Content

1. Some treaties:

a) Treaty of Betrawatib) Treaty of Sugaulic) Treaty of 1923 (Nepal –British)d) Treaty of 1950 (Nepal –India)

2. Constitutional Development:

a) The Government of Nepal Act 1948b) The Interim Constitution 2051c) High Court Act 2008d) The constitution of Nepal 1959e) The constitution of Nepal 1962f) The constitution of Nepal 1990g) The Interim constitution 2007h) Towards the Constituent Assembly

Some Treaties

Treaty of Betrawati 1792During the regency period of Bahadur Shah, Nepal government proposed making new treaty with Tibet, but the Tibetans roughly replied that attack would be met by attack. The Nepalese government was made aggressive by the behave f Tibet. The Nepalese government then sent a peace mission to China with a hope that if they could make friends with the Tibetans tey would automatically come to the terms. This mission reached Lhasa, but as the Tibetans were against this move, it returned to Kathmandu unsuccessful. Due to the unsuccessful of peaceful means attempted by Nepal the war between Nepal and Tibet led the situation. Nepal got victory in the war.At the news of the Nepalese attack on Tibet, the Chinese Emperor sent a strong force under Chwangchu to Lhasa. But, when he came to know all the facts from the lama of Potala and Tasi Lumbu of Digarcha, he was pacified. But he decided not to leave Lhasa until a settlement was reached between Nepal and Tibet. A combine meeting between Nepalese and Tibetans delegates was held. In the meantime, the Chinese leader, Chwang Chu, started for Shikar Dzong to inspect the border-line. There was a discussion between the two delegations and the Tibetans had to incur the whole blame for the quarrel. However, both sides agreed to make a treaty. According to the terms of the treaty:a. The Tibetan government was to bear the whole war expense incurred by Nepalese

government.b. If, however, the Tibetan government agreed to pay of lump sum of five million rupees, they

would be exempted from the payment of the war expense and the conquered territory would also be restored. But, if they were not prepared to pay five millions, they would have to cede all territories south of the main Himalayan range that were hitherto controlled by the Nepalese government.

c. If the Tibetan government did not accept either of these terms, they would be required to pay hundred thousand rupees to the Nepalese government every year. Tibetan government accepted none of these terms, but promised to pay fifty thousand rupees to the Nepalese government every year.

After this, the Nepalese troops left the Tibetan territories occupied by them and returned to Kathmandu. Though they contracted a treaty with Nepal at the pressure of Chinese Emperor, the Tibetans were not satisfied. Consequently, they stop to pay the annual subsidy of fifty thousand rupees from the following year. In the meantime, Tesu Lama, the favourite of Chinese emperor died. Regarding the property of Tashi Luampu, a quarrel appeared in Tibet and the brother of Tesu Lama, Samarpa Lama fled to Nepal to get help for a dispute of succession. Bahadur Shah took the side of Samarpa Lama (Samar Turluk), and on a charge of using violence on Nepalese merchants and adulterating the salt exported to Nepal, he sent troops to attack Tibet. Again Tibet was invaded by Nepal. For this time too, Tibet agreed t pay an annual subsidy of three hundred thousand rupees to Nepal and to let a new Nepalese coins circulate in Tibet.After this the Tibetans began to incite the neighbouring states against Nepal. They sent a delegation to the East India Company in Calcutta. Coming to know of this double dealing of Tibet, the Nepalese plundered the wealth of the big monasteries of Digarcha. Meanwhile, the Chinese troops arrived in Tibet and for plundering monasteries and giving refuge to Sumarpa Lama, ten thousand Chinese troops attacked Nepalese force and advanced up to Betrawati River of Nuwakot, the

gateway of Kathmandu. Nepal was in danger, but the Nepalese very clearly set fire to the jungle on three side of the Chinese. When this saw this, the Chinese thought that they were rounded by Nepalese troops and so they ran away in panic. After this event, both sides agreed to conclude a treaty.According to the terms of the treaty: 1). Nepal was to give back all the territories conquered by her. 2). Both Nepal and Tibet were to accept the sovereignty of China over Tibet. 3.) China was to make up her financial loss to Nepal. 4). If a quarrel arose between Neal and Tibet, they were to inform China for her arbitration. 5) Nepalese were to be allowed to trade in China and Tibet. 6). In case o foreign invasion of Nepal, China was to help her.7). Nepal and Tibet were to send present to court of China after every five years, and, in return, china was to send to the court of Nepal.

Treaty of Sugauli (1816) After the British were defeated by Prithvi Narayan Shah at Sndhuligadhi, they abandoned the hope of attacking the hilly regions of Nepal. But later on, in accordance with Prithv Narayan Shah’s policy of maintaining relations with foreign powers, a Nepalese envoy was stationed at Calcutta. East India Company attempted eal times to enter into Nepal. As her attempt, it was, during the period of Prithv Narayan Shah, a mission was sent to make relation with Nepal by East India Company under the leadership of captain Kin Lock. But it became unsuccessful to achieve the aim. After then, the mission of Wazir Ali, Kirk Patrick, and Captain Knox attempted to make an environment for East India Company in entering into Nepal peacefully, but in the achievement could get nothing. The British rulers of India had a great desire to stay in the cold places during hot seasons. The places as they wanted, due to not having been to India, they turned towards Nepal to get such places. But their attempt, which was to stay in Nepal entering here, had been becoming unsuccessful because of Nepal’s anti British policy. The year 114, it was the time of leisure for British because they had just won the war with France in Waterloo in 1813 or the British force did not have engaged in any war throughout the world. Therefore, at that time, the East India Company Government was wanted to take some places even by using the hard way and that was war.During the time of Lord Hasting, the then Governor General of India, was a kind of aggressive and started a war against Nepal by attacking, at first, in Butawal and Syuraj. As its result, the both countries went to the field of war. In the war, Nepal was defeated. On hearing the news of Nepal’s defeat including the surrender of Bam Shah in Almodha, the Nepalese government made a proposal for peace, and sent an envoy, Gajaraj Mishra, to the British at Sugauli to negotiate and settle the terms of peace. Major Bradshaw was the representative of the British. It is said that the two men drew up the clause of the treaty, but in reality it was prepared by East India Company. The clauses of the treaty are as following:

1. There shall be everlasting peace and friendship between the Honourable East India Company and the king of Nepal.

2. The king of Nepal shall not claim on the disputed territory and accepts that it shall under East India Company.

3. The king of Nepal shall handover the following mentioned territory to the East India Company government for ever:a. Whole the terai from Rapti to Kali riverb. The terai between Rapti and Gandaki (except particular Btawal)c. The terai area between Gandaki and Kusha (Koshi)d. The terai from Mechi to Tista

e. The Gorkhali troops of the hill area which has stayed in the east from Mechi including Nagari fort as well as the land, the way to go to the hill area from Morang and the territory of its round about shall be withdrawn within 40 days.

4. The Company government shall pay an annual subsidy of two lacks rupees including the currency of Company and authorized letter to the Nepal government and the king of Nepal shall free to distribute among his employees in his consideration.

5. The king of Nepal including his successors shall not keep any relation to the west from Kali River and the people of that territory.

6. The king of Nepal shall not claim on the land of the king of Sikkim. If any dispute arose between Sikkim and Nepal, British government shall be requested for arbitration and the decision of British Government shall be accepted by both countries.

7. The Nepalese Government shall not employ any European and American in their service without the prior consent of the British.

8. To sustain the relation of friendly and peace between both countries one shall keep one’s envoy in the state of the other.

9. The king of Nepal shall approve the treaty within fifteen days and the Governor General shall approve within 20 days or before these days if possible.

Accordingly, Gajaraj Mishra signed the treaty on the 18th of November, 1815 and returned to Nepal with it. As the signed agreement was to be sent within a fortnight, a great meeting of the Bhardars was held. Amar Shing Thapa and some other were not in favour of the treaty. Due to the different views of Nepalese Bhardars, postponed the matter of treaty for about a year by not providing the approval to the treaty and showed unwilling to leave the terai. In the meantime, Nepal government asked the help of china on the advice of Amar Singh Thapa. On seeing the unwilling of the Nepalese authority to leave the terai and coming to know of their request to China for help, lord Hastings sent 24000 troops under the command of Ochterlony to invade Nepal. The war again started .but Nepal was defeated again. After this, the king of Nepal approved the treaty on March 4, 1816.

1. The first was related to the territory and its subsidy which were mentioned in clause No. 2, 3 , 4 and 5

2. In clauses No.6 and 7 had mentioned the matter about foreign affairs. An attempt had been done to check and control on the diplomatic relations of Nepal with other foreign countries through these articles

3. It was, related to the Residency, mentioned in clause No.8Nepal lost her large amount of territory including the terai, the heart of the nation. The 2nd

category mentioned above did not accept Nepal as a full sovereign state. It is clearly seemed that the foreign policy of Nepal was attempted to control by British. The war of 1814-16 led to the annexation of a vast track of Nepalese territory by East India Company. Hence, the treaty of Sugauli was negotiated by Nepal and East India Company in the context of Nepal’s defeat and East India Company’s victory, even though the victoryhas been described as a ‘pyrrhic’ one. Nepal’s status as a sovereign state was implicit in the treaty of Sugauli from the clause No. 1, although her independence had never actually been called in question or challenged. The article No. 8 of the treaty provided for the exchange of ‘accredited ministers’ which was actually an improvement in the designation of the diplomatic representatives as the treaty of 1801 simply mentioned the appointment of ‘confidential persons’ to each other’s capital as vakil. However, the treaty had some political overtones and its article No. 7specifically asked Nepal not to take or retain in the service any European or American subjects, nor the subjects of British, without

consent of the British Government. This was, of course, unequal and entirely unjust provision of the treaty but this did not, in any way, put any sort of restriction, direct or indirect, on the kingdom’s international relations. The treaty of Sugauli can be compared with the treaty of Versailles. In the treaty of Versailles, Germany was compelled to provide signature even without any discussion among her authorities. Similarly, the treaty of Sugauli had been made compulsion for Nepal to approve it. The treaty of Sugauli was a result of defeat for Nepal from which Nepal lost everything for ever. Thapathali Treaty

After returning from Europe, Juag Bahadur’s attention seemed towards Tibet. The Nepalese delegates who had gone to China with the gifts to the emperor were treated very badly by the Chinese. Many of them were starved to death for want of food and water. It was reported to the emperor, but they remained indifferent. The Tibetans were tyrannizing over the Nepalese traders in Lhasa. The matter was reported to the authorities of Lhasa, but they paid no heed to it, and when even the Chinese representatives were found apathetic to the matter, Nepal was obliged to attack Tibet. The Nepalese troops under the General Bom Bahadur and Dhir Sumsher proceeded towards Tibet. Bom Bahadur defeated the Tibetans at Kerung and General did the same at Kuti.At the news of this defeat, the Chinese emperor sent a large force of Chinese troops and the Nepalese troops were also reinforced under General Jagat Sumsher and Bakhat Jung Rana. Fierce fight ensued but the Tibetans were given crushing defeats at Ghanta Gadi and Jhunga. At Jhunga the Nepalese got booty of salt worth three hundred thousand rupees, 364 Ibs of gold and thousands of woolen vests. A few days after this, Jung Bahadur himself reached Jhunga and pitched his camp two miles off.

Here on this side, Dhir sumsher conquered Kuti, advanced up to Suna Gomba, and defeated the Tibetans there. Thus defeated in all fronts, the Tibetans, sued for peace. For the conclusion of this treaty Tri Bikram Thapa went to Shikar Dzong from Nepal. But as the Nepalese claimed the

conquered and the territories Tibetans refused to cede the territories to them, treaty was not possible and tri Bikram Thapa returned to Nepal. Some days after this a large force of Tibetans attacked Kuti and Jhunga and drove out the Nepalese soldiers stationed at Suna Gomba. At the news of thiese reverses, Jung Bahadur sent troops under Dhir Sumsher towards Kuti and under Sanak Simha towards Jhunga. Both these forces gave crushing defeats to the Tibetans and they could resist no longer. About two thousand Tibetan soldiers lost their lives. Tibet was now willing to make peace with Nepal.

