यसअघिमा आन्दोलनपछि जस्तै यथास्थितिलाई निरन्तरता दिएर देश, जनता र अर्थतन्त्रलाई यति ठुलो परिवर्तनको लाभबाट वञ्चित गर्छ भन्ने कुरा हेर्न बाँकी छ। पूर्वप्रधान न्यायाधीश रहेकी सुशीला कार्की प्रधानमन्त्री बनेकी छन् भने प्रखर कानुन व्यवसायी गृहमन्त्री बनेकाले देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन गर्न पहल गर्ने छन् भन्ने सबै नेपालीको अपेक्षा छ। तर पहिलो गासमै ढुंगा चरितार्थ गरेर भदौ २३ र २४ गतेको घटनाको छानबिन गर्न जाँचबुझ आयोग ऐन २०२६ अनुसार गौरीबहादुर कार्कीको नेतृत्वमा एक छानबिन आयोग गठन गरेर कार्की सरकारमा गम्भीरताको अभाव दर्साएको छ। किनभने २०४६/४७ को जनआन्दोलनपश्चात् गठित मल्लिक आयोग र २०६२/६३ को जनआन्दोलनपछि गठित मल्लिक आयोग जस्तै कार्की आयोग पनि सर्वाधिकार सम्पन्न आयोग होइन। यो आयोगले पनि एक थान प्रतिवेदन मात्र पेस गर्ने र सो कार्यान्वयन गर्ने वा नगर्ने निर्णय फागुन २१ गते गरिने चुनावपश्चात् गठन हुने सरकारले गर्ने हुनाले कार्की आयोगको नियति पनि रायमाझी आयोग र मल्लिक आयोगभन्दा फरक हुने सम्भावना न्यून छ। कार्की सरकारले आवश्यक अध्यादेश जारी गरेर अभियोजनसमेत गर्ने दायित्वसहितको सर्वाधिकार सम्पन्न आयोग गठन गरेको भए भदौ २३ र २४ गतेको घटनाको जिम्मेवारहरूमाथि कारबाहीको सुनिश्चितता हुने थियो तर कार्की सरकारले यस्तो हिम्मत नै गरेन र उक्त घटनामा मारिने ७६ जना निर्दोषको हत्याको जिम्मेवार तत्कालीन ओली सरकारका पदाधिकारीमाथि कारबाही गर्ने छाँट देखिन्न। हुन त मानिस मार्नु भनेको थिएन भनेर बचाउ गरेको देखियो, तर मानिस नमार भनको नदेखिएकाले कारबाहीको भागीदार थिए। साथै नवयुवाको दुई मागमध्ये पहिलो सामाजिक सञ्जाल खोल्ने र दोस्रो माग भ्रष्टाचार अन्त्य गर्ने थियो। पहिलो माग निवर्तमान ओली सरकारले पूरा गर्‍यो भने दोस्रो माग पूरा जिम्मेवारी कार्की सरकारको थियो। तर यो सरकारले नवयुवाको दोस्रो माग पूरा गर्न न अध्यादेश जारी गर्‍यो र न कुनै पहल नै गर्‍यो। त्यति मात्र होइन, सुशासनमा पनि कार्की सरकार असफल भयो। किनभने केही वर्षअघिसम्म प्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्री आदि नियुक्त भएपछि आआफ्नो सम्पत्तिको विवरण सार्वजनिक गर्ने परिपाटी भएकोमा भ्रष्टाचार अन्त्य गर्न गठन भएको यो सरकारका प्रधानमन्त्री, मन्त्री कसैले पनि सम्पत्तिको विवरण सार्वजनिक गरेन। वास्तवमा सुशासनलाई सुदृढ पार्न यो सरकारले त सम्पत्तिको विवरण मात्र सार्वजनिक नगरेर आआफ्नो सम्पत्तिको स्रोतसमेत सार्वजनिक गर्ने हिम्मत गर्नुपर्ने थियो। फागुनमा निरर्थक निर्वाचन नवयुवाको भ्रष्टाचार अन्त्य गर्ने माग पूरा गर्न आवश्यक अध्यादेश जारी गरेको भए एफएटिएफले राखेको ग्रेलिस्टबाट समेत नेपाल हट्ने थियो। तर यसतर्फ कार्की सरकारले अग्रसरता नै देखाएन। यो स्थितिमा भ्रष्ट र अक्षम भनिएका नेताहरू नै आगामी चुनावबाट निर्वाचित हुने सम्भावना बढेको छ। जस्तै पूर्वप्रधानमन्त्री शेरबहादुर देउवा र उनकी पत्नीलाई आततायीले कुटपिट गरेर दुर्व्यवहार समेत गरेकाले देउवा फेरि पनि डडेलधुराबाट चुनावमा सहभागी भए सहानुभूतिको कारणले गर्दा अत्यधिक बहुमत पाएर निर्वाचित हुने सम्भावना उच्च छ। जुन उदाहरण ओली, प्रचण्डजस्ता नेताहरूको हकमा पनि लागु हुन सक्छ। अर्थात् कार्की सरकारको काम नै भ्रष्ट र अक्षम नेताहरूलाई दुधले नुहाइदिएर आगामी निर्वाचनपछि सत्तारुढ गराउने हो जस्तो देखिन थालेको छ। यस्तोमा भ्रष्ट र अक्षमहरूलाई कारबाही नगरीकन गरिने निर्वाचनमा मतदान गर्नु निरर्थक हुन्छ। निष्कर्ष विगत ३५ वर्षसम्म सत्तामा बसेकाहरूमाथि कुनै कारबाही नगरीकन निर्वाचन गराउँदा करोडौं खर्च गरेर चुनावमा विजयी भएर सत्तारुढ हुने शृङ्खलाले निरन्तरता पाउने हो भने नवयुवाको आन्दोलन पनि निष्फल हुनेछ। जबसम्म उम्मेदवारले निर्वाचनमा करोडौं खर्च नगरीकन निर्वाचित हुने वातावरण बन्दैन, तबसम्म देशबाट भ्रष्टाचारको अन्त्य हुन्न र नेतृत्व, नीति, प्रवृत्ति र नियतमा पनि परिवर्तन आउँदैन, देशमा आमूल परिवर्तन हुँदैन। यस्तो भएमा सुशीला कार्कीको प्रधानमन्त्री काल नै कलंकित हुनेछ। २०८२ मंसिर २० गते नागरिकमा प्रकाशित Ratna Sansar Shrestha https://nagariknews.nagariknetwork.com/social-affairs/radical-change-from-the-gen-g-movement-br-72-15.html

Meet Gen-Z Demand Forthwith

The initial demands of Gen-Z—youth in secondary school, higher secondary, and college—were clear: lift the ban on social media and curb rampant corruption and black money. Public anger against the pervasive corruption and nepotism in the country was nearing a boiling point, a sentiment shared not only by Gen-Z but by all generations. Resentment towards the political class was at its zenith. At this critical juncture, the Government of Nepal (GoN) suddenly banned 26 social media platforms, including Facebook and Instagram, effective the night of September 4. These platforms are widely used by all generations, and many citizens had successfully monetized their presence on them. This ban triggered an explosion of public anger, leading thousands of Gen-Z protesters to take to the streets carrying the national flag on September 8. In response, the Oli government revealed its inhuman face by massacring 19 innocent youths in cold blood, within a dozen hours—at the rate of one killing in less than an hour. This murderous spree was unprecedented in Nepal's history of mass movements. The ensuing explosive situation created an opportunity for rioters to vandalize, loot, and set fire to public and private properties on September 9, culminating in approximately 75 innocent deaths. Social Media On September 29, 2024, an expanded full bench of the Supreme Court, comprising nine justices, directed the GoN to regulate social media after promulgating legislation. However, instead of complying with this directive, the GoN used it as a pretext to impose a blanket ban on 26 platforms on the night of September 4, 2025, citing an older directive from November 2023. The current Chief Justice has publicly stated that the government violated the Supreme Court's directive by banning platforms without enacting a law. The ban was lifted on the night of September 8, but only after the government had already killed 19 young protesters. Gen-Z's Demands The outgoing Oli government fulfilled the first demand by lifting the social media ban. It now falls upon the Sushila Karki government to address the second demand: curbing corruption and black money. Furthermore, the tragedies of September 8 and 9 have spawned a third, critical demand: a transparent investigation into the unnecessary deaths of 75 innocents, the hundreds injured, and the widespread vandalism, arson, and looting. Ms. Karki, chosen by the Gen-Z movement to lead, initially stated she would only accept the premiership after the dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR), placing President Ram Chandra Poudel in a constitutional dilemma. As a legal and judicial person, she should have been aware that the ceremonial President can only dissolve the HoR upon the Prime Minister's recommendation. Ultimately, the President appointed her under Article 61(4) of the Constitution, which entrusts the President with protecting the Constitution. Subsequently, upon her recommendation, the President dissolved the HoR and directed her to hold elections by March 5, 2026. Thus, the Karki government bears a triple responsibility: (1) curb corruption and black money, (2) investigate the September violence, and (3) conduct free and fair HoR elections. Inquiry Commission On September 21, 2025, the GoN formed a “High-Level Judicial Inquiry Commission” under former Judge Gauri Bahadur Karki, under Inquiry Commission Act of 1969. Section 4(2) of this Act limits the commission's function to submitting a report with its opinions. As a former Chief Justice, PM Karki should know that such a commission lacks the power to prosecute or file cases, and there is no guarantee its findings will be implemented. Merely calling it "high-level" or "judicial" is ineffective. The commission chairman is an old friend of this scribe and is a patriot known for his honesty and integrity. However, without requisite authority, the problem will not be solved. History is littered with unimplemented commission reports, such as Rayamajhi and Mallik. A commission under GB Karki himself, formed a dozen years ago to address cooperative issues, and another two years ago for usury victims, failed to resolve either problem. The issue is not the individual but the feeble 1969 Act, which authorizes only a report, not action. The situation demands a powerful commission authorized not only to gather evidence but also to file cases in court. The Karki government must achieve this by promulgating a new Ordinance. Election without Curbing Corruption A key responsibility of the Karki government is to hold HoR elections by March 5, 2026. However, if elections proceed without first prosecuting the corrupt and those possessing black money, there is a high probability that the same corrupt individuals will be re-elected, as they possess the immense wealth and cadre strength (muscle and money) to win. Voters are often blamed for re-electing corrupt politicians. But in an environment of selective prosecution and impunity, it is unsurprising when voters succumb to monetary inducements and intimidation. The public's collective memory is often short-lived. If corrupt politicians return to power, the blood of the 75 martyrs will be on the hands of the Karki government, which will be cursed by the victims' families. Furthermore, the destruction of infrastructure worth Rs 80 billion will have been in vain. Therefore, the government must immediately promulgate an ordinance to establish a commission vested with the authority to prosecute corrupt figures and ban those facing corruption charges from contesting the upcoming elections. Moreover, during the September 9 riots, it was revealed that corrupt leaders had hoarded large caches of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 notes – example of black money. The Karki government should immediately demonetize these