KATHMANDU: The Society of Nepalese Architects (SONA) can be considered to represent Nepali architects as a whole. SONA represents Nepali architects in the international forum, as well as in dealing with national government authorities and other professional bodies. If SONA is going to represent Nepali architects as a whole, it needs the mandate as well as a clear shared vision.

The executive committee of SONA is elected, which would be understood as being given the mandate to represent the entire body of members. As with most organisations, once given the mandate, the executive committee will move forward with little care for consensus or general participation.

I became a member of SONA in 2000, because it was mandatory for participation in the design competition for the ICOMOD headquarters. Like many architects, I have not been involved in the events of SONA, mainly due of the lack of communication. Since 2012, I have been asked to work on various committees, but it never really worked out. As a member of the Committee on Professional Practice, I contributed to the preparation of competition guidelines for SONA. The draft competition guidelines were ignored. I am supposedly heading the Publication, Communication and Outreach Committee, but ironically I have not managed to get the committee running due to lack of communications. These seem to be my personal issues with SONA; however, I also see huge potential in the organisation if its vision spread beyond the executive committee.

SONA was established in 1990, which would mean that it will be celebrating its Silver Jubilee. It could be an ideal opportunity to develop a vision for SONA, which is more inclusive and participatory. As a well-wisher, but clearly an outsider, all I can do is make some recommendations for the more initiated to mull over.

For SONA to have the mandate of the overall body of Nepali architects, it would first need to develop a means of continued communications with all its members. This has improved over the past years, however still lacks a systematic approach to involve members in activities and decision-making. The strength of the organisation is its members: a pool of highly creative, educated, and opinionated professionals. How can these members contribute to putting Nepali architecture, not only traditional, but also contemporary Nepali architecture on the world map? The first step would be to create a platform for discussions, possibly through social media, but also procedures for expressing grievances and discussing contentious issues.

One of the most critical problems lies in the fact that architectural design is still being defined by the Public Procurement Act 2007, which clearly cannot address quality. The standard approach is still to decide on the consultant based on a technical and a financial bid: you get the project if you prove that you have been working for a few years and then undercut everyone else’s bid. The result is a bad design, bad construction and a project reeking of corruption. Design competitions need to become standard practice, but the Public Procurement Act must not sabotage the process. This can clearly be done only with entirely separate procedures put in place and officially monitored by a separate council for architects.

The logo of SONA consists of a silhouette of tiered temples and a stupa. These represent the traditional architecture of Nepal Mandala, the apogee of architectural developments in the Himalayas. Do the Nepali architects want to conserve such historical buildings? Do they want to emulate these historic styles? Is there a contemporary style of Nepali architecture being created? Do Nepali architects support the destruction of historical buildings? Do Nepali architects agree with the building of 18 storeyed buildings in the Kathmandu valley? Can SONA create consensus and lead the way in a befitting direction?