The month of Chaitra 1912 B.S. (March 1855 A,.D.) a treaty was concluded at Thapathali. According to this treaty:

1) The Tibetan government committed itself to make an annual payment of Rs 10,000 to Nepal.

2) Nepal promised to come to the aid of the Tibetans if they were attacked by any other “Raja”

3) Lhasa agreed not to levy duties on commodities brought into Tibet by Nepali subjects.4) Tibetans consented to return the “Sikh” prisoners who had been captured in the 1841 war

between Tibet and the Dogra ruler of Kashmir, and Nepal agreed to return all Tibetan prisoners. Nepal also was to withdraw from the Tibetan territory it had occupied.

5) Nepal would be permitted to install a “Bhardar” (i.e. envoy) in Lhasa.6) Nepal was granted the right to establish a trading establishment at lhasa for the sale of all

kinds of merchandise.7) The Nepal representatives at Lhasa were granted the right to adjudicate disputes between

Nepalis, Kasmiris and other non-Tibetans in Lhasa. When subjects of Nepal and Tibet were involved in a dispute, the two authorities would jointly settle the case.

8) The two governments agreed to the mutual surrender of murders.9) Tibet was made responsible for the life and property of Nepali subjects in Lhasa.

Similarly, Nepal was made responsible for the protection of Tibetans in Nepal. 10) The persons and property of subjects of Gorkha or Tibet who had collaborated with the

enemy during the war were to be respected by both governments.

Treaty of 1923 and political status of Nepal:Nepal did tremendous attempt to get regard the status of a sovereign and independent state from the British government before the ruling period of Chandra Sumsher. In the Anglo-Nepal war, Nepal was a defeated country whereas British as victorious. Therefore, Nepal lost large territories after the war signing in the treaty of Sugauli (1816). In spite of strong opposition of British Generals, the treaty of Sugauli recognized Nepal’s status as an independent state and it did not prohibited Nepal’s inalienable right to continue diplomatic relations with other countries. Nepal status as a sovereign status was implicit in the treaty of Sugauli. The treaty of Sugauli had some political overtones and its article 7 specially asked Nepal ‘not to take or retain in the service any British subjects, without the consent of the British government. This was, of course, an equal and entirely unjust provision of the treaty, from which the British interest apparently seemed towards in making isolation to Nepal from the international relationship. There were two points that saught to impose some restrictions on Nepal. These were the provisions of the treaty of Sugauli under which Nepal was not allowed to employ British, European or American citizens, without the consent of the British Government, and the so-called Engagement of 1839 under which Nepal undertook to have no dealings with the dependent allies of the east India Company beyond thf Ganges. While the first point was observed by Nepal more in its breach than observance, the latter had become almost absolutely redundant.When the treaty was signed between British India and Nepal, anti British non violence movement under the leadership of Mahatma Gandi was gaining momentum in India. So the British were trying to win over the native states and the neighbouring countries to their side. In pursuance of this policy, the British made a new treaty in 1923. The treaty had the following clauses:

1) Relation between Nepal and the British government shall remain peaceful and permanent.2) Disputes with neighbouring countries shall be settled by mutual cooperation.3) Nepal can purchase arms and ammunition from other countries. But she shall not send

them outside the boundaries of Nepal.4) Nepal can purchase and import British goods for her use free of custom duties.

5) One country shall not disturb the peace and security of the other country.6) The treaty shall in no cases affect the treaty of Sugauli and other treaties concluded

between the two countries. As the head of the sovereign and independent country, the king of Nepal was regarded as His Majesty by the British and all other foreign powers from that time. After this treaty, Nepal was clearly declared as sovereign and independent state. Before this treaty, British had already respected Nepal as sovereign state. These were several examples to show that the Nepalese kingdom was always respected as a sovereign independent state. In 1876, 1877, and 1878 Dhir Sumsher was deputed by His Majesty the king of Nepal as his ambassador and the British authorities granted him all privileges due to a foreign envoy representing an independent state. Same was the case when the Rana Prime Ministers General Ranudip Singh, and Bir Sumsher, visited India in 1881 and 1888 respectively as ambassador of the king of Nepal. In sometimes, Nepal was recognized as sovereign state but in practice British did not want to response as equal as her status. In this meaning, the treaty 1923 keeps importance in getting reorganization from British as a sovereign state of equal status.It seems that most of the provisions of the treaty of 1923were mere reiterations of the accepted facts and status quo. This is amply proved by the spirit of the communications sent by the government of India to Resident of Kathmandu on April4, 1911 and the clarifications sent to the Princely State of Gwalior in 1924. Both these points are already discussed in detail in the chapter on political relations between Nepal and British India.The treaty of 1923 simply made ‘de jure’ what was already a de facto situation since Nepal was among very few countries which were able to safeguard their independence. However, the document signed at Singha Durbar, the official residence of the prime minister and later the site of the cabinet secretariat, had its own importance? It put a formal stamp of approval on all bilateral deals and agreements agreed to by both sides, besides respecting some of Nepal’s rights of transit for importing goods and armaments trough the British India ports. Besides, the treaty led to the broadening of Nepal’s international relations. An indication of this fact was the visit of M. Denial Levi who was deputed b the French government to present the insignia of a ‘Grant to Chandra Sumsher which was conferred on him at the impressive public ceremony on March 30, 1925. This was the first time that a nation, other than Britain and China, had decorated a Nepalese leader.The treaty of 1923 was ratified by His Majesty King Tribhuvan and His Majesty King George V highlighting the reciprocal respect of each other’s sovereign status, equality and independence. The ratified copies were exchanged at Kathmandu on April 8, 1925, amidst an impressive function.In continuation of the process of removal of discrepancies in the way of consolidating bilateral relations between Nepal and Great Britain, the British authorities took some procedural measures. A government of India’s letter to the British Envoy to the court of Nepal in 1928 stated that ‘in connection with Macpherson’s British Enactments state in force of native states’ Nepal being an independent state, does not fall within the meaning of definition of interpretation Act and the General Clauses Act.Te British authorities changed their ‘Foreign Service Rules’ in 1928 including the entire British personnel working in the Nepal –based Legation under the foreign service of the British Government in India by applying all provisions of the ‘Rules’ to them.

The French Consul General visited Nepal in 1929, and the Italian Consul and other Consuls followed suit, in recognition of the changed circumstances caused by the expansion of Nepal’s diplomatic activities by Chandra Sumsher.It is a fact that the treaty of 1923 was the first comprehensive treaty signed between the two countries, Nepal and Great Britain, after long deliberations and adequate consultations on both sides. Not too much importance should, however, be attached to the treaty itself as far as the basic position of Nepal was concerned. Therefore, It is clear that while Nepal’s status as continuously independent state has remained unchallenged throughout history. It entered into a diplomatic epoch under Chandra Sumsher. The treaty of 1923 was one of the major landmark steps taken y Chandra Sumsher to broad base and active Nepal’s diplomacy.he strove tomaintain and assert Nepal’s distinct political individuality in tune with her tradition and glorious history. The move was also in tune with his times when self- government and self-determination had become the watchwords in Asia.

The Treaty of Peace of Friendship between India and Nepal31st July 1950The year of 1947 was an important year for south Asia because of a successful non-violence movement, which was held in India under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. As its consequence, India entered into a democratic system. On the other side, in Nepal, there was an absolute and autocratic rule of Ranas. Having impressed by the movement of independent of India and the great revolution of China, the Nepalese people were attempting tremendously to root out the Rana rule. The movement of Nepalese people was near to gain its aim. In the meantime, India proposed Nepal to make a signature in the treaty of ‘peace and friendship’. Rana Prime Minister, Mohan Sumsher, agreed the proposal and the treaty was completed between two countries, Nepal and India by providing the signature of Prime Minister, Mohan Sumsher from the side of Nepal and Chandreswar Narayan Singh, the Ambassador of India to Nepal on 31st July 1950.The provisions of the treaty were as follows:Article -1There shall be everlasting peace and friendship between the government of India and the government of Nepal. The two governments agree mutually to acknowledge and respect the complete sovereignty territorial integrity and independence of each other.Article 2The two governments hereby undertake to inform each other of any serious friction or misunderstanding with any neighboring state likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two governments.Article -3In order to establish and maintain the relations referred to in article 1 the two governments agree to continue diplomatic relations with other by means of representatives with such staff as in necessary for the due performance of their functions.The representatives and such of their staff as may be agreed upon shall enjoy such diplomatic privileges and immunities as are customarily granted by international law on a reciprocal basis provided that in no case shall there be less than those granted to person of a similar status of any other state having diplomatic relations with either government.Article -4 The two governments agree to appoint Consuls –General, Consul, Vice –Consuls and consular agents, who shall reside in town, parts and other places in each other’s territory as may be agreed to.

Consul-General, Consuls, Vice-Consuls and other consular agents shall be provided with exequaturs or other valid authorization of their appointment. Such exequaturs or authorization is able to be withdrawn by the country which issued it, if considered necessary. The reasons for the withdrawal shall be indicated wherever possible.The persons mentioned above shall enjoy on a reciprocal basis all the rights, privileges exemptions and immunities that are accorded to persons of corresponding status or any other state.Article -5Te government of Nepal shall be free to import, from or through the territory of India, arms, ammunitions, or warlike material and equipment necessary for the security of Nepal. The procedure for giving effect to this arrangement shall be worked out by the two governments acting in consultation.Article -6Each government undertakes, in token of neighbourly, friendship, between India and Nepal, to give the nationals of the other, in its territory national treatment with regard to participation in industrial and economic development in such territory and to the grant of concessions and contracts relating to such development.Article-7The government and India and Nepal agree to grant on a reciprocal basis, to the nationals of one country in the territories of the other the same privileges in the matter of residents, ownership of property, participation in the trade and commerce, movement and privileges of similar nature.Article 8So far as matters dealt with herein are concerned, this treaty cancels all previous treaties, agreements, and engagements entered into on behalf of India between the British government and the government of Nepal.Article -9The treat shall come into force from the date of signature by both governments.Article 10:The treaty shall remain in force until it is terminated by either party by giving one year notice.