high-denomination notes to neutralize a significant portion of black money. Private Sector The riots also exposed deep public anger towards intermediaries, brokers, and certain businessmen who are perceived to operate with impunity. For instance, an honorary consul caught smuggling a thermal gun during COVID-19 using a diplomatic vehicle faced no concrete state action. While some corrupt politicians and bureaucrats have been prosecuted, the intermediaries and businessmen who bribe them have almost never been punished. This one-sided accountability—punishing the bribe-taker but not the bribe-giver—is a primary reason corruption persists. The proposed Ordinance must include provisions to prosecute all parties involved in corruption. The state may be sympathetic towards the private sector due to the losses suffered on September 9. However, these losses will likely be indemnified by insurance companies and may even extract more by collusion between insurer and insured. Failing to prosecute the corrupters within the private sector ensures a vicious cycle where the same corrupt politicians return to power. Reports indicate politicians spent up to Rs 10 million on ward-level elections; the cost for a federal MP would be staggering. Intermediaries and businessmen often finance these campaigns, later recovering ten times their investment by misusing their connections with elected officials. The state should encourage the legitimate private sector, but it must not condone those who corrupt the system. Nepal's economy is in a precarious situation. The cooperative sector (the third leg of the economy) has cheated countless citizens, while the private sector (the second leg) has been busy corrupting politicians and bureaucrats. Action against bribe-givers is essential. This is a cancerous disease that requires immediate surgical removal; otherwise, it will metastasize, threatening the entire body politic. Grey-List In February 2025, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey-listed Nepal for failing to promulgate and enforce laws against corruption and black money. Key reasons include: (1) lack of monitoring for cooperatives and real estate, (2) inaction by regulatory bodies, (3) an ineffective Money Laundering Investigation Department, and (4) a failure to investigate and seize assets acquired through crime. Nepal was previously grey-listed from 2008-2014 and was removed only after committing to legal reforms. For a decade, the politicians and bureaucrats failed to fulfill these commitments, leading to the recent grey-listing. A likely reason for this political indifference is that effective laws would land many powerful figures in jail. Therefore, the Karki government must immediately promulgate the necessary Ordinance to get Nepal off the grey list. Failure to do so risks a blacklisting, which would have dire economic consequences. Ordinance related to FATF The following provisions must be included in the FATF-related Ordinance: • Empower and enhance the capacity of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority, the National Vigilance Center, the Department of Money Laundering Investigation, and other related bodies with necessary human and material resources. • Scrutinize the wealth sources of all elected officials (National Assembly, dissolved HoR, provincial, local) and all election candidates. Prosecute if assets are disproportionate to known income. • Scrutinize the wealth sources of all individuals donating over one hundred thousand rupees annually to political parties or politicians. Prosecute if assets are disproportionate to known income. • Investigate the wealth sources of political parties. Prosecute senior officials of parties found with disproportionate assets or colluding with intermediaries to the detriment of the nation. Conclusion The Karki government has a golden opportunity to fulfill Gen-Z's demand to curb corruption and black money. By courageously promulgating the ordinance described above, it could etch its name in golden letters in Nepal’s history. It is unrealistic to expect a future party government, formed after elections, to tackle this issue, as none have done so in the past. Failure to act will see the same corrupt leaders return to power with greater impunity. Since the source of corruption lies significantly with intermediaries and corrupt businessmen, prosecuting only politicians and bureaucrats is insufficient. The legitimate private sector should be encouraged, but allowing its corrupt elements to continue unchecked is tantamount to national hara-kiri. By taking these steps, Nepal can not only prosper but also be removed from the FATF grey list. Demonetizing high-value notes would neutralize black money. Furthermore, the government must lead by example: the Prime Minister and all ministers should publicly declare their assets and their sources within days. Prime Minister Sushila Karki's government is undergoing a trial by fire. If it succeeds, it will earn the applause of all Nepalis and set the country on a path to prosperity. Otherwise, the government will not only be tarnished but risk triggering another major upheaval in the very near future. Published in People’s Review of September 25, 2025. Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA https://mypeoplesreview.com/2025/09/24/meet-gen-z-demand-forthwith/

सरकार ! यसरी गरौं भ्रष्टाचार अन्त्य

माध्यमिक, उच्च माध्यमिक, स्नातक र स्नातकोत्तर तहमा अध्ययनरत जेन–जीका युवाहरूको मुख्य दुई माग थियो– सामाजिक सञ्जालमाथिको प्रतिबन्ध हटाउने र भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गर्ने । देशमा व्याप्त भ्रष्टाचार विरुद्धको आक्रोश विस्फोटन हुने अवस्थामा थियो, जेन–जी मात्र होइन सबै पुस्ता नै चरम भ्रष्टाचारबाट आक्रोशित थिए र राज्य सञ्चालकप्रति वितृष्णा व्यापक थियो । यस्तैमा जेन–जी र युवा पुस्ता मात्र होइन सबै पुस्तामाझ प्रिय फेसबुक लगायतका २६ वटा सामाजिक सञ्जालमाथि सरकारले गत भदौ १९ गते रातिदेखि प्रतिबन्ध लगायो । स्मरणीय छ, सामाजिक सञ्जालको उपयोग गरेर कतिपयले आय आर्जनसमेत गर्छन् । यो अवस्थाले गर्दा जनआक्रोश विस्फोटन हुने सङ्घारमा पुगेको थियो । यस्तोमा हजारौं जेन–जी भदौ २३ गते नेपालको झण्डा बोकेर आन्दोलनमा उत्रिए । जसबाट आक्रोशित ओली सरकारले केही घण्टाको अन्तरालमा नै १९ जना युवाको नरसंहार गरेर आफ्नो अमानवीय अनुहार प्रदर्शन गर्‍यो । झन्डै एक घण्टाभन्दा कममा एक युवा मारिए, यति द्रुत गतिमा निर्मम हत्या यस अघिका कुनै पनि जनआन्दोलनमा भएको थिएन । यसले गर्दा सबै नेपाली आक्रोशित भएको मौका छोपेर आततायीहरूले भाद्र २४ गते तोडफोड, आगजगनी, लुटपाट, इत्यादि गर्ने क्रममा मारिनेको संख्या बढेर लगभग ७३ पुग्यो । सामाजिक सञ्जाल सर्वोच्च अदालतका नौ जना न्यायाधीश सम्मिलित इजलासले २०८१ असोज १३ मा कानुन निर्माण गरेर सामाजिक सञ्जाल नियमन गर्ने आदेश दिएको थियो । सरकारले भने सर्वोच्च अदालतको आदेश पालना गरेर कानुन निर्माण गर्नुको सट्टा २०८० मंसिरमा जारी गरेको सामाजिक सञ्जालको प्रयोग व्यवस्थित गर्ने निर्देशिकालाई आधार बनाएर भदौ १९ गते राति देखि २६ वटा सामाजिक सञ्जाल प्रतिबन्ध लगायो । सर्वोच्च अदालतले २०८१ असोजमा दिएको आदेशलाई सरकारले प्रतिबन्ध लगाउने बहाना बनायो, जुन आदेशले कानुन निर्माण गरेर सामाजिक सञ्जाल नियमन गर्ने आदेश दिएको थियो, प्रतिबन्धित गर्न भनेको थिएन । सरकारले सामाजिक सञ्जालमाथि प्रतिबन्ध लगाएर सर्वोच्च अदालतले दिएको आदेशलाई अतरिंजना गरेको भन्ने सर्वोच्च अदालतका प्रधान न्यायाधीशको भनाइ पनि सार्वजनकि भई सकेको छ । यसरी सर्वोच्च अदालतको आदेशको अतरिञ्जना गरेर प्रतिबन्धित गरिएको सामाजिक सञ्जाल भदौ २३ गते १९ जना निर्दोष युवाको नरसंहारपछि सोही राति फुकुवा गर्‍यो । जेन–जीको माग जेन–जीको दुई मुख्य मागमध्ये एउटा सामाजिक सञ्जालमाथिको प्रतिबन्ध हटाउने निर्वतमान ओली सरकारले पूरा गरिसकेको छ र भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गर्ने माग पूरा गर्ने दायित्व पूर्वप्रधान न्यायाधीश सुशीला कार्की नेतृत्वको सरकारमाथि छ । यसका साथै भदौ २३ र २४ गते अनाहक मारिएका ७३ जना र सयौं जनालाई घाइते पारिएको तथा आततायीहरूले गरेको सरकारी तथा गैरसरकारी भौतिक संरचनाको तोडफोड, आगजनी र लुटपाटको छानबिनको माग थपिएको छ । जेन–जीको छनोटमा परेका कार्कीले प्रतिनिधिसभा भंग भएपछि मात्र प्रधानमन्त्री पद ग्रहण गर्ने अडान लिएकाले राष्ट्रपति रामचन्द्र पौडेललाई संवैधानिक संकटमा पारेको थियो । किनभने आलंकारिक राष्ट्रपतिले प्रधानमन्त्रीको सिफारिसमा मात्र संविधानत: प्रतिनिधिसभा विघटन गर्न सक्थे । यो तथ्य प्रधान न्यायाधीश भइ सकेको कार्कीलाई बोध हुनुपर्ने हो । अन्तत: संविधानको धारा ६१ (४) ले राष्ट्रपतिलाई संविधान संरक्षण गर्ने प्रमुख कर्तव्य तोकेकोलाई आधार बनाएर राष्ट्रपतिले कार्कीलाई प्रधानमन्त्री नियुक्त गरे । पछि प्रधानमन्त्री कार्कीको सिफारिसमा राष्ट्रपतिले प्रतिनिधिसभा विघटन गरेर आगामी फागुन २१ गते प्रतिनिधिसभाको निर्वाचन गर्ने मिति तोकियो । यसरी कार्की सरकारको काँधमा भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गर्नाको अतिरिक्त अनाहक मारिएका र घाइते पारिएको तथा तोडफोड, आगजनी र लुटपाटको सम्बन्धमा छानबिन गर्ने एवम् प्रतिनिधिसभाको निर्वाचन गर्ने दायित्व छ । छानबिन आयोग भदौ २३ र २४ गतेको घटना छानबिन गर्न कार्की सरकारले पूर्व न्यायाधीश गौरीबहादुर कार्कीको अध्यक्षतामा एक ‘उच्चस्तरीय न्यायिक जाँचबुझ आयोग’ यही असोज ५ गते गठन गर्‍यो । यस सम्बन्धमा के विचारणीय छ भने जाँचबुझ आयोग ऐन २०२६ को दफा ३ अनुसार सर्वोच्च अदालतका प्रधान न्यायाधीशदेखि जिल्ला अदालतका न्यायाधीशसम्मको अध्यक्षतमा गठन गरिन सक्छ र सोही ऐनको दफा ४ (२) अनुसार उक्त आयोगको काम, कर्तव्य र अधिकार रायसहितको प्रतिवेदन पेश गर्ने मात्र हो । यो ऐन अनुसार गठन गरिने आयोग आफैंले अभियोजन गर्न वा मुद्दा दायर गर्न सक्दैन भन्ने तथ्य पूर्वप्रधानन्यायाधीश तथा वर्तमान प्रधानमन्त्री कार्कीलाई जानकारी नहुने कुरै छैन । यस आयोगले पेश गरेको प्रतिवेदन कार्यान्वयनमा जाने कुनै सुनिश्चितता छैन । त्यसैले नाम उच्चस्तरीय राख्दैमा वा न्यायिक आयोग भन्दैमा प्रभावकारी हुने होइन । उच्चस्तरीय न्यायिक