Though the executives are responsible for not performing satisfactorily, the bureaucrats are more to be blamed for not correcting the politicians and also entering into a bonhomie to engage in corruption
The dismal performance is visible on all fronts in the country. This despite the frequent change in the government headed by the leftist as well as democratic parties. Earlier, the coalition government was supported by the Nepali Congress (NC). Now this place has been taken over by the communist party, the Unified Marxist-Leninist (UML). The only constant is the Prime Minister representing the Maoist Central (MC). The other commonality is, of course, the bureaucracy.
It can be glaringly seen that the different coalitions in the country have been marked by under-performance for several reasons. Firstly, they have not been able to spend the development budget fully, which has certainly blunted the pace of development. Secondly, they have been unable to create employment in the country, following which there is a flight of the youths to foreign countries. Instead, the government appears more interested in entering into agreements with foreign countries to facilitate the departure of the young persons from the country. Consequently, Nepal is becoming a country of senior citizens rather than that of all age groups.
Thirdly, the cooperatives, labelled as the third pillar of development, has been what is known as a cheating pot in Nepali narration, in which the Deputy Prime Minister has been implicated. The unwillingness shown to create a parliamentary committee to look into this sorry state of affairs certainly smells of a rat in the whole episode. Accordingly, the government and the opposition have been drifting apart to the peril of parliamentary democracy. Fourthly, the country has fallen victim to rampant corruption in which the top politicians, including the Deputy Prime Minister and the bureaucrats like the secretaries, have been in and out of bars.
If this is the case on the domestic front, the one in the foreign arena is not any different. The failure to hold dialogue with the southern neighbour, India, with respect to the widely labelled pointed map is very frustrating indeed. It has hit deeper political holes with its publication in the Nepali paper currency. The Foreign Minister of India, J Shiva Shankar, has responded by saying that such unilateral decisions made by Nepal does not help to solve the border problems existing between the two countries.
It is not that the corruption monster is active only in Nepal. A similar phenomenon can be observed in the neighbouring countries as well. The Chief Minister of Delhi is still behind bars on the charge of corruption in an alcohol scam. Similarly, the secretary, Naresh Kumar, is also in the news headlines for offering crores worth of benefit to his son's company. In China, 2.3 million officers are said to have been prosecuted by 2023 in a corruption-elimination drive by Chinese President Xi Jinping. But such scandals have not dampened the pace of development in these countries. The corruption in Nepal has, however, brought the development efforts virtually to a standstill.
Who is responsible for this depressing state of affairs? Is it the executive headed by the Prime Minister or the bureaucracy led by the Chief Secretary? The executives are widely believed to be the temporary government and the bureaucracy the permanent one. The executives are portrayed as the elected government officials and the bureaucrats as the non-elected ones. It then follows that the bureaucracy is characterised by specialised functions, adherence to fixed rules and a hierarchy of function. The executive on the other hand is an institution where political units exercise authority and perform government functions.
It is well known that the government or the executive should pronounce the programme, and the bureaucracy should implement it. It is like a male-female relationship. Whilst the male plants the seed in the female's womb, it is the female who ensures its evolution to life and later a bodied delivery. The politicians' vision is always abstract but it has to be concretised by the bureaucracy.
The politicians have to gauge the feeling of the people at large. They have to mention it in the manifesto and seek to implement it. Our politicians have not been able to read what is in the mind of the people in the first place. They have not been able to put it properly in their manifestoes and execute it. If their programmes are genuine, the bureaucracy will also seriously try to implement it as the bureaucrats are also the people after all.
The example of India will prove this point. For example, majority of Hindu Indians wanted the Ram temple to be constructed. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) committed to it and made it happen. The Congress party ignored it considering it as an unbecoming activity in a secular country. Similarly, the age-old three talaq system had become obsolete, but it had continued in the name of religion. The BJP abolished it after coming to power. Apart from conservative Mullahs, it has been appreciated by Muslims at large.
The problems of Nepal have cropped up from not being able to identify the problems inflicting the country, barring a few exceptions. The bureaucracy has not been able to implement even these exceptional issues. Instead of working hand in glove to implement the programmes beneficial to the country, their attention has unfortunately been diverted to complicity in corruption. This is the reason behind their spontaneous landing behind the bars.
In fact, the bureaucracy should have shunned any partnership in corruption because they receive the bare minimum salary for survival after all. It is thus clear that though the executives are responsible for not performing satisfactorily, the bureaucrats are more to be blamed for not correcting the politicians and also entering into a bonhomie to engage in corruption.