After nine months of the treaty was signed, the signatory government of Nepal was thrown out from the state power. The attitude of India towards Nepal could not appear as clear in the point of view of independency and equal sovereign status. The provisions of the treaty and exchanged letter with the treaty have clearly mentioned that the signatory party, Nepal, has obligation to take consent from India in importing arms and ammunitions. Nepal should give first priority to the Indian nationals to seek foreign assistance in regard to the development of the natural resources of or of any industrial project in Nepal, according to the clause No. 4 of the treaty’s exchanged letter. The clauses of the treaty have apparently seen as Indian domination upon Nepal. The Article No.7 was most harmful for Nepalese nationals due to the rights given to the citizens of both countries as their desire. As it, there was great possibility of Nepalese citizen to fall into minority under this treaty because the population of Nepal as well as territory is 30 times smaller than India.India started to voilate the provisions of the treaty by making and importing the arms and ammunitions not informing to Nepal. It was the concept of India that Nepal should remain silent even not making any expression against India because its’ smaller position than India. When

king Mahendra started to take the responsibility of the throne, by appointing Tanka Prasad Acharya as the Prime Minister of Nepal, expressed his desire was to change Nepal’s “special relationship” with India in favour of equal relationship with other countries. Under the treaty of 1950, Indian Military Liaison groups were kept in the north border of Nepal or Nepal-China border. As the most important step was taken in the diplomatic sector in the Primership of Kirti Nidhi Bista, in 1969, the letter was sent to India by Nepalese Government asking as the following matters:

a) Withdrawal of Indian Military Liaison groupb) Withdrawal of Indian technicians and observers posted on Nepal’s northern check posts

along the China border.c) No more consultations on security matters with India under the provisions of the treaty of

1950; andd) The termination of the 1965 Agreement seeking India’s permission and agreement for

import of arms by Nepal.Prime Minister, Bista expressed in an interview with the Nepalese government’s newspaper, The Rising Nepal, in 1969 that only Nepal was not ready to stay under the treaty of 1950 for the “policy of security of India” while it was abandoned several times by India before the time. India had already made product of arms and ammunitions including nuclear weapons even not asking to Nepal. But, in 1988, Nepal brought some weapons from China through Kodari Highway, India strongly opposed saying that that was the step against the treaty of 1950. Therefore, we can say from the study of these facts that the treaty of 1950 is a legal document from which India wants to dominate Nepal using its provisions. In 1995, during the visit period of Nepalese Prime Minister, Manamohan Adhikari, the government of Nepal put proposal before Indian government to review the treaty by amending some points. But India did not listen towards it. After Manamohan Adhikari, in 2008, Pushpa Kamal Dahal “Prachanda”, he was the first man in the history of Nepal, who put forward the proposal before India to replace the treaty by new one. But India did not satisfy with his proposal. However, the treaty seems as an obstacle in the diplomatic development of Nepal though it was not so active in practice. It is necessary to replace to the treaty of 1950 by new one for Nepal‘s dignity and prosperity.

2. Constitutional Development:

i) The Government of Nepal Act 1948j) The Interim Constitution 2051k) High Court Act 2008l) The constitution of Nepal 1959m) The constitution of Nepal 1962n) The constitution of Nepal 1990o) The Interim constitution 2007p) Towards the Constituent Assembly

Constitutional DevelopmentThe Government of Nepal Act 1948(2004)

Historical Background:The constitution history of Nepal began towards the end of forties’ decade in a high fragile way. Rana Prime Minister, Padma Sumsher had made an announcement that the state should be governed by involving the large number of people from which the people could be succeeded to gain facilities. Therefore, he was going to promulgate a constitution for the nation, proclaimed by him. He was the man as a Nepalese ruler, whose first attempt towards a short of constitution was the Government of Nepal Act 1948(2004). It was only drafted but could not be implemented due to getting mountain pressure from other Ranas. Since, than Nepal owned six constitutions would give us an understanding of the nature and direction of constitutional development in Nepal.

It was the first attempt in promulgating the main law by the Nepalese rulers from which the people could come under a boundary of the system in society. It was not expected of the authoritarian Rana rulers to introduce any political reforms. However, in the context of the growing discontent against their rule, the British with drawl relied from the sub continent on which the Ranas had democracy in the South Asian Region with the abandoning of the colonial rule, the Rana rules considered it wise to take up a reformist approach. The Rana Prime Minister Padma Shumsher JBR who framed the government of Nepal Act. viewed it as a scheme of Political reforms aimed at realizing his aspirations of reforms in the country.

The Act(constitution) was divided into six Parts, one Appendix and sixty eight Articles. The background in the first part, the fundamental rights in second parts, the executive assembly in third part; the legislative assembly in forth, the judiciary management in fifth and the miscellaneous in the sixth chapter (part) are mentioned. The executive body was also of two parts (a) Panchayat assembly and (b) central assembly. The Panchayat assembly was also mentioned as the village Panchayat and Nagar (city) panchayat;

The Act provided for fundamental rights such as freedom of person, speech, liberty, press, assembly, worship, equality. But it can be used by the people not avoiding the virtuous, and moral practice, and People’s policy. The executive powers were vested upon the Rana Prime

Minister. There was a provision of council of minister to assists the Rana Prime Minister in administration works and to be appointed by him. Regarding the central legislature, the two houses were consisted: Rastriya Sabha and Bhardari Sabha. Rastriya Shava consisted of 60-70 elected (by Panchayat) and nominated members in the ratio of 2:3. The bhardari sabha consisted of 20-30 members nominated by Rana Prime Minister. The system of direct election was also mentioned. These election were to be held for Gramin (village) or Nagar (city) Panchayats.

The central legislature was a permanent body but it was provided in the constitution that one-fourth of members would retire every years. The bill passed by the legislature were subject to their ratification by Rana prime Minister through his signatures. The Act of 1948 also provided for a Judiciary system. It was stated that elementary civil and criminal justice shall be administrated by the Panchayats. It also provided for courts and courts of appeal and a high court. The Act mentioned provision for the universal free and compulsory elementary education, with an objective to liquidate illiteracy. A provision was also made in the Act for the formation of a Public Service Commission. Ranas Prime Minister Padma Sumsher abducted before the Act could be promulgated and his successor Mohan Sumsher refused to implement. He tendered his resignation and his successor Mohan Sumsher was in the opposite to apply it. It may be pointed out here the need for a constitution was felt by Rana ruler taking into consideration his personal interest.

The Interim Government of Nepal Act 1951

The interim government of Nepal Act 1951 came into operation after the withdraw of the Rana rule. The idea was that certain rulers and regulation were required to steamline the politics and the administration till a constitution was framed and promulgated.

The interim constitution 1951 was divided into six parts. The Preamble in the first part, the guided principles of state policy in the second, the executive power in the 3 rd, the judiciary management in the chapter three, in the chapter four. The Auditor General, in part sir. The election, were mentioned in the constitution. The constitution was amended for six times within ten years.

It was stated in the interim constitution that the government will work for the improvement of social condition of its people, make effective provision for securing rights to work and education to public assistance in cases of employment old age, sickness and disablement and to improve living standard of the people in general and weaker sections of society in particular. The Constitution also provided for equal opportunity, rule of law, personal liberty and prohibition of trafficking in human being, beggary and other forms of forced labour.

The executive powers were vested on the king. It provided for a council of ministers headed by Prime Minister to assists the king in the execution of his powers and functions. The Prime Minister and members of cabinets were appointed by the king. King was also the supreme commander of the defence force of Nepal. King had the sovereign power to make laws for country. The cabinet could submit a bill for the consideration of the King, who could assent to bill, hold it or return it. The constitution also provided for an Advisory Assembly consisting of the members nominated by the King.

The Act also made Provision for the constitution of an election commission. The election commission was entrusted with the task to prepare electoral roll. The election of the constituent’s assembly, which was mentioned in the constitution Article No.68, was removed from the constitution by amending the constitution for the fourth times in2015 B.S.

Aim of the interim government was stated as to create conditions as early as possible to hold the election for the constituent Assembly (at the first) and latter on, parliament.

High Court Act 2008

Juddha Sumsher established a high court using the state power in the name of justice to provide the people. But in its establishment, the principle of separation of power was not applied. Juddha Sumsher, as the Prime minister had used all the power of state. Therefore, he was the supreme justice of the court too.

After the establishment of Democracy in 1951, the Interim Constitution was promulgated to rule over the country, in which the formation of the High Court was mentioned in its Chapter-3 and article No. 30. The jurisdiction and duties were also defined by the Act of 2008 B.S.

Relating to the context of High Court’s jurisdiction, the constitution was also amended in 2010 B;S'. It was the third amendment of the Interim constitution. At that time, a constitutional problem created from the verdicts given by the High Court. In High court, two writs were filed to get verdict as the following:

1) B.P. Koirala was banned to go outside from the Kathmandu valley until the next order would not be given under Public Security Act 2007 by the Home Ministry. He was charged that the government employees were made hindrance from his speech. B.P. Koirala filed writ against the order of the government.

2) The Badahakim of western Nepal No. 1imprisoned two persons named Min Bahadur Shahi and Bharat Bahadur Pande under Kathmandu Valley Magistrate Act 2010. They filed the writ under the right of habeas corpus against Badahakim.

3) In November 1953, High Court gave a verdict to both the cases as follows:a) The exercise of both cases was illegal. As the verdict given by the court regarding the

cases of both, that was the right to the citizen provided by the interim constitution to

move and walk freely all over the country without any restriction. From this point of view, both the Acts having contradicted with constitution, therefore, were illegal.

b) There was no right to the king to make law and Act. The king was given right only to issue the ordinance by the constitution

c) Prime Minister had no right to issue executive order. According to the constitution, these orders should be issued by the king and council.

Now a question can rise- was the verdict of High Court correct?

As answers of the question:

1) The right to the citizen was mentioned in the interim constitution under the Directive Principle of the state. The government or state would not compel to follow the articles of the constitution which were mentioned under Directive Principles.

2) The Act like Public Security Act 2007 would not invalid because of contradicted with the Directive Principles of the constitution

3) The court gave a verdict that the king had no right to make the law and Act. However, the jurisdiction and duty of the High Court was provided by the Act not by the constitution and the right which the court exercised to provide verdict being under the Act made by the king.

4) The executive right would be used by Prime Minister in the name of king of council as the head of the government. Therefore, the verdicts given by the court were wrong.

On one side, the High Court was declared as highest court of justice and its verdicts would be final decisions, but on the other hand, the king was also supreme authority who had provided the constitution as well as the Acts. Therefore, from the decision of High Court, a constitutional problem created in the country. To solve the problem, the king took a step by amending the constitution and issuing the proclamation. On January 20, 1954, (Magh 7, 2010) made a proclamation. The major points, which were submitted in his proclamation, are mentioned as following:

1) The right to make the law and Act was under the hand of the king until the constitution would not be promulgated by the constituent assembly.

2) The supreme power of the nation in Nepal had been entrusting under the king since ifs inception.

3) The laws and act could not be invalid due to having been contradict with the directive principle of the constitution.

4) The public Security Act 2007 and Kathmandu UpaTyakanchan Magistrateko Sawal were fully legal even whatever verdict was given by whichever court.

Thus, this proclamation and amendment of the constitution vested all the rights of the state including executive to the hand of the king and the right of the court was cut off.

The political parties of the countries announced to it as black day by protesting against the step of the king. In 1956, the High court was replaced by Supreme Court in the ruling time of King Mahendra,

The constitution of 1959

On the occasion of the declaration of the constitution of 1959, on February 12, 1959, king Mahandra proclaimed:

“A commission had been appointed by us on March 16, 1958 to draft a constitution suitable to the genius of our country. I am happy to proclaim hereby the granting of constitution drafted by the said commission and approved by the council of ministers after a careful security-a constitution designed to promote the welfare of this generation and also of those to come and deemed suitable for this ancient lqnd of ours”.

On March 16, 1958 king Mahendra formed a commission under the chairmanship of Bhagawati Prasad Singh. As the advisor of the commission Sir Ivor Jennings, expert of the constitution of Cambridge University of United Kingdom was invited to draft the constitution. It was said that the draft, which was prepared by Jennings, was rejected by the commission in the advice of the king because in those drafts, the executive and legislative rights were provided to the council of ministers more than the king. His fourth draft was accepted including the amendment in some points. After the constitution was drafted, he made an expression in a press conference that the democracy between Britain and Nepal seems very difference because in Britain, the monarchy is only the nominal head of the state but in Nepal, the king should not be a nominal head. It was a symbol that the king was going to be active in nation’s politics in future.

It is attempted to make clear about t he nature of the constitution in its preamble. These are 1) the objective of the constitution, 2) the kind of the political system assumed by the constitution and 3) location of the sovereignty. These were mentioned in the preamble of the constitution of 1959. The preamble of the constitution of 1959 indicates about the mentioned subject as follows:

And whereas for the said purpose it is desirable to enact and promulgate a constitution for sovereign kingdom of Nepal, I, King Mahendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev in exercise of the sovereign kingdom of Nepal and prerogatives vesting in us in accordance with the traditions and custom of our country and which developed on s from our August and Respected forefathers, do hereby enact and promulgate this fundamental law entitled “the constitution of the kingdom of Nepal”

The preamble of the constitution has mentioned the principle of the as the points given below:

1) All the powers of the state including sovereign power of the country is kept under the control of the king as vested by the tradition and custom.