जाँचबुझ आयोगका अध्यक्ष गौरीबहादुरजी यस पंक्तिकारको पुराना मित्र हुन् । उनी देशभक्त, राष्ट्रवादी, इमान्दार तथा निष्ठावान व्यक्ति हुन् तर सर्वाधिकार सम्पन्न आयोग गठन नगरिकन पञ्चायतीकालमा जारी गरिएको जाँचबुझ आयोग ऐन अनुसार गठित आयोगबाट एक थान प्रतिवेदनमात्र प्राप्त गर्ने गरी आयोग गठन गरेर समस्या समाधान हुने छैन । विगतमा पनि धेरै आयोगहरू बनेका थिए, रायमाझी आयोग त अझै व्यापक चर्चामा छ । सरकारलाई पेश गरिएका अधिकांश यस्ता आयोगका प्रतिवेदनहरू कार्यान्वयनमा गएन । गौरीबहादुरजीकै अध्यक्ष्यतामा सहकारी समस्या समाधान गर्न २०७० सालमा आयोग गठन गरिएको थियो भने २०८० सालमा मिटरब्याजी पीडितको समस्या समाधान गर्न पनि उनैको अध्यक्षतामा एक आयोग गठन गरिएको थियो तर यी दुवै समस्या यथावत छन् । यी केही उदाहरण मात्र हुन् । समस्या गौरीबहादुरजीमा छैन, समस्या जाँचबुझ आयोग ऐन, २०२६ मा छ, जसले आयोगलाई प्रतिवेदन पेश गर्ने मात्र अधिकार र कर्तव्य तोकेको छ । त्यसैले आवश्यकता छ, सर्वाधिकार सम्पन्न आयोगको, जसले यथेष्ट सबुत प्रमाण जुटाएर अदालतमा आफैंले मुद्दा दायर गरोस् । त्यसैले कार्की सरकारले संविधानबमोजिम अध्यादेश जारी गरेर मात्र यस्तो आयोग गठन गर्नुपर्थ्यो, जुन सापेक्षरूपमा प्रभावकारी हुन्थ्यो । भ्रष्टमाथि कारबाही बिना निर्वाचन कार्की सरकारको एउटा प्रमुख दायित्व आगामी फागुन २१ गते प्रतिनिधिसभाको निर्वाचन गर्ने हो भन्ने माथि उल्लेख गरियो तर भ्रष्टमाथि कारबाही बिना निर्वाचन गराइएमा आगामी निर्वाचनबाट पनि तिनै भ्रष्ट व्यक्ति नै फेरि निर्वाचित भएर आउने सम्भावना उच्च छ । किनभने चुनाव जित्न अत्यावश्यक अकुत सम्पत्ति र कार्यकर्ता तिनैसँग छ । हुन पनि यी भ्रष्ट जो अक्षम पनि हुन्, तिनै पटक–पटक चुनाव जितेर आउनमा मतदातालाई दोष दिने गरिन्छ । तर भ्रष्टाचारीमाथि चयनमुखी अभियोजन र सजाय हुने गरेको छ भने सबैले चिनेका भ्रष्टमाथि कारबाही र दण्डित गरिएको छैन । यस्तोमा मतदाताले भ्रष्टलाई नै मतदान गर्नु आश्चर्यजनक कुरा होइन । स्मरणीय छ, आम जनताको स्मरण शक्ति अल्पकालीन हुन्छ । फागुन २१ गतेको निर्वाचनबाट यिनै भ्रष्ट नेता चुनिएर सांसद बने भने नरसंहार गरिएका ७५ जनाले बगाएको रगत खेर जाने छ र कार्की सरकार ती शहीद र तिनको परिवारबाट अभिशप्त हुने छ । साथै ८० अर्ब रुपैयाँको भौतिक संरचना र मालवस्तु ध्वस्त भएको पनि अनाहक हुनेछ । त्यसैले कार्की सरकारले तत्काल अध्यादेश जारी गरेर भ्रष्टाचारीमाथि प्रभावकारी कारबाही गरेर अभियोजन गर्ने गरेर शक्ति सम्पन्न आयोग गठन गर्ने व्यवस्था गरेर यी भ्रष्टले फेरि निर्वाचनमा उम्मेदवार बन्न नपाउने गर्न जरुरी छ । साथै भदौ २४ गतेको घटनामा यी भ्रष्ट नेताहरूको आलिशान निवासहरूबाट एक हजार र पाँच सय रुपैयाँका थुप्रै नोट लुकाएर राखेको सार्वजनिक भई सकेको छ । त्यसैले कार्की सरकारले तुरुन्त हाल प्रचलनमा रहेका एक हजार र पाँच सय रुपैयाँका नोट खारेज गर्नु पर्छ । यस्तो गर्दा कालो धन केही हदसम्म नियन्त्रणमा पनि आउँछ । निजी क्षेत्र जेन–जी लगायतको भ्रष्टाचारी विरुद्धको आक्रोशलाई भजाएर आततायीले निजी क्षेत्रलाई भदौ २४ गते तोडफोड, आगजनी, लुटपाट इत्यादिको निशाना बनाए । निशानामा पर्नेकोमा उदाहरण छन्, कुनै एक देशको मानार्थ वाणिज्यदूत, जसले निलो नम्बर प्लेट भएको गाडी दुरुपयोग गरी कोभिड संक्रमणको समयमा ज्वरो नाप्ने यन्त्र (थर्मल गन) तस्करी गर्दै गर्दा रंगेहात गिरफ्तारीमा परेका थिए । उनीमाथि राज्यले न ठोस कारबाही गर्‍यो, न दण्डित नै । यावत् कारणले निजी क्षेत्रका दलाल, बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्टलगायत केही व्यापारीप्रति जनमानसमा ठुलो क्लेश थियो र अझ पनि छ । आततायीहरूले यसै क्लेशलाई भजाएर तोडफोड, आगजनी र लुटपाट गरे । नेपालमा यदाकदा भ्रष्ट नेता र कर्मचारीलाई कारबाही गरेर दण्डित गरेमा पनि नेता र कर्मचारीलाई भ्रष्ट बनाउने बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारीलाई अहिलेसम्म कारबाहीको दायरामा पारिएको छैन । यस्तोमा घुस खानेलाई मात्र कारबाही गरेर घुस ख्वाउनेलाई उन्मुक्ति दिने गरिएकै कारणले भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रणमा आउन नसकेको हो । त्यसैले नेता र कर्मचारीलाई भ्रष्ट बनाउने बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारी आदि सबैलाई पनि कारबाही र सजायको दायरा ल्याउने गरेर माथि उल्लेख गरिएको अध्यादेश जारी गरिनुपर्छ । निजी क्षेत्रले भदौ २४ गतेको तोडफोड, आगजनी, लुटपाटबाट धेरै क्षति व्यहोरेकाले उनीहरूमाथि भ्रष्टाचारमा कारबाही गर्नु हुन्न भन्ने राज्य सञ्चालक लगायत केहीको सहानुभूतिपूर्ण अवधारणा हुन सक्छ । निजी क्षेत्रले यस्तो क्षतिबापत बिमा कम्पनीबाट सोधभर्ना लिने नै छन्, कम से कम क्षति भएको रकम बराबर, अझ मौका मिले साँठगाँठ गरेर त्यसभन्दा बढी पनि । त्यसैले नेता र कर्मचारीलाई भ्रष्ट बनाउने बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारीलाई कारबाही नगर्ने हो भने भ्रष्ट नेताहरूको सर्वस्व जफत गरे पनि अर्को निर्वाचनमा यिनै भ्रष्ट नेताले करोडौं खर्च गरेर सत्तारुढ हुने र भ्रष्टाचारमा लिप्त हुने कुचक्रले निरन्तरता पाउँछ । स्मरणीय छ, वडा अध्यक्ष पदमा निर्वाचित हुन मात्रै एक करोड रुपैयाँसम्म खर्च गरेको सार्वजनिक भएको छ । संघीय सांसद पदमा निर्वाचित हुन गरिने खर्च अनुमान गर्दा पनि आङ सिरिङ्ङ हुन्छ । यसरी गरिने खर्च उम्मेदवारहरूले बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारीबाटै लिने हुन् । कमैले मात्र आफूले जोडेको सम्पत्ति बेचेर निर्वाचनमा उम्मेदवारी दिएका हुन्छन् । यसरी उम्मेदवारको निर्वाचन खर्च व्यहोर्ने बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारीले ती उम्मेदवार निर्वाचित भएमा आफ्ना लगानीको दशौं गुणा निर्वाचित पदाधिकारीलाई गलत काममा लगाएर असुल्छन् । निश्चय नै निजी क्षेत्रलाई प्रोत्साहित गरिनुपर्छ तर नेता र कर्मचारीवर्गलाई भ्रष्ट बनाउनेलाई दुरुत्साहित गर्नुहुन्न । यस्तै नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रको तीन वटा खुट्टामध्येको तेस्रो खुट्टा सहकारीहरूले सर्वसाधारणको रकम अपचलन गरेकैले देश विषम आर्थिक परिस्थितिमा पुगेकोमा शंका छैन । साथै अर्थतन्त्रको दोस्रो खुट्टा मानिएको निजी क्षेत्रले भ्रष्टाचारको मलजल गरेकाले नेपालबाट भ्रष्टाचारको उन्मूलन हुन नसकेको हो । यस्तोमा निजी क्षेत्रप्रति अनावश्यक सहृदयता वा सहानुभूति देखाएर देशमा भ्रष्टाचारको खेतीलाई निरन्तरता राख्न दिनु बुद्धिमानी होइन । यो एक शल्यक्रिया गर्नैपर्ने जटिल रोग हो र यसलाई माया गरेर राखे रोगले अझ व्यापक रूप लिन सक्छ । त्यसैले कुहिएको अंग काटेर फ्याँके मात्र बाँकी अंग सुरक्षित रहन्छ, अन्यथा देशले अकल्पनीय दुर्घटना व्यहोर्न सक्छ । ग्रे–लिस्ट फाइनान्सियल एक्सन टास्क फोर्स (एफएटिएफ) नामक अन्तरसरकारी निकायले नेपाललाई २०८१ फागुनमा दोहर्‍याएर ग्रे–लिस्ट राखेको छ । कारण हुन्: (१) सहकारी र घरजग्गा कारोबारमा निगरानी नहुनु, (२) राष्ट्र बैंक, धितोपत्र बोर्ड, बिमा प्राधिकरणबाट कारबाही नहुनु, (३) सम्पत्ति शुद्धीकरण अनुसन्धान विभाग प्रभावहीन हुनु, (४) कानुनमा नै जिम्मेवारी छरपस्ट पारेर अनुसन्धानलाई कमजोर बनाइनु, (५) नेता तथा उच्च पदस्थ कर्मचारीको सम्पत्तिमाथि निगरानी नहुनु र (६) अनुसन्धान र अभियोजन नहुनु तथा कसुरजन्य सम्पत्ति पनि आरोपीले नै उपयोग गरिरहनु । अर्थात् कालो धन र भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गर्ने प्रभावकारी कानुन नेपाल सरकारले निर्माण नगरेको र ती कानुन प्रभावकारी रूपमा कार्यान्वयन नगरेकाले ग्रे–लिस्ट परेको हो । नेपाल २०६९ सालमा पनि नेपाल ग्रे–लिस्टमा परेकोमा तोकिएको कानुन निर्माण गर्ने प्रतिबद्धता जनाएकाले २०७१ सालमा ग्रे–लिस्टबाट निकालिएको थियो । नेपालका राज्य सञ्चालकले यसतर्फ एक दशकसम्म ध्यान नदिएकाले फेरि नेपाल ग्रे–लिस्टमा परेको हो । हुन त यस्ता प्रभावकारी कानुन निर्माण गरेर कार्यान्वयन गरिएको भए ती नेता कारागारमा हुन्थे, त्यसैले तिनीहरू प्रभावकारी कानुन निर्माण गर्नेतर्फ उदासीन रहे । तसर्थ कार्की सरकारले तत्काल ग्रे–लिस्टबाट नेपाललाई निस्कनको लागि आवश्यक अध्यादेश जारी गर्न वान्छनीय छ । अन्यथा नेपाल कालो सूचीमा अवनति हुने अवश्यंभावी छ, जसपछि नेपालको आर्थिक समस्या अझ धेरै भयावह हुनेछ । भ्रष्टाचार र कालो धन नियन्त्रण गर्ने अध्यादेश माथि उल्लिखित अध्यादेशमा निम्नानुसार व्यवस्था अनिवार्य रूपमा गर्नुपर्नेछ: ● अख्तियार दुरुपयोग अनुसन्धान आयोग, राष्ट्रिय सतर्कता केन्द्र, सम्पत्ति शुद्धीकरण विभाग लगायतका निकायहरूको सशक्तिकरण गर्ने र यी निकायलाई आवश्यक जनशक्ति र स्रोत साधन उपलब्ध गराउने । ● हाल कायम राष्ट्रियसभा र विघटित प्रतिनिधिसभाका सबै सांसदहरू लगायत सबै निर्वाचित पदाधिकारी र ती पदहरूको लागि उम्मेदवारी दिएर निर्वाचनमा भाग लिएका सबैको सम्पत्तिको स्रोत जाँच गरेर अस्वाभाविक सम्पत्ति देखिएमा कारबाही गर्ने । ● राजनीतिक दलहरूलाई र नेताहरूलाई एक वर्षमा एक लाखभन्दा बढी चन्दा दिने सबैको सम्पत्तिको स्रोत जाँच गरेर अस्वाभाविक सम्पत्ति देखिएमा कारबाही गर्ने । ● राजनीतिक दलहरूको सम्पत्तिको स्रोत जाँच गरेर अस्वाभाविक सम्पत्ति देखिएमा र ती दलहरूले बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारी आदिसँग साँठगाँठ गरेर सम्पत्ति जोडेको सिद्ध भए ती दलका उच्च पदाधिकारीहरूलाई कारबाही गर्ने । समग्रमा जेन–जीको भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गर्ने माग पूरा गर्ने सुवर्ण अवसर कार्की सरकारलाई प्राप्त भएको छ । खुट्टा नकमाइकन माथि सुझाव दिइए अनुसार अध्यादेश जारी गरेर भ्रष्टाचार निर्मुल पार्ने काम यो सरकारले गरे यसको नाम इतिहासमा सुवर्ण अक्षरले लेखिने छ । किनभने आगामी निर्वाचनपछि निर्माण हुने दलीय सरकारले भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रणको काम गर्ने कल्पना समेत गर्न सकिन्न, न विगतमा नै गर्‍यो । अन्यथा यिनै भ्रष्ट नेता नै फेरि फागुन २१ गते गरिने निर्वाचनमा निर्वाचित भएर आई अझ बढी भ्रष्टाचार गर्नेछन् । साथै नेता तथा कर्मचारीले ठूलो रकम रुखमा टिपेर ल्याउने होइन, तिनीहरूलाई ठूलो रकम घुस दिने बिचौलिया, कमिसन एजेन्ट, दलाल, व्यापारी आदि नै हुन् । तिनीहरूलाई चोखै राखेर नेता र कर्मचारीमाथि मात्र कारबाही गरिएमा रातभरि रुङ्दा पनि कुन्नि को हो जिम्दै भने झैं भ्रष्टाचार जिउँदै रहनेछ । निजी क्षेत्रलाई देशको कानुन अनुसार सुविधा दिएर, सहजीकरण गरेर प्रोत्साहित पारिनुपर्छ तर नेता र कर्मचारीलाई भ्रष्ट बनाउने काम गर्न दिई राख्नु आत्मघाती हो । माथि सुझाव दिइए अनुसार अध्यादेश जारी गरेर भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गरिएमा देश समृद्ध बन्ने मात्र होइन ग्रे–लिस्टबाट अवनति भएर कालो सूचीमा जानुको सट्टा ग्रे–लिस्टबाट नै देशले मुक्ति पाउने छ । साथै माथि भनिए अनुसार तुरुन्त एक हजार र पाँच सयका नोटहरू खारेज गरिएमा ठूलो परिमाणको कालो धन निष्क्रिय हुनेछ । साथै यो सरकार आफैंले नै उदाहरण बनेर देखाए मात्र भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण गर्न सहज हुन्छ । त्यसैले प्रधानमन्त्री र सबै मन्त्रीहरूले केही दिन भित्र आ–आफ्नो सम्पत्ति विवरण सार्वजनिक गर्नाको साथै ती सम्पत्तिको स्रोत पनि सार्वजनिक गर्ने हिम्मत गर्नुपर्छ । अन्तमा प्रधानमन्त्री सुशीला कार्कीको सरकार अहिले अग्नी परीक्षामा छ । यो परीक्षामा कार्की सरकार सफल भएमा सारा नेपालीले यो सरकारको जय मनाउने छ, देश समृद्धिको बाटो अगाडि लम्कने छ । अन्यथा यो सरकार कलंकित हुने मात्र होइन यो देशमा अर्को ठूलो उथलपुथल निम्तिने खतरा छ । २०८२ असोज ७ गते नागरिकमा प्रकाशित Ratna Sansar Shrestha https://nagariknews.nagariknetwork.com/opinion/government-let-s-end-corruption-like-this-16-27.html?click_from=just_in