2) The powers, mentioned above, should be exercised only by the king not by the people.3) The sovereign rights of the state are the hereditary rights of the king.

According to the preamble of the constitution of 1959, the objectives of the constitution are as follows:

1) To provide the rights to the people as the desire expressed by late king Tribhuvan due to the revolution was led by him.

2) It is promulgated for the welfare of the people.3) To establish a democratic system in the country.

The 1959 constitution made provisions for a wide range of fundamental rights to the people of Nepal in the spirit of democratic constitution. These fundamental rights included personal liberty, equality, and religion, and property, freedom of speech, assembly, association, residence, and right to constitutional remedies.

According to the Article No. 10 of the constitution, the executive powers were vested on the king who would exercise powers through a council of ministers headed by the prime minister it was maintained that the king shall act the recommendation of the cabinet. The prime minister was to be appointed by the king and other ministers on the recommendation of Prime minister.

The two kinds of powers were provided to the king by the constitution. These were 1) the power exercised by the king in his own discretion and 2) the power exercised on the advice of the cabinet. In order to exercise the discretionary power, the king had no any obligation to take advice with the cabinet. But in exercising the latter, the advice would take with prime minister.

The provision for the Council of State was consisted in Article No.11 of the constitution in which the President and Deputy President of the Senate and speaker and Deputy speaker of House of Representative, ministers, former ministers and such other persons were appointed by the king. The functions of the council of the state were: proclamation of the accession of His Majesty’s successor in accordance with the law, custom usage in Nepal and arrangements for Regency if king was a minor or unable to perform his duties.

In part V, Chapter 1, and Article No. 18,of the constitution of 1959, it was mentioned “there shall be a parliament which shall consist of His Majesty and two Houses, to be known respectively as the Senate (Maha Sabha) and the House of Representatives (Pratinidhi Sabha).” It means the constitution provided for a parliament consisting of two houses: Senate and House of Representatives.

The House of Representatives consisted of 109members elected on the basis of universal adult suffrage. This House did not have powers to discuss any issue relating to the conduct of His Majesty and also relating to the conduct of Chief Justice and other Judges of Supreme Court. The bills passed by the house could become law after receiving royal acquiesces to it. His Majesty could withhold acquiesces to a bill; return it along with his observations.

The Senate consisted of 36 members-18 elected by the House of Representatives and 18 nominated by the king. The Senate was permanent House, of which members’ term was fixed for six years.

When a bill would be submitted for the assent of the king in accordance with Article 41 His Majesty should declare either that he agreed or withheld his assent thereform. If the king wanted to consult, he was provided the right to consult with the State of Council as to whether he should assent to a bill and if after such consultation he was satisfied he ought to withhold his assent. It was his discretionary power.

The constitution of 1959 had a design of the principle of separation of powers. But the discretionary power of the king was very heavy. The declaration of the emergency in the state was defined as the discretionary power of the king, according to the Article No.55 of the constitution. He would declare emergency in the country in case of threat of war, in internal crisis of the security and economic life of the country or in internal disturbance. The king would assume all powers in such a situation. He could also assume emergency powers in case of failure of constitutional machinery and suspend any provision of he constitution pertaining to part III, IV, & V. The king could also suspend ether one of both houses of the parliament and him assume the law making power. A memorable matter in the history was that king Mahendra had dissolved the elected cabinet including both Houses of parliament in December 1960 using the power provided by this Article of the constitution.

Part VI of the constitution made provision for a Supreme Court headed by a Chief Justice appointed by the king in consultation with the Prime Minister.

The powers to enact amend, and repeal a law relating to the succession to the throne was vested upon the hand o the king as his discretion power. The power relating to the armed force of the nation was his discretionary power. He was the Supreme Commander In Chief of the army.

The first general election was held in Nepal in February 1959 on the basis of this constitution. But the life of this parliament could last only for eighteen months. King Mahendra abrogated the newly installed parliamentary democracy in December 1960 and the constitution was also collapsed.

Constitution of Nepal -1962After the dismissal of first elected parliament, king Mahendra took over all powers upon his hand and established his despotic rule. He, creating a principle among the people of Nepal as well as the world community, forwarded an argument that the parliamentary democracy based on the western models of governance was not suitable to the Nepalese condition and had provided to be failure. He, therefore, began to search a ‘third world model’ of democracy suitable to Nepalese culture, history and traditions. He envisaged a new political system for Nepal as Panchayat System by following the footsteps of General Ayub Khan of Pakistan, Sukarno of Indonesia and Colonel Naser of Egypt. The constitution committee suggested for the establishment of Panchayat System, which obviously resembled “basic Democracy of Ayub, “Guided Democracy “of Sukarno and the “Class Organization” of Egypt and Nigeria. The main features of Panchayat system were:

1) Party less character of polity,2) Supremacy of monarchy and its guidance and control at all levels ofPanchayat

organizations’

3) Decentralization of political power and4) Class organization

The 1962 constitution maintained that

The governance of the country in consonance with the popular will was only possible through a party less democratic Panchayat System, which was rooted in Nepalese traditions. Hence, it was stated to be an indigenous system.

In the preamble of the constitution 1962, it was written:

“Now therefore, I, king Mahendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev, in exercise of sovereign powers and prerogatives inherent in us according to the constitutional law, custom and usage of our country as handed down to us by our august and revered forefathers, do hereby enact and promulgate this constitution”

In the point of view of the power of the king, there was no basically different than that of the constitution of 1959

The constitution defined Nepal as an independent, indivisible and sovereign monarchical Hindu kingdom. Nepali language in Devanagari script was declared as official and national language.

Panchayat constitution made provisions regarding the citizenship that every person who had his domicile in Nepal and

1) Who was born in Nepal; or2) Either of whose parents was born in Nepal; or 3) Who, as a women, had any kind of relation with a citizen of Nepal consisting

matrimony in accordance with the laws and customs of Nepal; or 4) Who had already obtained a certificate of citizenship in citizenship, etc.

Part 3 of the constitution was related to fundamental duties and rights. The fundamental duties of citizen of Nepal were stated as devotion and loyalty towards the kingdom of Nepal. According to the Article No. 9(b), the Nepalese citizen, to exercise one’s rights with due regards to the law and without infringing upon the rights of others; 9(c)to follow the system established under the constitution and 9(d)to maintain harmony in the society by refraining from taking any action. The fundamental rights prescribed in the constitution were: right to equality, right to freedom right against exploitation, right against exile, right to religion, right of property and right to constitutional remedies.

The constitution also prescribed a number of restrictions on the exercise of fundamental rights relating to national security, law and order, peace and harmony and prevention of internal and external disturbances..

In the Part 4, of the constitution the Directive Principles of the nations ware mentioned as the principles of Panchaya System. Likewise in the Part 5, Article No.20, 21, 22, the discretionary powers of the king were decided. His Majesty was decided as the source of the power. He was vested the sovereignty of Nepal by the article No. 20(2) of the constitution. All powers –executive, legislative and judicial could be emanated by the king. The Raj Sabha, as an advisory council of the king or monarchy would also be formed, according to the constitution, Part 6,

Article No. 23. The constitution Part 7 provided for a a Council of Ministers appointed by the king to aid and advices him in the execution of executive powers.

In the Part 8, a four tier Panchayat System was established. These were : 1) village or town Panchayat, 2) district panchayat, 3) zonal panchayat, and 4) rastriya panchayat. Direct elections were held only at the lowest web of Panchaya hierarchy. Rastria Panchayat was the apex of the party less panchayat system and functioned as the national legislature. As the supreme judicial authority, the constitution also provided Supreme Court and other level courts were also settled in the constitution to provide the justice to the people.

The 1962 constitution was amended thrice in 1967, 1975 and 1980. On 27 February 1967, by making a royal proclamation, king Mahendra proclaimed that the constitution was amended for the first time. The Panchayat system was declared as partyless officially, the, as a head of the council of ministers, post of prime minister was created, compulsion The membership of the class organizations was made as compulsory to be the member of Rastriya Panchayat through the first amendment. Likewise, the class organizations were given the constitutional status, formation of election commission was settled, and the posts of Commander in Chief, zonal commissar and Royal Nepali Ambassador were created through the first amendment.

On December 12, 1975, the constitution 1962 was amended for the second time. The Back to Village National Campaign was given constitutional status, the Prevention of Abuse of Authority commission was established, the flag of His Majesty the King was included and the class organizations were expanded up to the local level (whereas these were formed only in central level before it) in the constitution through this amendment.

On 15 December 1980, or after the national referendum, the constitution 1962 was amended for the third time. From this amendment, the major portions of the constitution which were amended, i.e. the proposal of “zone of peace” was included in the constitution as one of the goals of foreign policy, the system of direct election to the Rastriya Panchayat on the basis of adult franchise, appointment of the prime minister on the basis recommendation made by Rastriya Panchayat and abolition of the Back to Village National Campaign, in the constitution.

The 1962 constitution remained effective till 1990 when the Panchaya System was removed through a people’s movement and it was replaced by the multiparty parliamentary system.

The constitution of 1990The constitution of 1990 was promulgated by the king on 9th November 1990. From the study of the preamble of the constitution 1990, these are found:

a. The source of sovereign authority of the independent and sovereign Nepal is inherent in the people.

b. The constitution was promulgated concerning to the desire of the Nepalese people which was expressed by the people through the recent people’s movement.

c. The constitution was promulgated and enforced to guarantee basic human rights to every people, and to consolidate the Adult franchise, parliamentary system of government, constitutional monarchy and system of multiparty democracy.

The constitution envisaged for a constitutional monarchy in Nepal. The constitution declared Nepal as a multiethnic, multilingual, democratic, independent, indivisible, sovereign, Hindu and constitutional monarchical kingdom. The sovereignty was vested in the Nepalese people and exercised in accordance with the provisions of the constitution.

In part 3, from Article No.11, to 23 of the constitution, it provided for wide ranging fundamental rights to Nepalese citizens. These were:

a) Right to equality, b) rights to freedom, c) press and publication right, d) right regarding criminal justice, e) right against preventive detention, f) right to information, g) right to property, h) cultural and educational right, i) right to religion, j)right against exploitation, j)right against exile, k) right to privacy, l) right to constitutional remedy. In the Article Nos.24, 25 and 26 , the Directive principles and policies of the state were also narrated. The discretionary powers regarding to the legislative, judiciary and executive sectors as not provided to the king. The king could make, amend and remove the laws and by- laws related to the royal family, succession to the throne and the royal palace in his discretion. He was regarded as the symbol of Nepalese nationality and the unity of the Nepalese people. The king was to protect and preserve the constitution by keeping in view the best interests and welfare of the people of Nepal.

The constitution provided a constitutional organ, Raj Parisad, which was an advisory organ of the king, constituted by the king, in Part 6. The executive powers were vested in the king and the council of ministers headed by Prime Minister. The formation of the Council of Ministers would be held by the following ways:

1) According to the Article No. 36 (1), the leader of the party which commands a majority in the House of Representatives would be appointed as the Prime Minister by the king.

2) If no party had no a clear majority in the House of Representatives, a member who was able to command a majority with the support of two or more parties represented in the House would be appointed as prime minister by the king, according to the Article No. 42(1).

3) If no member was able to command a majority in the House of Representatives, even pursuant to Article 42(1), the leader of the parliamentary party that held the largest number of seats in the House of Representatives would be appointed as the prime minister by the king. But a prime minister appointed pursuant to Article 42(1) or 42(2), he should be required to obtain a vote of confidence from the House of Representatives within thirty days.

The legislature consisted of two Houses: House of Representatives and National Assembly. The National Assembly (upper house)consisted of 60 members: 10 members nominated by the king, 35 members (including at least 3 women) elected by the House of Representatives on the basis of proportional representation by means of single transferable vote, 15 members -3each from five development regions elected by single transferable vote by an electoral college consisting of the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the village and town level local authorities and the president, Deputy president and members of the district level local authorities. The lower house, House of Representatives consisted of 205 members elected on the basis of adult franchise.

The constitution vested powers relating to justice in an independent judiciary consisting of Supreme Court, Appellate Court and District courts. The constitution adopted provisions for a number of commissions such as Commission for Investigation of the Abuse of Authority, Public Service Commission, and Election Commission, etc. All the political parties /organizations were required to register with the Election Commission. Any party based n religion, community, caste, tribe or region was not recognized by the election Commission. Any political party consisting election to the House of Representatives was required to have at least five percent women candidates out of its total candidates consisting the election.

The emergency power vested on His Majesty. He was also the Supreme Commander of the Royal Nepal Army.

The Article No.127 of this constitution related to “power to remove difficulties “was vested on the hand of the king severally misused by king Gyanendra who was also the protector of the constitution and as its result the constitution was to be failed. This constitution was replaced by the Interim constitution promulgated in January 2007.

The Interim Constitution 2007The basic objective of the interim constitution has been to provide a set a rules and regulations for the governance of the country till it is replaced by a permanent constitution.

The preamble of the interim constitution for the first time used the words “we the people of Nepal, in exercise the sovereign powers and state authority inheriting in us”… … …

The sovereign authority is vested in the Nepalese people. Nepal is declared as an independent, indivisible, sovereign, secular, and inclusive and fully democratic state. While Nepali is the official language all the languages spoken as the mother tongue in Nepal are the national language s of Nepal.

Regarding citizenship the interim constitution states that the following persons who have their domicile in Nepal shall be deemed to be citizen of Nepal by decent:

a) A person who has acquired citizenship by decent before the commencement of this constitution.

b) Any person whose father and mother is a citizen of Nepal at the birth of such person.c) Any person born till the end of mid April 1990 and has been permanently residing in

Nepal by birth as per the laws in force.

The interim constitution also provides for fundamental rights to Nepalese citizen such as rights to freedom, equality, right against untouch-ability and social discrimination, right regarding publication, broadcasting and press, right regarding environment and health, education and cultural right, right regarding employment and social security, right to property, right of women, right to social justice, right of child, right to religion, right against preventive detention, right against torture, right to information, right to privacy, right against exploitation, right regarding labour, right against exile and right to constitutional remedy.

Responsibility of the state is stated to be to conduct free and impartial election for the members of constituent assembly, to ensure progressive socio-economic and political change in the country, etc.

The leader of any party which commands a majority in the legislature –parliament shall be appointed as the Prime Minister by the president. The executive right are vested in the council of ministers and executive functions of Nepal will be carried in the government of Nepal. The prime minister and the council of ministers are responsible to the legislature-parliament.The interim constitution has provided for 601 member legislative-parliament consisting of 240 from the direct election on the basis of adult franchise, 335 members from the proportional representation and 26 members of civil society shall be nominated by the government as their status in the legislature- parliament.

The judiciary consists of Supreme Court, appellate and district courts.The president shall be elected by the majority of the legislature-parliament but shall be removed from the post in such a condition, if a resolution is passed by a majority of two-third of the total number of members in the House of legislature-parliament to the effect that his conduct is not compatible with his position. The president is the supreme commander in chief f the Nepali army. The constitution also provides for Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority, Public Service Commission, election commission and national human rights commission. The constitution provides that the commander in chief of army force will be appointed by president as recommended by the council of ministers. It has made the provision for a National Defense Council. The emergency powers are also vested in the council of ministers and in case emergency is declared due to external or internal reasons it shall have to be placed before the legislature-parliament within one month.It is essential for all the political parties to register themselves with the election commission. Any party, acting against the spirit of the preamble of the constitution will not be registered with the election commission.The constituent assembly has to frame the new constitution in two years time if the time is not expanded by amending the constitution.

Towards Constituent Assembly In the political history of Nepal the constitution had been promulgated by the king until the peoples’ movement of 2006. The formation of the constitution recommendation committee and the promulgation of the constitution was the privilege of the monarchy. In the Nepalese politics, the matter of constituent assembly had became a point of agreement between Rana rulers and king Tribhuvan including Nepali congress in Delhi which settlement was complete during the period of anti- Rana movement, on December 8, 1950. As agreed by them, the then Rana prime minister, Mohan Sumsher, on January 8th, 1951, and king Tribhuvan on February 18 th, 1951 made their proclamation that the election of constituent assembly would be held within two years.

But the election could not be held at that time. Latter on, king Mahendra, who was not in favour of constituent assembly, removed the provision of the constituent assembly from the interim constitution 1951, using the weakness of the political parties. The communists of Nepal, who had been raising the need for constituent assembly since 1950, did not accept the decision of the king. After the establishment of Panchayat system, the communist group led by Mohan Bikram Singh was raising the slogan of constituent assembly. During the Panchayat era, the main agenda before the democratic forces was restoration of the multiparty system of government. During the period of people’s movement of 1990, on one side the joint mechanism between United Left Front and Nepali Congress led by Ganesh Man Singh had the major demand for establishment of multiparty democracy but on the other hand, a leftist alliance named People’s Movement Coordination Committee (in which Baburam Bhattarai was declared as the spokesman of the alliance) demanded to conduct the election of constituent assembly not for only the establishment of multiparty system. The political parties and organized political activities were banned under the Panchayat system. After lifting the ban on the political parties, king Birendra formed a commission for constituting the next constitution consulting with the Nepali Congress and ULF and the government was also formed by taking the member from the both alliance. The next constitution was promulgated in 1990 but the demand for the restructuring of the state and formation of the constituent assembly elections was rejected by the then state authority. The political development of post 1990 emanated in the context of the Maoist movement.

The 1990 democratic movement was an outcome of the joint struggle of different sets of political parties and groups in Nepal. However, the constitution making process after the abrogation of the Panchayat system repeated the history. There was some resistance regarding the formation of constitution making committee and was reconstituted on that basis, but the need for a constituent assembly was not accepted and the constitution was framed by the committee itself.

Topics:

1.Democratic movement of Nepala.1950-1951 movementb.Movement of 1990c. People movement of 2006

Democratic Movements of Nepal1950-51 MovementWe have found that the causes to end the Rana reign had begun with its establishment. On one side, Junga Bahadur, founder of Rana oligarchy, was going to consolidate the family autocracy in Nepal by taking several steps but on the other hand, the crisis inside the power politics had been creating with those taken steps. The political consciousness to the people brought a situation of changes in the politics of the country. The causes of people’s movement of 1950 were as follows:-

1. Political causes a. Disunity among the Ranas:-

The clash among the Ranas had been starting since the period of Jung Bahadur Rana, the founder of Rana rule. Some of historian has expressed with a suspicion whether there was the hand of Dhir Shumsher in the death of Jung Bahadur. It is said that Jung Bahadur did not dieas a natural death. His death was plotted by his opponents, including his own brothers. On a pretext of sjooting a tiger, he was shot dead by one of the members of hunting party. The story goes that his dead body was enclosed in a wooden box and was not allowed to be seen by anybody, not even his wives who self-immolated themselves as satis. A rumour was spread that he wasd attacked and killed by a white tiger. It was a conspiracy plotted by the family.

Ranoddip Singh, who was the prime minister of Nepal after Jung Bahadur, could not get natural death. He was killed by his nephew due to the state power. The agnate system for the prime minister, which was promulgated by Jung Bahadur, would be effective from elder to younger brother but not from father to the son. But the agnate system for the post of sri teen Maharaja was given to Jung Bahadur by the king by issuing next Lalmohar, in which it was said that the post was given for Jung Bahadur and his descendants generation to generation. It means, the post of prime minister would hand over from elder brother to younger brother. But the post of sri teen maharaja would go from father to son or generation to generation, according to the lalmohar. Due to the ambition for getting the state power, the agnate system was attempted to cross riotously again and again, which created the conflict and brought a vital internal clash among the members of Rana family. As its result, Ranodip Singh was killed by the Ranas . Later on, the Ranas were divided into three classes by the ruling class. From which discrimination among the Ranas was created and due to the feeling of humiliation, the Ranas of ‘c’ class or non-ruling class Ranas were dissatisfied and were waiting a chance to take revenge for it. When the people of Nepal started to organize for anti-Ranas movement, the ‘c’ class Ranas reached to involve in anti-Ranas activities secretly. On the other hand, the unity could not be sustainable

inside the ruling class too. Khadga Sumsher, the brother of Bir Sumsher, who had taken the vital role in gaining the state power from the hand of the sons of Jung Bahadur to Sumsher brothers by killing their elder father, Ranoddip Singh, was banished from the valley by Bir Sumsher in the charge of conspiracy. He was only charged, but he didn’t have involvement in any conspiracy. Bir Sumsher was striker with fear from his courageous activities which had been shown during the killing of Ranaddip. After Bir Sumsher, Dev Sumsher became the prime minister, who was known as the liberal Prime Minister, was thrown out from his post by his brothers forcefully. Juddha Sumsher could also not hold the prime minister during his lifetime because of the internal conflict among the Ranas. Likewise, the 2nd last Prime Minister of Rana rule, Padma Sumsher had come into an obligation to resign from the post, when he was in the process of administrative and constitutional reform. He felt a pressure created by his hardliner brothers Mohan Sumsher and Baber Sumsher. After the starting of uprising of the people against Rana rules, the dissatisfied Ranas reached to the organize anti-Rana movement from which the anti-Rana movement could get success to achieve the goal.

b. Corrupted Administration.

The whole administrative command under Rana rules was on the base of feudal aristocracy. Almost all the high-level administrative posts of the state mechanism were controlled and captured by the members of Rana family. No any action would have been taken upon the members of Rana family if they found as a culprit of the state; such activities made the state authority corrupted. Neither there was system of appointment of the government officials nor had been given any kind of examination or test for the ability and capacity before their appointment in the posts. The whole system was running on the base of heredity, nepotism, fovourism, under Ranas. Therefore, the Rana rule had become the centre of corruption. Due to the lack of experienced and able manpower, the state authority was unable to make any plan for the development. The development was only in the palaces of Rana. The bribery, backbiting, sycophancy and affection etc. were the major parts of the state mechanism. From such kind of ruling system, there was no any kind of rights to the people under the Rana reign. The people had mostly felt it as a suppressive and exploitative ruling system. Therefore, the people’s mentality was burning silently against the suppressive system. The movement of 1950 was only a blast resulted of this situation.

c. Unable to understand the demand of time:-

Liberty, equality and fraternity was the slogan of French revolution of 1789, which did not touch to Nepal but the Nepalese people, who were servicing in the army of British, fought in the two great mass going to different parts of the world during the world wars period. They were able to understand in some portion of the changing situation of the world. In every parts of the world, the feudal aristocracy was going to fall down but the rulers of Nepal were not

even attempting to bring a little change in the existing system. Therefore, the people of Nepal reached to stand against the Ranas.

d. The consciousness among the people:-

The awakening people rose gradually against Rana rule. During the period of Janga Bahadur Rana, founder of Rana oligarchy, Lakahan Thapa had attempted to kill Jung Bahadur, which was the first step taken by the people level against Rana oligarchy.

During the time of Bir Sumsher, Madhav Raj Joshi, the father of Martyr Shukraraj, propagated his creed among the people of pokhara and Kathmandu from the name of Arya Samaj. Chandra Sumsher tolerated it at first, but later on, suspecting that it might lead to political awakening, he imprisoned Madhav Raj and excommunicated the Arya samaj (to exclude somebody as a punishment from membership of the Christians). After his release from jail he went to Darjeeling with his family and settled there.