बहुदलीय व्यवस्था नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रका लागि अभिशाप

आर्थिक मन्दीको दबाबका कारण नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रले अहिले महŒवपूर्ण चुनौतीहरूको सामना गरिरहेको छ। विशेषतः उपभोक्ताको क्रयशक्तिमा आएको ह्रासले मागमा कमी आएको छ र उद्योग–व्यवसाय पूर्ण क्षमतामा सञ्चालित छैनन्। राज्य सञ्चालक भने विप्रेषणको आप्रवाह बढेर वृद्धि भएको विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति हेर्दै आह्लादित छन् र सेयर बजार तीन हजार बिन्दुमाथि पुगेकोमा दंग छन्। स्मरणीय छ, कोरोना सङ्क्रमण चुलिएर अर्थतन्त्र रसातल सन्निकट पुग्दा पनि कीर्तिमान कायम गरेको नेपालको सेयर बजारले अर्थतन्त्रको अवस्था ठिकसँग चित्रण गर्न सक्दैन। अहिले पनि अर्थतन्त्र लगभग थला परेको समयमा चुलिएको सेयर बजारले राज्य सञ्चालकलाई गिज्याएको छ। यस पृष्ठभूमिमा अर्थतन्त्रका विभिन्न सूचकांकको गहन विश्लेषण वाञ्छनीय छ। बाह्य आर्थिक सूचकांक नेपाल राष्ट्र बैंकले आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१/८२ को ११ महिनामा बाह्य आर्थिक सूचकांकमा आएको सुधारलाई आधार बनाएर देशको आर्थिक अवस्था सुध्रिएको भाष्य निर्माण गरेको छ। मुख्यतः विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति बढेकोलाई आधार बनाइएको हो। आर्थिक वर्ष २०८०/८१ को ११ महिनामा विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति १५ अर्ब २७ करोड अमेरिकी डलर भएकोमा आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१/८२ को ११ महिनामा २२.२ प्रतिशतले बढेर १८ अर्ब ६५ करोड अमेरिकी डलर पुगेको हो। विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति बढ्नुमा देशमा थप औद्योगिकीकरण भएर वा उत्पादन वृद्धि भई आयात प्रतिस्थापन भएर वा निर्यात वृद्धि भएकाले होइन। आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१/८२ का लागि घोषित मौद्रिक नीतिले कम्तीमा सात महिनाको वस्तु तथा सेवा आयात धान्न पर्याप्त हुने विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति कायम राख्ने लक्ष्य लिएकोमा आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१/८२ को ११ महिनामा विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति १४.७ महिनाको वस्तु तथा सेवा आयात धान्न पर्याप्त रहेछ। यस सम्बन्धी मौद्रिक नीति असफल भएकोमा पनि रमाउन सक्ने दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण अवस्था छ। नेपालका बैंक तथा वित्तीय संस्थाहरूमा आठ खर्ब ६९ अर्ब रूपैयाँ (६.३४ अर्ब अमेरिकी डलर) लगानीयोग्य रकम थुप्रिएको छ। ऋणको माग कम भएकाले यस्तो भएको हो, जसले वित्तीय प्रणालीलाई अस्थिर बनाउन थालेको छ। अर्कोतिर कर्जा–निक्षेप अनुपात भने ह्रास भएर ६२.५९ प्रतिशत पुगेको छ, जुन राष्ट्र बैंकले तोकेको ९० प्रतिशतभन्दा झन्डै ३० प्रतिशत विन्दुले कम हो, जुन विसंगति र विकृति हो। राष्ट्र बैंकसँग अत्यधिक विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति रहनु र बैंक तथा वित्तीय संस्थाहरूमा ठुलो मात्रामा लगानीयोग्य रकम थुप्रिनु र कर्जा–निक्षेप अनुपात तोकिएको भन्दा झन्डै ३० प्रतिशत बिन्दुले कम हुनु नेपालको अर्थतन्त्र सिकिस्त बिरामी भएको लक्षण हो। कुपोषित व्यक्तिको पेटमा अनावश्यक बोसो र तरल पदार्थ जम्मा भएर पेट मात्र बडेमानको हुन्छ भने बाँकी शरीरका हात–खुट्टा, छातीलगायतका अंगहरू हाड–छाला मात्र बाँकी रहेर नरकंकाल जस्तो देखिन्छ। नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रको पेटमा अनावश्यक रूपमा ठुलो मात्रामा तरलता (राष्ट्र बैंकसँग रहेको विदेशी मुद्रा सञ्चिति र बैंक तथा वित्तीय संस्थाहरूमा थुप्रिएको लगानीयोग्य रकम) छ, जबकि बाँकी आर्थिक क्षेत्र नरकंकालजस्तो छ। आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१/८२ को ११ महिनामा विप्रेषण आप्रवाह ११.२५ अर्ब अमेरिकी डलर भएकोमा गत वर्षको सोही अवधिमा यो ९.९८ अर्ब अमेरिकी डलर थियो। अर्थतन्त्र बिरामी पर्नुका प्रमुख कारण नेपाल प्रवेश गर्ने विप्रेषणलाई उत्पादनशील उपयोगमा लगाउन राज्य सञ्चालक असफल हुनु हो। दक्षिण कोरियाजस्ता धेरै देशले आफ्नो देशमा आप्रवाह हुने विप्रेषणलाई उत्पादनशील उपयोगमा लगाएर आर्थिक समृद्धि हासिल गरेको हो। विस्मृतिमा नपरोस्, २००९ सालतिर नेपालले दक्षिण कोरियालाई सहयोग गर्न सकेको थियो। बाह्य आर्थिक सूचकांकहरूमा आएको सुधारका कारण जागेको उत्साहले देशलाई लाभ भएको छैन। यो त सुन्निएकोलाई मोटाएको भन्ने भ्रमजस्तै हो। आन्तरिक आर्थिक सूचकांक बाह्य आर्थिक सूचकांकहरूसँग तादात्म्य राखेर आन्तरिक आर्थिक सूचकांकहरूमा पनि सुधार आएको भए अर्थतन्त्र स्वस्थ, सबल र सुदृढ हुन्थ्यो। यस पृष्ठभूमिमा २०३६ सालदेखि २०८१ सालसम्मको आन्तरिक आर्थिक सूचकांकहरूको तुलनात्मक विवेचना वाञ्छनीय छ। जिडिपीमा उद्योग क्षेत्रको योगदान उद्योग क्षेत्र अर्थतन्त्रको मेरुदण्ड हो र २०४६ सालमा नेपालको कुल गार्हस्थ्य उत्पादन (जिडिपी) मा उद्योग क्षेत्रको योगदान १८.४ प्रतिशत थियो। तर पञ्चायती व्यवस्था खारेजीपछि ल्याइएको बहुदलीय व्यवस्थामा ३० वटा सरकारी स्वामित्वका उद्योगहरूको निजीकरण गरिएकोमा १९ वटा बन्द भए भने सञ्चालनमा रहेका ११ मध्ये पाँच वटा मात्र मुनाफामा छन्। यसले गर्दा जिडिपीमा उद्योग क्षेत्रको योगदान क्रमिक रूपमा घट्दै गएको हो। निजीकरण आफैंमा खराब होइन, तर निजीकरण गरिएका ती उद्योग सञ्चालनमा रहने सुनिश्चिता गर्न नसक्नु राज्य सञ्चालकको अकर्मण्यता हो। सरकार आफैंले उद्योग सञ्चालन गर्ने परिपाटी नै बन्द गर्दैे उद्योग सञ्चालन गर्ने जिम्मा निजी क्षेत्र एक्लैको हो भन्ने भाष्य निर्माण गरियो। तर निजी क्षेत्र मुख्यतया छिटो र अत्यधिक मुनाफा आर्जनमा केन्द्रित भएर आयात व्यापारमा संलग्न छन्, उद्योग सञ्चालनमा रुचि छैन। केहीले उद्योग सञ्चालन गरेकोमा पनि सूर्यमुखी तेल, भटमासको तेल, पाम आयलजस्ता आयातमा अत्यधिक निर्भर उद्योग छन्, जसले नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रमा १० प्रतिशत पनि मूल्य अभिवृद्धि गर्दैन। आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१÷८२ मा दुई खर्ब ७७ अर्ब रूपैयाँको निर्यात भएकोमा एक खर्ब १९ करोड रूपैयाँका (४३ प्रतिशत) यस्ता वस्तुहरू थिए। वास्तवमा यस्ता उद्योगले नेपाल र भारतको सरकारी राजस्व दोहन गरेर मुनाफाखोरी गर्छन्। यी उद्योगले विदेशबाट लगभग पूर्ण प्रशोधित कच्चा पदार्थ आयात गरेर नेपालमा थोरै प्रशोधन गरेर भारत निर्यात गर्दा भारतले तेस्रो देशबाट आयातमा लगाएको महसुलभन्दा निकै कम मात्र आयात महसुल नेपालमा तिरेर आयात गरी पुनः निर्यात गर्दा नेपाल र भारतले दिएको महसुल छुटको दुरूपयोग गर्छन्, जुन सरकारी राजस्वको दोहन हो। यस्तै कारण २०४६ सालको तुलनामा आर्थिक वर्ष २०७८/७९ मा जिडिपीमा उद्योग क्षेत्रको योगदानमा ह्रास आई १४.२४ प्रतिशतमा झरेकोमा आर्थिक वर्ष २०७९/८० मा घटेर १३.६ प्रतिशत पुग्यो भने २०८०/८१ मा त १३ प्रतिशतमा सङ्कुचित भयो। आर्थिक वर्ष २०८१/८२ मा यो थप घटेर १२ प्रतिशतमा सीमित हुने बजेट भाषणमा प्रक्षेपण गरिएको छ। यसैको फलस्वरूप देशमा बेरोजगारी व्याप्त छ र नेपालीहरू रोजगारीका लागि विदेशमा शोषित हुन बाध्य छन्। लगभग ६० लाख नेपाली खाडी, पूर्वी एसियालगायतका देशमा कार्यरत छन् भने ४० लाख नेपाली भारतमा कार्यरत छन् भनिन्छ। कुल जनसंख्याको एकतिहाइ अन्य विदेशमा श्रम गर्छन्। कच्चा पदार्थ र ऊर्जा जस्तै जनशक्ति निर्यात गरेर कुनै पनि देश समृद्ध भएको छैन र त्यस्ता देशको अर्थतन्त्र स्वस्थ, सबल र सुदृढ हुँदैन। उद्योग क्षेत्रको जिडिपीमा योगदानको महŒव बुझ्नका लागि बहुदलीय व्यवस्था भएका केही दक्षिण एसियाली देशहरूसँग तुलना उपयुक्त हुन्छ। श्रीलंकामा यो अनुपात २५.५९ प्रतिशत, भारतमा २७.६२ प्रतिशत, बंगलादेशमा ३७.९५ प्रतिशत छ। २०८१ साउनमा बंगलादेशका तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री शेख हसिना खेदिनुको कारण आर्थिक संकट थिएन, आरक्षणसम्बन्धी जनआक्रोश थियो। त्यहाँको अर्थतन्त्रको मेरुदण्ड स्वस्थ, सबल र सुदृढ नै थियो। यद्यपि, २०७९ असारमा श्रीलंकाका तत्कालीन राष्ट्रपति गोटाबाया राजापक्षे र उनको परिवार श्रीलंकाबाट निश्चय नै आर्थिक समस्याका कारण खेदिएको थियो, तरलता संकटले गर्दा (बहुराष्ट्रिय वित्तीय संस्थाहरूको साँवा ब्याज तिर्न असफल भएर)। तथापि श्रीलंकाको अर्थतन्त्रको मेरुदण्ड स्वस्थ, सबल र सुदृढ भएकाले तरलता संकट समाधान हुँदै गएको छ। धेरैजसो नेपाली भुटानसँग नेपालको तुलना गर्छन्। तर, भुटानको यो अनुपात ४९.९६ प्रतिशत छ भन्ने ज्ञान तिनलाई छैन। व्यापार घाटा पञ्चायत व्यवस्थाको अन्तिम दशकमा औसत व्यापार घाटा १२ प्रतिशत मात्र थियो। बहुदलीय व्यवस्था लागु भएको पहिलो दशक (२०४६–२०५६) मा बढेर औसत १७.१ प्रतिशत पुग्यो। माओवादी विद्रोहको दशकमा थोरै सुध्रिएर औसत १६.६ प्रतिशत रह्यो। दुर्भाग्यवश, नेपाल गणतन्त्र बनेपछिको दशक (२०६६–२०७६) मा यो थप बढेर औसत २७.५ प्रतिशत पुग्यो। संघीयता काल (२०७६–२०८१) मा अझ बढेर औसत २९.५ प्रतिशत पुग्यो। यसले पञ्चायत व्यवस्थाको अन्तिम दशकमा नेपाल अपेक्षाकृत आत्मनिर्भर रहेकोमा यसको खारेजीपछि राजनीतिक प्रणालीमा आएको प्रत्येक परिवर्तनपछि औद्योगिकीकरण नहुनु र औद्योगिक उत्पादन पनि नबढ्नाले नेपालको आयातमाथि निर्भरता क्रमिक रूपमा बढ्यो। अहिले प्रचलनमा रहेको संविधानको छैठौं प्रस्तावनामा ‘समाजवादप्रति प्रतिबद्ध रही समृद्ध राष्ट्र निर्माण गर्न’ र धारा ५० को उपधारा (३) मा ‘समाजवाद उन्मुख अर्थतन्त्र विकास गर्ने’ उल्लेख छ। तर व्यवहारमा समाजवाद यति धेरै उपेक्षित छ कि सर्वोच्च अदालतको संवैधानिक इजलासले २०८० वैशाखमा माथिल्लो कर्णाली जलविद्युत् आयोजना सम्बन्धमा गरेको फैसलामा ‘नेपालको संविधानले खुला अर्थतन्त्रको मान्यतालाई आत्मसात गरेको’ भन्ने वाक्यांश उल्लेख गर्ने त्रुटि गरियो। हुन पनि विगत ३५ वर्षका राज्य सञ्चालकहरूले यथार्थमा छाडा र स्वच्छन्द खुला अर्थतन्त्र नीति अवलम्बन गरेकाले देशको आर्थिक स्थिति यसरी खस्कँदै गएको हो। खुला अर्थतन्त्र नीति आफैंमा खराब होइन तर छाडा र स्वच्छन्द हुनाले अत्यधिक विकृति र विसङ्गतिले देशको अर्थतन्त्र जर्जर बनायो। पञ्चायती व्यवस्थामा मिश्रित अर्थव्यवस्था थियो र राज्यले पनि उद्योग सञ्चालन गरेर उत्पादन गर्नाले रोजगारी पनि सिर्जना हुन्थ्यो। बहुदलीय व्यवस्थाको ३५ वर्षमा राज्यले न उद्योग स्थापना गर्‍यो न दिगो रोजगारी सिर्जना गर्नमा ध्यान दियो। तर फाटेको चप्पल लगाएर हिँड्ने नेताहरू भने धनाढ्य बनेका छन्। पुँजीगत खर्च २०३६–२०४६ मा औसत पुँजीगत खर्च ६७.२ प्रतिशत थियो। २०४६–२०५६ मा औसत ५६.९ प्रतिशतमा झर्‍यो। माओवादी द्वन्द्वको दशकमा औसत ३०.७ प्रतिशतमा खुम्चियो। २०६६/७६ मा अझ घटेर औसत २३.७ प्रतिशत पुग्यो। २०७६–२०८१ मा त औसत १७ प्रतिशत मात्र थियो। बहुदलीय व्यवस्थाको ३५ वर्षमा पुँजीगत खर्च ५० प्रतिशत बिन्दुले घट्दा बेरोजगारीमा व्यापक वृद्धि भयो। पुँजीगत खर्चसँगै थप रोजगारी सिर्जना हुन्थ्यो भने निर्माण सामग्रीको खपत बढ्थ्यो र निर्माण सामग्री उद्योग उच्च क्षमतामा सञ्चालन हुन्थ्यो, जसले थप रोजगारी सिर्जना हुन्थ्यो र अर्थतन्त्र पनि फस्टाउँथ्यो। तर, यस्तो भएन। अर्को शब्दमा पुँजीगत खर्चले सर्वसाधारणको क्रयशक्ति बढाउँथ्यो, तर घट्दा विपरीत भयो। साथै गरिएका धेरै पुँजीगत खर्च अनुत्पादक एवं प्रत्युत्पादक थिए। जस्तै कम सञ्चालन हुने सभाहलहरू निर्माण गरिए भने भ्युटावर (धरहरासमेत), स्वागतद्वार, सालिक, स्तम्भजस्ता अनुत्पादक भौतिक संरचना निर्माण गरिए। अझ लहड र रहर वा सनकको भरमा भैरहवा र पोखरामा अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय विमानस्थलहरू निर्माण गरिए, जुन सञ्चालनमा आउन सकेनन्। भैरहवा अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय विमानस्थलमा गरिएको लगानी ६१ अर्ब रूपैयाँ र पोखराको २५ अर्ब रूपैयाँ अनुत्पादक मात्र भएन, प्रत्युत्पादक नै भयो, यी सञ्चालनमा नआए पनि सञ्चालन, मर्मतसम्भार खर्च ब्यहोर्नु परेकाले। यसरी झन्डै एक खर्ब रूपैयाँ प्रत्युत्पादक रूपमा पुँजीगत खर्च गरियो। यस्तै कारणहरूले नेपालको अर्थतन्त्र समस्याग्रस्त भयो। श्रीलंकामा निर्माण गरिएका मट्टाला अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय विमानस्थल, हामबानटोटा बन्दरगाहजस्ता भौतिक संरचना सञ्चालनमा आउन नसकी तिनका लागि बहुराष्ट्रिय वित्तीय संस्थाहरूबाट लिइएको ऋणको साँवाब्याजको किस्ता तिर्न नसकेकाले अघि उल्लेखित तरलताको संकट आएको कारण त्यहाँका तत्कालीन राष्ट्रपति राजापक्षे र उनको परिवार खेदिएको थियो। औसत कर राजस्वको भार पञ्चायत व्यवस्थाको अन्तिम दशकमा जनतालाई औसत कर राजस्वको भार ८.७ प्रतिशत मात्र थियो। तर २०४६–२०५६ सालमा यो बढेर औसत १०.१ प्रतिशत पुग्यो भने माओवादी द्वन्द्वको दशकमा औसत ११.९ प्रतिशत पुग्यो। गणतन्त्रको पहिलो दशकमा औसत १७.१ प्रतिशत पुग्यो भने देश संघीयतामा गएपछि २०७६–२०८१ मा चुलिएर औसत २० प्रतिशत पुग्यो। जनतालाई कर राजस्वको भार बढी हुँदा क्रयशक्तिमा ह्रास आउँछ, नेपालमा सर्वसाधारणको क्रयशक्ति कम हुनुमा यो अर्को कारक हो। नेपालको अन्य कुनै आयस्रोत नहुनाले जनतालाई कर राजस्वको भार बढी भएको हो। पञ्चायत कालमा सञ्चालित उद्योगहरूबाट प्राप्त हुने लाभांश पनि राज्यको आयस्रोत थियो, जुन निजीकरण पछि सुक्यो। भुटान सरकारले भने खेर जाने बिजुलीबाट सन् २०२४ मा बिटक्वाइन उत्खनन गरी बिक्री गर्दा तीन करोड ३५ लाख डलर (चार अर्ब ६०.४९ करोड रूपैयाँ) कमायो भने एक अर्ब डलर (एक खर्ब ३७.४६ अर्ब रूपैयाँ) मूल्य पर्ने बिटक्वाइन मौज्दातमा छ। तर नेपालका राज्य सञ्चालकको सोच बिजुली निर्यात गर्नुभन्दा माथि उठ्न सकेन। स्मरणीय छ, माथि उल्लिखित भारतमा जनतालाई कर राजस्वको भार ६.७२ प्रतिशत मात्र छ भने बंगलादेश, श्रीलंका र भुटानमा क्रमशः ७.६४, ९.८५ र १२.२८ प्रतिशत छ। आसन्न जोखिम राष्ट्र बैंकको अभिलेखअनुसार बैंकिङ प्रणालीमा खराब कर्जा औसतमा ५.२४ प्रतिशत पुग्यो, जुन अघिल्लो वर्ष ३.९८ प्रतिशत थियो। साथै कालोसूचीमा परेका ऋणीहरूको संख्या पनि बढ्दै गएकाले यी संस्थाहरू चरम दबाबमा छन्। अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मुद्रा कोषको अनौपचारिक अनुमानअनुसार खराब कर्जाको अनुपात लगभग १५ प्रतिशत छ। यसको अतिरिक्त गैरबैंकिङ सम्पत्ति नै ४५.७ अर्ब रूपैयाँ बराबर पुगेको छ। वर्तमान अवस्थामा बैंक तथा वित्तीय संस्थाहरूले खराब कर्जा र गैरबैंकिङ सम्पत्ति उल्लेखनीय रूपमा घटाउने प्रयास गरेको खण्डमा शिथिल भएको घर जग्गा बजार रसातलमा नै पुगेर अर्थतन्त्रको जोखिम थप बढ्नेछ। यो रोक्न राज्य सञ्चालकबाट हस्तक्षेप आवश्यकता छ, तर अहिलेसम्मका क्रियाकलाप हेर्दा केही गरिने अपेक्षा गर्नु मूर्खता हुन्छ। भ्रष्टाचार र दण्डहीनता नै अभिशाप पञ्चायती व्यवस्थाको अन्तिम दशकका आर्थिक सूचकांकहरूको तुलनामा बहुदलीय व्यवस्थाको ३५ वर्षमा देशको आर्थिक अवस्था क्रमिक रूपमा दयनीय हुँदै गएको प्रस्टिन्छ र बहुदलीय व्यवस्था नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रका लागि अभिशापसिद्ध भएको देखिन्छ। तर बहुदलीय व्यवस्था आफैंमा खराब होइन। संसारका एक सय ९५ देशमध्ये एक सय वटा देशमा बहुदलीय व्यवस्था छ र जर्मनी, नेदरल्यान्ड्सजस्ता विकसित देशमा बहुदलीय व्यवस्था सफल देखिन्छ। माथि उल्लिखित बंगलादेश, भारत, भुटान र श्रीलंकामा पनि बहुदलीय व्यवस्था नै छ, तर तिनमा नेपालको जस्तो आर्थिक दुरावस्था छैन। नेपालको आर्थिक अवस्था यस्तो दयनीय हुनुको प्रमुख कारण भ्रष्टाचार र दण्डहीनता हो, जसले गर्दा नै बहुदलीय व्यवस्था नेपालको अर्थतन्त्रका लागि अभिशाप देखिएको हो। साथै यही कारण नेपाल ग्रे लिस्टमा समेत दोहोर्‍याएर परेको छ। सन् २००८ देखि २०१४ सम्म पनि नेपाल ग्रे लिस्टमा थियो। भ्रष्टाचारजन्य काम गर्ने केही नेता र कर्मचारीमाथि कारबाही नगर्नाले नै यस्तो भएको हो। नीतिगत निर्णयमा भ्रष्टाचारमा कारबाही नगर्ने व्यवस्थाको आडमा केही नेता तथा कर्मचारीले नीतिगत निर्णयका आवरणमा भ्रष्टाचारजन्य काम गर्छन् र दण्डित हुनबाट उन्मुक्ति पाइरहेका छन्। दुई कारणले नेपाल ग्रे लिस्टमा परेको हो– भ्रष्टाचार र कालोधन नियन्त्रण गर्न प्रभावकारी कानुन जारी नगर्नु र भ्रष्टाचार एवं कालोधन नियन्त्रण गर्ने कानुन प्रभावकारी रूपमा कार्यान्वयन नगर्नु। तर विडम्बना के छ भने भ्रष्टाचार र कालोधन नियन्त्रण गर्ने प्रभावकारी कानुन जारी गरी प्रभावकारी रूपमा कार्यान्वयन गरियो भने हालका अधिकांश नेता र उच्च पदस्थ कर्मचारीहरू जेलभित्र हुनेछन्। त्यसैले राज्य सञ्चालक यसप्रति उदासीन छन्। तर यस्तो उदासीनताका कारण नेपाल ग्रे लिस्टबाट कालोसूचीमा अवनति हुने जोखिम टड्कारो छ। नेताहरूको अक्षमता र अकर्मण्यता संसारका धेरै देशमा बहुदलीय व्यवस्था भए पनि ती देशमध्ये धेरैजसोका नेता र कर्मचारी नेपालमा जत्तिकै भ्रष्ट र अक्षम छैनन्। त्यस्तै तिनीहरू आफ्नो देशको आर्थिक समस्याप्रति उदासीन पनि छैनन्। पञ्चायती व्यवस्थाको उन्मूलनपछि माथि उल्लिखित खस्किँदो आर्थिक सूचकांकहरू सम्बोधन गर्नेगरी कहिल्यै वित्तीय नीति (बजेट) र मौद्रिक नीति ल्याइएन। त्यसमाथि २०७६ माघदेखि नेपालमा पनि फैलिएको कोरोना संक्रमण र त्यसलाई नियन्त्रण गर्न लगाइएको लकडाउनले अर्थतन्त्रमा दुष्प्रभाव परेको भन्दै नेता र कर्मचारीले जवाफ दिन्छन्। तर भारत, बंगलादेश, श्रीलंका, भुटानलगायत संसारका धेरै देशमा पनि कोरोना संक्रमण फैलिएको थियो, तर ती देशको अर्थतन्त्र सुध्रिसक्यो। नेपालको अर्थतन्त्र पुनरुत्थानका लागि हाम्रा राज्य सञ्चालकले कुनै पहल गरेनन् र समस्या जेलियो। निष्कर्ष भारतले २०४५ चैतदेखि नेपालमाथि अनाहक आर्थिक नाकाबन्दी लगाएका कारण देश र जनता कष्टमा थिए। आर्थिक नाकाबन्दी भनेको आर्थिक युद्ध नै हो। देशमाथि यसरी आक्रमण भएको बेलामा सबै जनता, राजनीतिक दल र तिनका नेता एक भई भारतीय नाकाबन्दीको डटेर सामना गर्नु पर्नेमा २०४६ फागुनदेखि दलहरूले विद्रोह गरेका कारणले पञ्चायती व्यवस्था खारेज गरिएको थियो। यसरी भारतले आर्थिक आक्रमण गरेकाले मातृभूमि र जनता कष्टमा परेको बेलामा राजनीतिक दल र तिनका नेताहरूले विद्रोह गरेकाले नेपाल आमाले श्राप दिएको हुनाले ती नेता अक्षम, अकर्मण्य भएका त होइनन् होला। जे होस्, नेपालका नेताहरूमा पनि खेदिने अवस्था आाउने छैन भन्ने कामना छ। Ratna Sansar Shrestha https://nagariknews.nagariknetwork.com/opinion/the-curse-of-the-economy-69-58.html?click_from=category

Multiparty Democracy Failed Nepal’s Economy

Nepal's economy is currently facing significant challenges due to recessionary pressures. The economy shows signs of a demand-side recession, with declining household consumption, which is mainly due to decrease in consumers’ purchasing power. While Nepal is not in a technical recession (defined by two consecutive quarters of negative growth), its economy exhibits recessionary traits—weak demand, low investment, etc. External Macro-economic Indicators However, Nepal Rastra Bank (NRB) has reported that a number of macro-economic indicators of the country have improved as of mid-June this year amid ongoing concerns for the country’s worsening economic condition. The reported improvement was basically centered on improvement of balance of payment position, fueled mainly by increasing inflow of remittances; not, for example, by increase in production resulting in import substitution and increase in export, hence trade surplus. The foreign exchange reserves had increased by 22.2 percent to US $18.65 billion compared to US $15.27 billion last fiscal year. The monetary policy for the fiscal year 2024/25 had aimed to maintain foreign exchange reserves sufficient to cover at least 7 months of imports of goods and services, but the actual foreign exchange reserve as of mid-June 2025 is sufficient to cover 14.7 months of imports of goods and services. In the meantime, Nepal’s banks and financial (BFIs) institutions are holding around Rs 869 billion in investable funds, equivalent to US $6.34 billion. It so happened because credit expansion remained sluggish, which has started to destabilize the financial system. These, however, do not prove that macroeconomy has actually improved. On the contrary, NRB holding a huge amount of idle foreign exchange reserve and BFI’s saddled with a huge amount of investible funds is manifestation of Nepal’s economy being sick. Like a malnourished person that has huge stomach due to fluid retention (edema), while the rest of the body is emaciated with thin limbs and a visible ribcage, Nepal’s economy has retained huge amount of fluid in its stomach in the form of unnecessarily huge amount of foreign exchange reserve with NRB and huge amount of investible fund in BFIs, while rest of the economic sectors are emaciated. Idle foreign exchange reserve is the result of inflow of remittance in huge quantities, which was US $11.25 billion during 11 months of the current fiscal year. It was US $9.98 billion during the same period last year. However, GoN has failed to put most of the remittance entering Nepal to productive use. Many countries like South Korea have achieved economic prosperity by putting remittance to productive uses. Internal Macro-economic Indicators The euphoria due to improvement of external macro-economic indicators of the country is misplaced as explained above. In reality the external macro-economic indicators are symptoms of sickness of the economy as pointed out above. If the internal macro-economic indicators had also improved in tandem with external macro-economic indicators then the health of the economy