The next time satya Chandra started an institute called Malami Muthi (organization for performance of funeral rites and began to serve his end in the guise of a social worker. But when the secret was found out, he and Madav Raj’s sons were banished.

Many Nepalese returned from the war with much social consciousness. Consequently, Thakur Chandra Simha started the Gorkha league in Deharadun with two official organs namely “ The Gorkha Sansar” and “The Tarun Gorkha”. Its object was to rise social and political consciousness among the Nepalese people. But Chandra Sumsher, by using the money and spy, was able to know about it and its whole scheme ended in smoke. In the meantime, Tulasi Mehar returned from India and began to preach the use of charkha. But his activities were confined to social work.

During the regime of Bhim Sumsher, Ramesh Bikram Shah, khadga man Singh and others tried to organize a political party called “Parachanda Gorkha” with a view to bring reforms in the administrative system of Nepal. But, as the secret of their scheme was divulged (to make something known esp. secret), most of its leaders were thrown to jail for life. Another organization, ”Nagarik Adhikar samitee” of Sukraj Shastri was also banned by Juddha Sumsher and he was interned. Some of the youths of Nepal, coming forward to throw off the despotic rules of the Ranas in Nepal formed a political party called” Praja Parishad” under the leadership of Tanka Prashad Acharya. In the meantime, Nepalese students studying in Banaras formed a group called “ The Nepali Samaj” and began to make social and political speeches. “ The Nepal Praja Parishad” was also supported by it. The Rana government suppressed it. Sukraj Shastri, Dasrath Chand, Ganga lal Shrestha and Dharma Bhakta were killed by the government and

Tanka Prashad Acharya got punishment for life imprisoned. During this period an one organization Raktapat committee was also formed but could not sustain long last.

In 1947 next political Party called “Akhil Nepail Rastriya Congress” was formed in Banaras through efforts of B.P. Koirala. The Nepalese residing in India started various associations to help and co-operate the” Nepail Rastriya Congress”. Dambar Singh organized another” Gorkha League”.

People of Nepal felt a most trouble and went to stand on anti Rana forum, from which the uprising against the ruling system rose in political atmosphere as the people’s movement and could get victory. The people’s movement ended the ruling system which was running since one hundred and four years.

On the first of Ashadh, 2004 B.S.(1947 A.D.), the student of the Sanskrit Pathshala went on strike for not having a provision for teaching them history and geography. This strike of the government school was the first demonstration in the history of Nepal. Getting a mountain pressure from every sector, Padma Sumsher got constitutional law framed with the help of constitutional experts from India and announced them. But it was to no effect because of the opposition from Mohan Sumsher and others. In the meantime, other political party named “Nepal Prajatantra Congress” was formed and it was financed by Subarna Sumsher and Mahabir Sumsher out of their private purses. After some time, the Democratic Congress and the National Congress were unified and formed the new party called” Nepali Congress” under the leadership of Matrika Prashad Koirala. In 1949 other political party’ The Communist Party of Nepal” was formed which was led by Pushpa Lal Shrestha. In such political situation, Nepali congress and other political forces launched the movement including arm struggle against Rana ruling system. The movement could get success to achieve the goal.

When the movement was in climax, general Keshar Sumsher and Vijaya Sumsher as representative of Nepal government reached to New Delhi for a talk with the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, where King Tribhuvan also stated as political refugee. The talk between the representatives of Rana Government and king Tribhuvan was started in the arbitration (meditation) of Indian Prime Minister and an agreement was completed there. This agreement is known as “Delhi Settlement” in the history. After this agreement, king Tribhuvan returned Nepal and made an announcement on February 18, 1951 that the political system which was running since 104 years was ended by this proclamation from that day

e. Active role of the king:-

The anti Rana movement was going to spread from the period of Juddha Sumsher but it was started from the governing period of Bir Sumsher. Dharma Bhakta was the physical exercise teacher of King Tribhuvan. The King was making an alliance secretly with the protestors of Rana system through him. It is said that the anti Rana activities was supported morally and financially by the King. When the Rana Prime Minister got the information about the secret alliance of the King with the protestors, the King was also humiliated. In the meantime, in November 1950, King Tribhuvan left his palace with his family and sought asylum in the Indian Embassy. After King’s leaving the palace, Mohan Sumsher, the then Rana Prime Minister, declared the King’s abdication and placed his three years old infant grandson, Gyanendra on the thrown.

The forceful deposition of King Tribhuvan spread a wave of indignation (angry caused by something that one’s consider unfair) throughout the country, and excitement ran in high speed among the people. The news spread like wild fire round all cities of the world. Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru, outlining Indian Government’s policy on Nepal, stated in the Indian parliament, Lok shava, India recognized king Tribhuvan as the head of the state and refused to accept prince Gyanendra as the king of Nepal. Nehru also made it clear that New Delhi had no aggressive design on Nepal. On December 8, 1950, Government of India submitted a memorandum to the government of Nepal in which the former demanded urgent immediate constitutional reforms and changes which would satisfy popular opinion and would be acceptable to important non official organizations of Nepalese nationals. Moreover, three constitutional changes were also proposed which included, firstly, the formation of an elected constituent assembly to promulgate a new constitution; secondly, the formation of an interim government consisting of both Ranas and popular ministers with Rana Prime Minister and thirdly, continuation of Tribhuvan as the king in the interest of the realm.

The Rana government accepted the proposal of India by January 1951 and the leaders of Nepali Congress, B.P. koirala and Matrika Prasad Koirala were invited New Delhi for final decision, and after talks with the leaders in India an announcement was made for cease-fire to assist in the restoration of peace. It was decided that the interim government would be formed as coalition between Rana and Nepali Congress with Mohan Sumsher as the new interim prime minister and the king Tribhuvan as a constitutional head of the state. King Tribhuvan returned from India after getting favorable situation and declared the end of Rana system. Thus, Rana regime was thrown out from the country forever.

2. Economic cause:-

The economic condition of the country during the Rana period was itself a revolution. The whole economy of the state was on the base of Feudal System and the property of the state was used by the rulers as their personal property. Neither any plan was made to increase the economy of the state nor would the collected revenue be used in the productive sectors. From such activities, a deep ditch was made between haves and have-nots classes of the people. The have-nots classes were facing several problems as well as exploitation from which the people of lower class and right less community were waiting a chance to express their dissatisfaction. The movement of 1950 seemed as the result of this dissatisfaction of the people.

On one side, the majority people of Nepal, the farmer and lower class, who were the most resource of revenue of the state, got nothing from the state except exploitation and suppression. From such activities of the government, the people were facing the problems. On the other hand, the rulers and their families were passing luxurious and comfortable life by using the state property. Regarding the government service, there was discrimination between the Rana and non Rana officers. Some officers were appointed from the community of non-Rana in the same rank of Ranas but the salary facilities and rights were different between Ranas and non-Ranas. All the Ranas had the palace like house but the people had nothing except a hut. Such types of economic situation invited the revolution in the country and the people’s movement was able to get success.

3. Social cause:-

The social system of Nepal under the Rana rule was based on the discriminatory caste system. There was vast discrimination between touchable and untouchable caste legally. The Beth, Beggar and Jhara system was private rights of Ranas. By using such system the people were exploited by ruling class. This had exploited the low class people. The caste system, which was also under the Rana rulers, was used by the rulers as their desire. The caste even of high class too would be decreased and increased as their desire. In the name of Patiya system, there were no any rights to read and write for the untouchable caste going to school and entering into the classroom. There was no right for untouchable cast to enter the market for purchasing something. Among the Ranas too, “c” class Ranas were humiliated by “A” class. At first, the Ranas of Jung family was suppressed by the Sumsher family and later on, “c” class was made dissatisfied. The both dissatisfied reached to involve in anti-Rana activities. This social behavior adapted by the ruling class invited the revolution.

4. External cause:-

After the Second World War, many countries became independent from the intervention of the Imperialism and colonism. India, the neighboring country of Nepal, went to be freed from British colony in 1947. Many political leaders and cadres of Nepal had also participated in the independent movement of India and by influencing from the Indian movement their activities in Nepal seemed to be increased to liberate from the aristocratic ruling system. British imperialism was the pillar of Rana system from which the Rana were getting back up in the international level. Due to its downfall in India, Ranas became helpless and people’s movement could rise with courage. Likewise, in the other neighboring country, China, it defeated the Japanese imperialism as well as internal feudalism. The international situation during the last quarter of the 1040’s was changing very rapidly. The British Labour Prime Minister of Labour Party, Lord Attlee, on February 1947, announcing his liberal policy towards India, declared that Britain would grant India independence before June 1948 and accordingly, appointed Lord Mount Baton as India’s governor General. India became independence from the British colony. Likewise on the other hand, china was going to complete the great revolution under the leadership of Mao Tse-tung, the then chairman of the Chinese communist Party. The liberation movement of Afro-Asian countries influenced the Nepalese people. The Nepalese people, coming to an influence of the incidents of both neighboring countries as well as other independent movements of other countries of the world, raised the movement against the Rana rule.

We can define to the effect of 1950’s political changes as follows:

Effect of the movement of 1950-1951:

1. The nation entered into a new system.2. The nation entered into the International community.3. Socio-economic change. 4. Administrative changes.5. Increased Indian influence.6. Position of the King.7. Bad political activities.

A) Positive effects:1. The nation entered into a new system:

The people’s movement of 1950-1951 threw out the one hundred and four year’s family autocracy of Rana families and the nation was entered into the democratic system. After returning from India, King Tribhuvan made a proclamation an February 18, 1951 that the state would be ruled in future under the democratic constitution which would be prepared by the constitutional assembly elected by the people. The election for the assembly would be held within two years. The royal proclamation about the formation of Constituents

Assembly would keep the meaning of sovereign power which was going to be exercised by the people through their popular votes. It means, the nation was not only the private interest of the King but it was also of the people. As consequence of the People’s movement the coalition government between Rana and Nepali Congress was formed. The state power was kept under the King and Minister of Council. It was the system of King in Council, like of Britain.2. The nation entered into the international community:

The country entered into the international community after the people’s movement. During the Rana period, the isolation foreign policy was adopted by the nation. Except India or Britain, The nation had no diplomatic relation with other countries, even with the neighbouring country, china too. In about the ending time of Rana period, Nepal had kept diplomatic relation with USA and other few countries. But after the establishment of democracy, the nation entered into the international community and could get success to be member of United Nations Organization (UNO) and other international level forum, “non-alignment Movement”. From the participation in many conferences of such international forum, the status and dignity of the country could have been possible to increase.

3) Socio-economic change in country:The people’s movement of 1950-51 was the political movement due to having been its

main objective, which was to end the Rana regime, though the movement could get success to bring an attention of nation towards the socio –economic reforms. It was necessary to give a realization of new political change to the people by applying some reforms in the society or nation, which was not possible only from political change. Therefore, an attempted was made to bring a change in other sectors too. The whole economy of the state was under the Rana family during the Rana period. After the democracy, the first elected government took the step to abolish the Birta land system by promulgating the laws in 1959 A.D. and the properties of Ranas were taken by the government. The society had been running by adopting the discriminatory caste system applied in the middle age and that was followed by Ranas strictly in practice by making the code. Such system divided the people in different categories even they are the citizen of one state. In 1963, by promulgating the Naya Muluki Ain, the caste discrimination was removed legally. For the development of the state, the five years and three years plan was also settled. Therefore the movement of 1950-51 attempted to bring a change in the socio-economic life of the people and nation.4) Administrative change:After the political change of 1950-51, the administrative system of the country was also changed. Before the movement, the whole administration of the nation was under Rana family, which was a mostly dismissed to give a realization of change to the people and to hold the nation systematically. A change was brought in administrative structure. The system of ministry of council, Departments, and the local authorities of the state was settled. A commission led by Buch had come from India to Nepal, which was known as Buch Commission, by getting invitation of Nepal government to bring a reform in the administrative structure of Nepal. As to end the domination of Ranas in the military organization, the Bijuli Garat, the security force of

Rana Prime Minister, which had been working as private force of Rana Prime Minister was dismissed and it was sent to Narayanhiti Royal palace by converting into royal army force. The seal of Rana Prime minister, khadga Nisana chhap was also declared as illegal. The government employers achieved the rights to be united under the organization. The whole personnel of the government were brought under the single law by promulgating the “Civil Service Act” (Nijamati karmachari ain). These were the effects of the people’s movement of 1950-51.