would have been sound and robust, which is not the case at all. A comparative study of internal macro-economic indicators in half a century in the past is made in following lines. Contribution of the industry sector in GDP: The industry sector is considered to be the backbone of a country's economy, and the contribution of the industry sector to Nepal's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was 18.4 percent in the last decade under the Panchayat system, abolished in April 1990. However, the contribution of the industry sector to Nepal's GDP is projected to have shrunk to 12 percent in 2024/25 and mentioned in the budget speech for 2025/26, which has been declining steadily. It was 14.24 percent in 2021/22, which had gradually decreased to 13.6 percent in 2022/23 and to 13 percent in 2023/24. In a robust economy the contribution of the industry sector to GDP gradually increases. Therefore, this is a clear indication that Nepal’s economy is gradually becoming sick. Because of it, unemployment is rampant and people are forced to seek employment abroad. It is estimated that about 6 million are employed in third countries (which is recorded) and about 4 million in India that are unrecorded. That is about one-third of the total population works for other countries. No economy has flourished by exporting human resources akin to exporting raw materials and energy. In order to put the importance of contribution of the industrial sector to GDP in proper perspective, a comparison is warranted with a few South Asian countries. It was 27.62 percent in India, 37.95 percent in Bangladesh and 25.59 percent in Sri Lanka. The reason the then Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was forced to flee Bangladesh in August 2024 was not because of the economic crisis; she had to escape due to public anger related to reservation. The economy there was strong. However, the reason behind the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and his family having to run away from Sri Lanka in July 2022 was definitely related to economic problems – a severe liquidity crisis. However, since Sri Lankan industry sector – the backbone of the economy - is strong, the liquidity crisis is gradually getting resolved. Most people in Nepal tend to compare with Bhutan, but are unaware of the fact that the contribution of the industrial sector to the GDP of Bhutan is 49.96 percent. All the countries discussed have multiparty democracy. Trade deficit: Nepal's other internal macro-economic indicators are too not encouraging. They have been declining steadily. In the last decade of the Panchayat era, the average trade deficit was only 12 percent on average. However, in the first decade of multiparty democracy it increased to 17.1 percent on average. It slightly improved to 16.6 percent on average during a decade of Maoist insurgency. Unfortunately, it further deteriorated in the decade after Nepal became a republic in May 2008 to 27.5 percent on average. After the implementation of federal structure, the trade deficit further rose to 29.5 percent on average till last year. It indicates that Nepal was relatively self-reliant during the last decade of Panchayat system and after its abolition her dependence on imports gradually rose with each change of political system. Capital expenditure: During the last decade of Panchayat system average capital expenditure was 67.2 percent. It took a nose drive in the first decade of multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy to 56.9 percent on average. The decade of Maoist insurgency took its toll on capital expenditure and it fell to 30.7 percent on average. It further fell in the decade after Nepal’s monarchy was abolished in May 2008; it declined to 23.7 percent on average. It worsened with the implementation of federalism and it stood at 17 percent on average till last year. Another reason behind rampant unemployment is the contraction of capital expenditure by 50 percentage points compared with the last decade of the Panchayat system. Higher proportion of capital expenditure would have resulted in additional job creation, consumption of construction materials would have increased, and the construction material industry would have operated at higher capacity, creating more jobs further, and the economy would also have thrived. Average tax burden: The average tax burden on the people was 8.7 percent in the last decade of the Panchayat system. However, during the first decade of multiparty democracy (1990-2000) it rose to 10.1 percent. It further rose to 11.9 percent during the decade of Maoist insurgency. The tax burden rose to 17.1 percent on average during the first decade of Nepal becoming a republic. It worsened after 7 provinces were created and rose to 20 percent on average till last year. The combined impact of all these indicators put together has drastically reduced the purchasing power of the people on average, which is the base of all economic problems. However, both the fiscal policy of GoN and monetary policy of NRB has failed to address this since the abolition of the Panchayat system. The Covid19 and lockdowns enforced to contain the endemic did exacerbate the economic problem, alleviation of which required GoN to come up with a stimulus package, which did not materialize. Potential Risks BFIs are under pressure due to rising non-performing loan (NPL) and the accumulation of non-banking assets (NBA). Moreover, the number of blacklisted borrowers is also growing. According to the record of NRB, NPL of BFIs has reached 5.24 percent on average now, up from 3.98 percent a year ago. Additionally, BFIs have been rescheduling outstanding loans in order to control NPL. Rescheduling is not a solution to the problem, but rather a way to sidestep it, which only complicates it further. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has unofficially estimated the NPL to be about 15 percent. Moreover, BFIs have also accumulated a huge amount of non-banking assets (NBA) – amounting to Rs 45.7 billion – which are assets mortgaged by the borrowers and seized by the banks upon failure of the borrower to repay the loans. BFIs are required to dispose of the NBA within a timeframe by auctioning them. However, due to lack of demand in the real estate market, BFIs have failed to dispose of them. In the current situation, if BFIs were to attempt to reduce NPL and NBA significantly, the real estate market could collapse and it calls for intervention on the part of state machinery. But the state machinery is highly unlikely to even raise a finger based on the track record so far. Corruption Transparency International (TI) reported in January 2025 that Nepal's score on the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) had decreased, indicating a worsening perception of corruption. Specifically, Nepal's score dropped by one point to 34, and its rank slipped to 107 out of 180 countries. Moreover, Nepal is currently on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list. This means the country is under increased monitoring due to deficiencies in its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing frameworks. Nepal was previously on the grey list from 2008 to 2014 and has now been added back due to ongoing concerns. It is due to failure to prosecute certain politicians and bureaucrats in corruption cases. As a general rule important politicians and bureaucrats enjoy immunity on cover of policy decisions. No action is taken against the prime ministers, ministers, high level bureaucrats, etc. that are involved in corrupt practices. Nepal has been placed on the grey list one two grounds: (1) for failure to promulgate effective laws to control corruption and black money and (2) for failure to implement the laws effectively. However, if effective laws to control corruption and black money are to be promulgated and implemented effectively, most of the current top politicians and bureaucrats will end up behind bars. That is why the state machinery is indifferent towards this. But due to such indifference, the risk of Nepal being demoted to the black list has increased. Politicians and bureaucrats A huge number of countries in the world have multiparty democracy and some have monarchy and most do not. But the politicians and bureaucrats of most of those countries are not as corrupt as in Nepal and nor are they indifferent to the economic problems of their respective countries. For some strange reason most politicians and bureaucrats of Nepal for last 35 years have not only been corrupt but also indifferent towards the poor economic state Nepal’s. One could only wonder why! Conclusion Panchayat system was abolished due to pro-democracy uprising against it by political parties in April 1990, in the middle of an economic blockade imposed by India for no rhyme or reason. From the above discussion, it becomes clear that Nepal’s economy was in a lot better shape during the last decade of the Panchayat system and has gradually worsened with the abolition of Panchayat system and introduction of multiparty democracy in its various incarnations: (1) multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy, (2) declaration of republic after abolition of monarchy and (3) implementation of federal structure. More than 100 countries do not have monarchical system of governance and their economies have not deteriorated like that of Nepal. Neighboring Bangladesh, India, Sir Lanka etc. are too republics with multiparty democracy and their economy is in a lot better shape than that of Nepal. With respect to the excuse of Covid19 and lockdown trotted out by Nepal’s politicians and bureaucrats, those countries too did suffer from it massively, but have rebounded back already. Therefore, the problem lies with Nepal’s most of the politicians and bureaucrats that are corrupt, and they are neither nationalist nor patriotic. In Nepal’s political system, politicians get elected as parliamentarians by spending a huge amount of money, come to power (become minister) by investing even larger amounts of money, and while in power they busy themselves in illegally recovering many times the investment they had made to get elected and to come to power. In other words, becoming a minister is not about formulating the country's policy to lead the country to prosperity and running the country's daily administration, but rather, one has to become a minister to recover the investment made to be elected and so forth. The only way out of this vicious cycle is to change the governance system, under which the parliamentarians would be limited to legislative work, and not participate in the functions of the executive branch of the government by becoming ministers. Experts in the relevant subjects, that are not parliamentarians, must be appointed as ministers to avoid conflict of interest situations between legislature and executive. The parallel can be drawn from the fact that justices do not get involved in legislative work, nor do they join the executive branch as ministers. If this system is to be put in place, corruption and black money would come under effective control and Nepal can get out of the grey list with ease. Let’s collectively hope that the deterioration of the economy has hit the nadir by now and the only way is upwards. Also hope that Nepal’s politicians were not cursed by the motherland for launching pro-democracy uprising against the Panchayat system in April 1990, while Nepal was suffering tremendously from the economic blockade imposed by inimical India since March 1989. Incidentally, the author does not believe in dynastic rule of a particular family and nor does he advocate absolute monarchy. The author is also not an apologist of the Panchayat system and therefore, did not intend to glorify the Panchayat system by publishing this article. Finally, let us all collectively pray that such a day is not on the anvil when Nepal’s corrupt politicians and bureaucrats are forced to flee the country like in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, etc. Published in People’s Review on July 17, 2025. https://mypeoplesreview.com/2025/07/15/multiparty-democracy-failed-nepals-economy/

‘Take or Pay’ Tightens Monopsony Trap

The budget speech for fiscal year 2025/26 included a sentence: "a policy will be adopted to maintain balance between electricity generation and consumption while signing PPAs. It will be signed for run-of-river (RoR) projects under the 'take and pay' model", which would require Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) to purchase electricity only when needed. This would reduce financial liabilities from surplus "flood energy" to NEA. This was a positive step that would have ensured better fiscal health of NEA and reduced its dependency on India to sell flood electricity. Retracted after opposition However, IPPs vehemently opposed the take and pay model and some “experts” joined the bandwagon. They claimed that under this model the electricity market for the IPPs would vanish and demanded continuation of the current ‘take or pay’ model. What those experts forgot is that NEA itself is not an electricity market, its job is only to buy in bulk from IPPs and retail it to consumers. The experts’ insistence that NEA must buy all the electricity from IPPs although the former cannot sell to consumers and would be spilled (wasted) is absurd at best. Even the private sector entrepreneurs adhere to the take and pay model. They would not purchase commodities or services that they are unable to sell to the consumers. Further, a narrative was created that it does not matter if NEA incurs loss, but the private sector must be protected from any loss. Since NEA is fully owned by GoN, it incurring loss increases GoN’s fiscal burden, which in turn increases taxpayers’ burden. [However, it does not mean that NE, should be allowed to profiteer; NEA, a monopoly utility, is not expected to exploit consumers to earn huge profit.] Perhaps these experts did not realize the ground reality of forcing NEA to buy flood electricity from IPPs, which the former would not be able to retail and its profound and long-term adverse impact not only on NEA but also on GoN and the country’s economy. The energy minister, Deepak Khadka also joined the fray and surprised the general public by calling this model a serious mistake. He said in the parliament that and this provision would be amended. It is perhaps only in Nepal that not only a member of the cabinet that passed the budget but also the concerned departmental ministers speaking against the provision in the budget. Former prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, who is the President of the Nepali Congress, a powerful coalition partner, had reportedly phoned Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and threatened to pull out of the coalition causing it to collapse if this modality is not “removed”. He had phoned the Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel too, telling him to remove it. Eventually the main parties in the coalition government, Congress and UML, agreed to remove this provision and pass the budget. Thereafter, the sentence in the budget speech was replaced with the following sentence: “PPAs can be signed for hydropower projects that are confirmed to have domestic consumption or export potential and for which the NEA can ensure payment obligations based on financial risk assessment.” This amounts to reinstatement of the status quo ante and NEA will have to continue to sign PPAs on ‘take or pay’ model, although it was not spelled out in so many words. By retracting as such GoN has driven one more nail in the coffin of the principle of self-reliant energy security inherent in ‘take and pay’ model. Because all the governments so far have not been concerned with Nepal’s energy security, and the concept of self-reliant energy security has not even been imagined. Take and Pay Under the take and pay model, NEA would purchase electricity from IPPs in the quantity that it can sell to the consumers domestically. That is, NEA would “take” electricity from IPPs “and” would “pay” with an eye on maintaining “balance between electricity generation and consumption.” RoR projects generate relatively a lot more electricity in the monsoon, most of which has no demand in Nepal, and, hence, called spill energy (that goes waste). At the moment RoR projects are implemented with a design discharge of 40 percent known also as Q40. RoR powerhouses generate electricity at full installed capacity 40 percent of the time (4.8 months) in a year and generate close to one-third of the installed capacity in the remaining 7.2 months. Upper Tamakoshi can be cited as an example: although its installed capacity is 456 MW and generates at near full capacity during monsoon, but generates about 150 MW only during dry season. Under the take and pay model, NEA would neither have to purchase the rainy season electricity beyond what NEA could sell domestically, nor have to pay for such spill energy. Because, electricity demand in Nepal is relatively higher during dry season and lower in wet season thereby resulting in mismatch in demand and supply. That is why the take and pay model was incorporated in the budget speech initially to maintain balance between electricity generation and consumption thereof. In other words, this model would have reduced/minimized flood (spill) energy. Take or Pay The history of the take or pay model is rooted in the 60 MW Khimti hydropower project (RoR). After the Electricity Act was promulgated in 1992, for the first time in Nepal’s history foreign direct investment (FDI) was injected into Khimti hydropower project (the infrastructure sector) by Statkraft SF (SF), a Norwegian company. Himal Power Limited (HPL) was incorporated in February 1993, in which SF held 75 percent equity. GoN and NEA signed project agreement (PA) and power purchase agreement (PPA) respectively with HPL in March 1994. The take or pay model was incorporated in this PPA for the first time and Khimti was to have 65 percent design discharge (Q65). Both these agreements were amended in January 1996. [Self-declaration: This author had joined HPL in May 1994 and had signed as witness the amended PA and PPA in the capacity of company secretary. At that time, he was neither familiar with the jargon used in these agreements including the phrase “take or pay” (being a non-technical person) nor was he involved in the decision making process – all the decisions were taken by the Board of Directors of HPL and that of SF. The author stopped working for HPL in October 1998 and about five or six years afterwards an article was published in Kantipur Daily under the title ‘Khimti’s Villains’ and his name included in the list of villains. This impelled him to undertake self-study