B) Negative effects:5. Increased Indian influence in Nepalese politics:

Before the declaration of democracy or in about the ending time of Rana oligarchy, an agreement was settled in India among the Ranas, Nepali Congress and king Tribhuvan in the arbitration of Indian Prime minister to end the Rana regime. India got a chance to play a role as a guardian in Nepalese politics due to this settlement. Its impact fell upon the Nepalese politics and the whole politics of Nepal reached to be guided by India for future. India’s domination started to be felt on Nepal as her provincial state in every sectors of Nepal. At one place, Matrika Prasad Koirala had said that India never wanted to bring in a table together with to the Ranas, the king and the Nepali Congress during the talking period in India before the Delhi agreement. After the successful people’s movement too, India kept the interest to stay Mohan sumsher as the prime minister of the coalition government. In other words, as the interest of India, Mohan Sumsher, the Rana Prime Minister, got the chance to lead the government of Nepal after the revolution. Due to the conflict between Ranas and Nepali Congress in the coalition government, Mohan Sumsher had reached to the conclusion of his resignation from the post but he was stopped to present the resignation before the king by Indian authority and accordingly, he did not do too. The then Indian ambassador to Nepal, C.P.N.Singh would attend in the meeting of the cabinet of Nepal. His best attempt was to give direction to the minister of Nepal as their guardians and his activities was opposed by B.P. Koirala, the then home minister of Nepal. Koirala’s objection made a cause for dispute between B.P. Koirala and C.P.N. Singh, the then Indian ambassador to Nepal. Koirala demanded to recall him to India due to interfere of ambassador in Nepal’s internal affairs. Govind Narayan singh, an Indian citizen, was appointed as the chief advisor of king Tribhuvan. Indian army was also invited to suppress the revolt of K.I. Singh and Bhim Dutta Panta, a farmer of Nepal. However, after the death of king Tribhuvan, king Mahendra took hard and labourious step to reduce the Indian influence from the Nepalese politics.

6) Increased the Power of the King:

During the period of Delhi settlement, king had accepted to be the constitutional head of the state but later on, it was increased gradually and at last all the power went on the hand of the king. After the dismissal of Rana –congress coalition government led by Mohan Sumsher, king Tribhuvan refused to appoint B.P. Koirala, who was the choice of Nepali Congress for the post of Prime Minister, as the prime minister and appointed Matrika Prasad Koirala as his desire. Latter on, other some constitutional executive rights also kept under his hand by amending the interim constitution. The king snatched the rights of high court. After the death of king Tribhuvan, king Mahendra removed the provision of constituent assembly was also removed

from the constitution by dismissing the interim constitution and king held the election of parliament. At last, the parliamentary system was also dismissed in 1960 by the kind all power took on his hand and introduced new political system named Panchayat system. According to the Panchayat rule, the state was defined as the private property of the king. Such increased power of the king guided the country to the dictatorship of the king. As its result king Mahandra took over the power of the state and established the absolute monarchy system, which was known as dictator Panchayat system.7) Activities of the Political parties:After the democratic movement of 1951, many political parties had come in existence but their activities were hopeless and immature. The leadership of the parties turned their attention only towards their parties’ interest. But they did not make even a little interest for nation and people. The political parties’ role seemed so many negative in the politics. They used to make unnatural alliance to fulfill the interest of their parties, which would be the harmful for the people and nation. For example, an alliance between Praja Parishad and the communist party of Nepal had completed to go against the Nepali congress, which was defined as correct and logical in the surface for the then politics but philosophically and politically the alliance was unnatural because Praja Parishad was a rightist party whereas communist party was leftist. The Nepali congress, which could get lead the people’s movement had also split into four factions i.e. Matrika group, B.P. group, Bhadrakali group, pragatishil group led by Balchandra Sharma and Kedarman Byathit.The political parties were going to be failure to protect the achievements of the people’s movement. The activities of the political parties was also a cause among others, which led to make failure to the democratic system and such activities of the parties provided the opportunity to the king to take over the state power on his hand in 1960. When king Mahendra dismissed the parliamentary system by charging several blames to the political parties and theirs leaders including by taking the suppressive step on them, nobody the people took interest to oppose the step taken by the king.

Movement of 1990

Causes of the 1990 People’s Movement:

In 1990, the banned political parties declared that they would launch a people’s movement to establish the multiparty democracy dissolving the party-less despotic Panchayat System. As committed by them, the movement was launched from the date of 18 February 1990 and it took the time of forty nine days to get victory over the existing Panchayat System. The causes of the movement are mentioned as following:

1. The Panchayat System as a despotic rule:On December 15, 1960 King Mahendra dissolved the 18 months old elected government and parliament and announced a ban on all the political parties by taking the whole state power on his hand. The King started to get the political leaders arrested which

created a political terror. Even in such situation too, the parties were moving without making any unity among them and the activities of the parties provided the opportunity to the King to hold the government by adopting the policy of divide and rule. [Nepali Congress, which was the largest parties of those days, decided to pick up the weapon and declare armed struggle against the King’s step.] The King introduced Panchayat System by raising a slogan as “a suitable democracy for the soil and climate of the country.” The major force of Nepalese communists did not accept the King’s step and decided to go forward against the Panchayat System. The party-less Panchayat System started its activities depending on the Philosophical base of despotism.As the political revolts against the existing system, the Nepali Congress, which was on the way of armed struggle against the King, attempted to kill King Mahendra by blasting bomb at a place in Janakpur, where the King was visiting. But the attempt was unsuccessful. On Magh 17, 2028 B.S. King Mahendra succumbed to heart attack, crown Prince Birendra ascended the throne and was declared the King of the Kingdom. The people had come to a hope the political system would be reformed with more liberal concept than before by the new King, who was well known Personality to understand the world situation due to his study, which he had got in ETON and Harvard, the famous university of the world. He was the first King of Nepal who had studied in foreign university. But the hope of the people changed into a bubble of water when he made second amendment in the Panchayat Constitution. At the beginning period of King Birendra, In Jhapa, a eastern bordering district of Nepal with India, some youth Communists started armed revolts against Panchayat System raising the slogan, ”the liquidation of landlord class enemy.” The violent action, which happened in Jhapa for sometime, was an expression of dissatisfaction indicated against the Panchayat System and politics. The revolt was launched by hot spirited youths inspired by Naxalite ideology. In that revolt the Panchayat Cadres like Former Member of Rastriya Panchayat (The Panchayat Legislature), Deputy Pradhan Panch of a village Panchayat and a activist of Panchayat supporters student organization were also killed by the rebellions. The movement could not get success to achieve the goal which the revolt had taken. But the Panchayat suppressive government felt a blow from that revolt. Indicating this revolt, King Birendra also made an address in the occasion of his visit in east Nepal, gathering the citizens in his honor at Dhankuta that he was deeply grieved over the violence against the human event, which was happening in the eastern part of the country.A plan at a violence action was plotted by Nepali Congress at Okhaldhunga could not be successful. In 1974, another attempt to kill King Birendra was done by Nepali Congress by blasting a bomb when the King was in Biratnagar on the occasion of his

visit. Bhim Narayan Shrestha and Yagya Bahadur Thapa were arrested by the government. Later on, they were punished to death. In 1975, King Birendra gave the second amendment to the Panchayat Constitution. Hearing about him, he was expected by the people that the existing political system would bring in liberal form to provide the rights to the people. It became just opposite as thought by the people after its amendment. The doors of election system and the exercise of the democratic activities were closed by providing the more rights to the Back to Village National Campaign (Gaun Pharka Rastriya Abhiyan) from which the candidates for the Panchayat elections would be selected. In the same year, a strike was called by the students’ organizations as the dissatisfaction with the Panchayat System. But this strike could not provide the fruitful result. However, the despotic ruling system was making people very fury. There was no any constitution to take action on the member of royal family if they involved in any crime. Just opposite to this, the provision was mentioned in the constitution that the citizens would be punished to death if any question had been raised against the activities of royal family members. Thus the Panchayat system was made more despotic than before, which made the people dissatisfied. National Referendum:On December 30, 1974 B.P. Koirala, the leader of Nepali Congress returned to Nepal along with his colleagues from his self imposed exile abandoning the tactics of violent activities. He put forward the policy of “National Reconciliation” during his return. His policy was defined by himself that it was the unity with the King too. But the Panchas, the then rulers, could not show the tolerable behave on him as well as his followers. The behavior of the Panchas was bringing in an aggressive mood to the people. In the mean time, on one side the congress man were getting general amnesty due to their policy of National Reconciliation and on the other hand Bhim Narayan Shrestha and Yagya Bahadur Thapa, who were in jail, were punished to the death by the government. Likewise, the central member of the CPN (ML), Ratna Kumar Bantawa and other Bam Prasad Bantawa at Ilam were also killed by the police. Such suppressive activities of the government were making the people furious. On April 6, 1979, some Nepalese students of Tribhuvan University staged a protest outside the Pakistan Embassy at Kathmandu condemning the execution of former Prime Minister Zulficar Ali Bhutto in Rawalpindi. These students were lathi-charged and the police arrested some. The students had forwarded twenty four point demands and they called peaceful movement against the authority, which triggered a chain of event with the students continuing protest against them. The student movement could not remain within the limits of educational demands. It also created atmosphere in which the anti-Panchayat elements especially, some peasants and workers in the Terai region also

launched a violent demonstration in support of their respective demands, and the agitation became intensive. King Birendra being the Chancellor of Tribhuvan University constituted a five member high commission and asked it to investigate into the nature, process and incidents of the students’ movement. The then authority of Tribhuvan University fulfilled the few demands of students but movement did not stop. On May 21,1979, Bal Bahadur K.C. the then leader of student organization of Nepali Congress, Kailash Karki, the leader of Pro- Moscow communists’ student organization and Sharan Bikram Malla of Pushpa Lal faction of communists of Nepal, negotiated with royal commission as representatives of students movement’s Action Committee. But other students rejected them as their representatives, and declared them as traitors. On May 23, 1979, a large number of students and people gathered in Kathmandu and put on garlands of shoes in the negotiators’ necks, smeared black soot on their faces, put them on a handcart and took them throughout Kathmandu city. The agitation of students was in climax. The press of Gorkhapatra Corporation was burnt down and the agitated students destroyed the vehicles of Royal Nepal Airline Corporation. King Birendra was now convinced that any effort to early hours of May 24, 1979, to announce that a referendum would be held to let the people choose between the existing partyless Panchayat system with suitable reform and multiparty system of government. The proclamation of referendum provided the right to canvass among the people against the existing Panchayat system. During the period of referendum, people more exercised the political freedom than before. But the result of the referendum had come in favour of Panchayat system and the rulers of Panchayat system attempted to suppress the oppositions. Due to the suppressive activities of the rulers all the forces of opposition went to be unified to go against the Panchayat system. From May 23, 1985, a non-violent movement was launched by Nepali Congress and it was supported and helped by the different communist factions of Nepal. The result of referendum provided a lesson to the oppositions that without a joint or unified movement of oppositions the Panchayat system would not be ended. Therefore, the national referendum also became a cause for the people’s movement of 1990.