to understand manifestation and ramification of the jargons used in those agreements, including the take or pay model.] The ministers and the top bureaucrats of the time both in GoN and NEA hardly understood the full ramification of this model. The politicians and bureaucrats running the government at the time must have accepted the conditions of SF (both legitimate and otherwise) with the sole aim of attracting FDI in Nepal and keeping investors happy by ensuring to sell all the electricity generated by Khimti. It is also possible that high officials of NEA had accepted the model under pressure from GoN. Electricity generation from RoR projects depends on the quantum of water flowing in the river. That is, due to the hydrological cycle, Nepal’s rivers are flooded during the rainy season and accordingly, RoR projects generate electricity at full capacity during monsoon. While water flow in the rivers during dry season is very low and, hence, the electricity generation also decreases by up to two-thirds. The electricity demand during rainy season in Nepal is relatively low and, notwithstanding it, PPAs under take or pay model requires NEA to buy (take) all rainy season electricity, although NEA would not be able to sell most of it and would go waste (hence it is called ‘spill energy’) compulsorily and pay. Even if NEA is not to buy spill energy, NEA is still required to pay for it. That is why the model is called ‘take or pay’. Although NEA and/or Nepal does not need much electricity during the rainy season, it must take (buy) it and even if NEA does not take it, the prescribed amount must be paid (or pay). The irony of the take or pay model is that NEA is currently purchasing all flood energy from IPPs, most of which would go waste. Private sector entrepreneurs would not have touched such a model even with a barge pole. Flood energy In view of the fact that most of the spill energy is generated during monsoon, when rivers are flooded, it is called “flood” energy. There have been difficult situations with regard to such energy. There was a lot of hullabaloo about wasting flood energy worth Rs 25 billion during the 2020 rainy season. Similarly, the officials of IPPAN (independent power producers association of Nepal) had claimed that 500 MW electricity from 30 projects was wasted during the 2021 rainy season, worth Rs 500 billion. Export to India India initially agreed to import only 39 MW electricity generated by powerhouses in Trishuli and Devighat in November 2021, both owned by NEA and implemented with Indian assistance. Later in September 2023 India approved 14 hydropower plants to import electricity from Nepal, 5 powerhouses belonging to NEA totaling 313 MW and 9 powerhouses owned by IPPs totaling 319 MW. The reason behind this cherry picking is section 6.3 (i) of “Procedure for Approval and Facilitating Import/Export (Cross Border) of Electricity” discussed below. In this manner, NEA basically became dependent upon India to dispose off the flood energy. Last fiscal year NEA exported 1,946 GWh flood energy to India for Rs 17.066 billion and it had projected to export flood energy worth Rs 30 billion by 15th July this year. However, NEA’s dependence upon India with regard to flood energy export is fraught with a number of risks. According to Section 6.3 (i) of the Procedure mentioned above, India neither buys electricity generated by the powerhouses implemented with Chinese investment nor constructed by Chinese contractors; not even if Chinese machinery and equipment is used. Basically, India resorts to cherry picking in the matter of buying flood energy from Nepal. Although electricity is a commodity and once generated and flows through the transmission/distribution network, it is physically/scientifically impossible to determine the exact powerhouse from which the electricity is generated at the time of using it. However, due to this tendency of India, NEA is in great difficulty. Using the above mentioned condition India is treating Upper Tamakoshi, largest hydropower project of Nepal, as an untouchable project. The combined effect of this condition of India and the 'take or pay' model has put NEA in a vicious cycle. Further, Section 6.7.1 of the procedure is even more dangerous, under which India reserves the right to import/export electricity from Nepal for reasons of larger policy interest. India can suddenly stop importing flood energy from Nepal at any time. If India is to exercise this discretionary authority suddenly, the market for flood energy that NEA purchases under take or pay model would suddenly vanish. It could bankrupt NEA and add a huge fiscal burden on GoN. Based on the track record of India having already imposed four economic blockades on Nepal, excessive dependency on India would be harmful to both NEA and GoN. Care should be taken to ensure that NEA does not drown under flood energy. Meaning IPPs need to appreciate that if NEA goes bankrupt under the burden of flood energy, IPPs too would suffer. 28,500 MW target GoN had approved a target of generating 28,500 MW of electricity by 2035 in March 2025, of which 13,500 MW would be consumed domestically and export 15,000 MW. IPPs too have stated that more than 350 projects with a capacity of 17,117 MW is in their pipeline. Last fiscal year, when Nepal’s total installed capacity was 3,157 MW, NEA had to export 1,946 GWh flood energy. If PPAs were signed on a take-or-pay model for 17,117 MW, NEA will have to purchase 11,071 GWh of flood energy, which would be worth Rs 96.32 billion. If India refuses to buy this flood energy, not only NEA but GoN too will be severely impacted. Q40 The main reason behind generation of huge quantities of flood energy is due to the fact that the design discharge of powerhouses is fixed at Q40, under which the powerhouses generate electricity at full capacity for 40 percent of a year as pointed out above, most of which is flood energy. Due to which, most of the civil works and electro-mechanical equipment stay idle for 60 percent of the time. In order to cover for this idle investment, the current PPA tariff includes a component to compensate IPPs. Had the PPA tariff not included this component, IPPs would have incurred loss. Therefore, Q40 policy is responsible for the huge quantum of flood energy. If it was to be revised upwards to Q60 or even Q70/80, the flood energy would have been much lower. The then deputy prime minister Shailaja Acharya, while announcing PPA for up to 5 MW, had fixed the design discharge at 90 percent (Q90) in June 1998. Later she agreed to reduce it to Q65 in November 1998, emulating the Khimti. However, the design discharge was lowered to Q40 in December 2008. It was further planned to reduce to Q25 in the expectation that installed capacity would increase by up to 85.4 percent and annual energy generation would increase by 40.2 percent in August 2022. The poisonous icing on the cake would be that most of the electricity would be flood energy, estimated to increase by 59.3 percent, which, fortunately, was not implemented. Although, announcement of the take and pay model was a right step, it was like the adage “the head is sick, but the leg is being treated.” Because, while the combined effect of Indian condition in its procedure and the 'take or pay' model has put NEA in a straitjacket, the added impact of design discharge of 40 percent is fatal, as it would tighten the monopsony trap that would be discussed below. Monopsony Trap India is a single buyer for Nepal’s flood energy, hence, it is a monopsony market. Although a tripartite agreement was signed between, NEA, NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam of India, and Bangladesh Power Development Board to export 40 MW from Nepal to Bangladesh via India. However, she is not a good paymaster (has defaulted to Adani Power and Tripura State Electricity Board. Therefore, Indian hegemony in Nepal’s hydropower sector has been inadvertently established and generation of additional flood energy would strengthen it. As mentioned above the design discharge of 40 percent coupled with take or pay model and India’s procedure allowing it to studently stop purchasing flood energy from Nepal, the monopsony trap becomes tighter. Conclusion Take or pay model for Khimti project, with 65 percent design discharge was accepted mainly to attract FDI in Nepal. When Khimti was commissioned in July 2000, Nepal was in the midst of an energy crisis and even monsoon energy came as a relief. However, NEA started to spill electricity when 144 MW Kali Gandaki A was fully commissioned in May 2002. Frantic efforts were made by NEA to sell the flood energy from this project in India, unsuccessfully. With the increase in hydropower generation both by NEA and IPPs, the design discharge should have been tailored to meet Nepal’s requirement both during dry season and monsoon. On the contrary it was reduced to 40 percent and even planned to reduce it to 25 percent, due to which Nepal is generating a lot of flood energy with only India as a market, thereby tightening the monopsony trap, which is fatal for Nepal as explained above. It is not prudent to allow a non-well-wisher to have one by short and curlies (begging forgiveness for the choice of words). Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA Published in Peoples Review of July 3, 2025. https://mypeoplesreview.com/2025/07/01/take-or-pay-tightens-monopsony-trap/