Alliance among the Political Forces: Philosophically and theoretically there were two kinds of forces in Nepal especially the Nepali Congress and the Communists, who have been attempting to throw the Panchayat System since a long time. But their attempt was not getting to success due to the lack of united effort among the anti-Panchayat forces. When king Mahendra dismissed the parliamentary government, the situation brought a possibility of the unity between Nepali Congress and the Communist powers to fight against autocracy but they fought against the royal take over separately.

B.P. Koirala was the man who never wanted to make the alliance with the Communist to fight against the Panchayat System. The alliance could not make even in the period of referendum too. But the result of referendum created an obligation also for him to think about unity with the Communists even though he respected the result of referendum. After the death of B.P. Koirala the leaders of Nepali Congress started to stand with the communist on a single stage jointly. The opponents of Party less Panchayat System especially the Nepali Congress and the Communists boycotted the general election of Rastriya Panchayat in 1982. Even holding the same view about this Panchayat election, they did not stand on a single stage for the same purpose. However, the political situation brought them nearer to consider about joint venture against the Panchayat System. In September 1983, they started to sit on a bench by making their signature which was related to release of political prisoners.From May 23, 1985, Nepali Congress started a non-violent movement putting seven points demands including established of democracy lifting the ban on political parties. When the state authority took suppressive step on the movement of Nepali Congress, the communists of Nepal also came in path of the movement showing solidarity in the non-violent movement. When the movement of congress and communists was running successfully, the Janabadi Morcha led by Ram Raja Prasad Singh set off a series of bomb explosion on June 21, 1885 at the different places of the country. The movement was non-violent; therefore it was withdrawn by both congress and communists. However, this movement developed an environment of trust and goodwill thereby causing the unity between both forces which became possible in 1990.After the result of National Referendum, on December 15, 1980, King Birendra honored his pledge to reform the system and announced the third amendment to the Constitution. His action did not; however lead to the fundamental changes in the structure of power. The third amendment mentioned the practice of direct election to the Rastriya Panchayat and local Panchayats by universal suffrage replacing the indirect election. The first general election of the Panchayat was boycotted by the banned political parties except one led by Rohit of Bhaktapur.But the next time, in the 2nd general election, some communists’ factions including the CPN (ML), which was largest among the communists till that date participated the election. Padma Ratna Tuladhar, a communist supporter candidate, who won the election from Kathmandu getting highest vote in the capital of the country, demanded to establish the multiparty system as a replacement of the existing system from the rostrum of Rastriya Panchayat. In the 2nd local election of the Panchaya was also participated by the Nepali Congress and won the election of Kathmandu Nagar Panchayat the major two posts Pradhan Panch and Deputy Pradhan Panch.

In the same year the various candidates of Nepali Congress boycotted the constitution day of Panchayat System under party’s instruction to be followed strictly. Though, in some places the communist cadres also followed them pledging solidarity with Congress man yet they did not follow them everywhere. The Congress and the Communists cadres who boycotted the constitution day were suspended by the government from their post. To condemn to the action of Panchayat government, the congress and the communists started to move jointly. Thus, the tradition of joint movement between the communist and congress developed.During the period of 1989 and 1990, the both powers seemed jointly in the single stage or programs which would be arranged by whomsoever except Panchas. Due to this development of joint movement, Nepali Congress and seven party alliance of the communists under the commanding ship of Ganesh Man Singh, the leader of Nepali Congress. On the other side, a separate front among some radical communists was also formed. This type of alliance among the anti Panchayat forces created an excitement among the people to go against the Panchayat System. When the programmes of congress and Unite Left Front were published jointly under the signature of Krishna Prashad Bhattarai and Mrs. Sahana Pradhan, the people’s support towards the movement in a high level,. Therefore, their alliance among the political parties made a major cause for the people’s movement of 1990.Social Causes:After the political change of 1951, the social status of Rana was only snatched and that was transferred towards monarchy. The Kings of Nepal had been feeling that they were the next form of the God before the people. But the concept of people was going to change gradually about the monarchy due to their activities. Giving the answer to the question of a reporter of news week magazine published from New York on September 1973, King Birendra had been governed by dharma, a system drawn from the Hindu religion. King cannot change this value system.The concept of King was going to be proved wrong because it did not match with the scene of new generation and could not be trusted by the people. In those times some idols were being theft, and the rumor came that those idols were being theft by the members of Royal family. From such activities the monarchy was getting infamous among the people. In 1980, an accident happened in Pokhara, where two female students named Sunita and Namita were killed after being raped. People thought that crime was done by the Royal member. Thus, the status of monarchy was decreasing among the people. These are also the social factor that led to the movement of 1990. The people except Hindus were not happy due to the declaration of Nepal as Hindu state.

Economic Causes:The economic condition of the country during the Panchayat period was bad. The whole economy of the state was under the control of Royal palace. If the king wanted the money to expense for him or his family in anytime, that must be available by the government. Nobody had right to question on the action taken by the king and the member of the royal family. Neither there was any provision to impose tax on the property of the royal member nor did they have any obligation to bring into publicity to their property. During the period of referendum the nation was facing the serious economic crisis. At that time, the government not only misused public funds but also seriously tempered with the like of both the present and the future generations by allowing the country’s ecology to be irreparably (a loss that cannot be restored) destroyed through its policy of open encouragement to cut trees indiscriminately. Almost all the forest of the country was destroyed during the Panchayat System. There was yet glaring example of the government’s utter incapability to deal with corruption cases in which big business houses were allegedly involved. For these cases, one the reason was the formation of Social Service National Coordination Council in which the proprietor of big houses were appointed as its member and Queen Aishwarya was it’s the head of this organization. Government establishing this Umbrella organization for the social agencies could have been prevents influx of foreign funds for political purpose under the guise of social work. Channeling of funds was chosen as means to prevent their wide spread, misappropriation and resultant adverse publicity. Such as had earlier embarrassed the Nepal Red Cross Society in which the head of the society was Sister-in-law of the king. Thus the foreign aid and funds were controlled by the royal family. Such activities of the royal family created the environment for the initial change in the country.Other Causes:a. Indo- Nepal relation:

The relation between Nepal and India could never be clean and clear. When King Mahendra ascended the throne, his one best attempt was to reduce the Indian influence from the Nepalese politics. Raising the slogan of nationalism he provided an international status to the country. He made a design laboriously to bring outside to the country from the concept of Indian security. The diplomatic relation of Nepal with China was necessary which King Mahendra made it. Even getting several pressures from India, against the construction of Kodari Highway and the relation with Pakistan, he went forward to achieve the both. The Indian check post (army post) was working staying in the north border of Nepal since more than two decades ago; these were removed from the Nepalese territory in 1969 during the

Premiership of Kritinidhi Bista. Such steps, which were taken by the Nepal, were reluctant for India. On January 31, 1972, king Mahendra died and his son Birendra became the King of the Nepal. He also faced the several pressure created by India regarding this diplomatic relation between both countries. For example, we can take some points about it.

February 24 1975, was the coronation Day of the King Birendra. On this Coronation many distinguished guests of the friendly nations were invited. On this occasion, a farewell function was noised at Narayan Hiti Royal Palace, king Birendra proposed before the dignitaries on February 25 that his country, Nepal, be declared a zone of peace. Amending third time to the Panchayat constitution, the proposal of the “peace zone Nepal” was made a guideline of Nepalese foreign policy. More than one hundred and sixteen countries of the world including America recognized the proposal. China, a neighbor to Nepal, recognized immediately. But India did not accept it and became fury from this proposal. Since those days, the relation between India and Nepal had been in a problematic way.

The Panchayat government brought the policy of work permit for the Indian citizens who were working in Kathmandu Valley. India did not like Nepalese Policy.

In 1968, the Panchayat government imported some valuable weapons for Royal Nepalese Army from China through Kodari Highway. It was made subject of objection by India that this Nepalese activities seemed against the peace and friendship treaty of 1950.

In 1989, Balaram Jakhad, the then speaker of Indian Parliament visited Nepal and he was humiliated by the Panchas inviting him at Rastriya Panchayat.

These activities led the relation between two countries towards worse.

On 23 march, 1988 the trade and transit treaty between two countries could not be renewed for the further period. India adopted the policy of economic blockade against Nepal. On one side, the political parties reached the door for the people’s movement against the Panchayat System and on the other side India, forwarding the policy of economic blockade to put pressure on Nepal. The Nepalese rulers started to face the crisis created by two sides internally and externally. Due to the problem created by India, the Nepalese people felt a great trouble and reached to a conclusion that the Panchayat System was only the cause for the nation’s problem. This situation led the politics towards the People’s movement. Great desire of Nepalese political leaders of the banned parties as well as Indian leaders seemed for a People’s

Movement to establish the multiparty System in Nepal. Thus the Indo-Nepalese crisis also became a cause for the People’s Movement of 1990.

b) Next cause:

Gorbachev, the then general secretary of the Communist Party of Soviet Union Russia (USSR) forwarded a Principle of “Glasnost” and “perestroika” for the development of his country. All the Communist rulers of Eastern Europe followed his principle. As its result, the Soviet Union, which was ruling there since seventy years, fell down and the states which were under Soviet Union were going to be declared as independent separating from Soviet Union. From the whole Eastern Europe including Mongolia, the Communist Governments were replaced by the movement and the new governments were formed adopting the democratic process. Chaucheskue was also thrown out from Rumania. This message spread throughout the world that he had become most unpopular among the people. In Nepal, the incident of Rumania, made a matter in canvassing the people and raised the voice that Nepalese ruler should take the lesson from Rumania. Such international situation created an environment for the People’s movement.

April 1990, was the time of movement when the program of third phase was declared by the Nepali Congress and Unified Left Font. In this month the movement arose picking up the tempo especially, in the place where the police misbehaved the people. By killing the youths at Patan and Kritipur in this month, the police made people angry and raised the movement. Thus the Panchayat government ignited the fire itself.

April’s momentous events manifestly took place in the context of development in the Eastern Europe, Mongolia and a few South American nations towards change to multiparty system. Some other factor important to the pro-democracy movement’s successful overthrow of the Panchayat system should also be noted:

a. The considerable dissatisfaction amongst professional and businessman and women, who unexpectedly sides with the anti-panchayat politician and students.

b. The fact that anyone with a shortwave radio that could receive F.M. broadcasts could monitor (and record) police communication between Kathmandu head-quarters and units deployed around town, could learn and pass along to pro-democratic activities what orders were going out, where police were being sent, which police units were reporting their inability to cope and demanding and being refused- reinforcement, when these units were told to open fire or to beat all participants of a demonstration.

c. The lacks of control over outgoing news to foreign media, with the BBC and Voice of America effectively informing Nepalese in Nepali, Hindi and English of developments that were not reported independent press.

d. China’s failure to come to the Panchayat government aid. The Panchayat government had expected. The Chinese statements as given by Marshal Chen Yi in 1962, when he declared that if the people of Nepal were attacked (by inference, from India), China would come to Nepal’s assistance. But this time China did not make any statement about Nepal.

e. Impending overt pressure from the foreign governments and organizations. The Swiss had let be known a quietly that their aid would be withdrawn if human rights were not restored. The West German and U.S governments had let the Nepalese know their views on the suppression of democratic values.

Effects of the movement:

1. Dissolved the Panchayat organs:In April 1990, when the movement was in climax, 6 th day of this month, King Birendra was compelled to proclaim the cabinet of Lokendra Bahadur Chand to solve the problem through dialogue with the political parties. The royal proclamation created the reactions in different sectors. The movements’ liaison committee, by opposing the royal proclamation said that the movement would not be stopped without the establishment of multi-party system; therefore, the new prime minister was not able to hold a dialogue with them.

Before the formation of the cabinet led by Lokendra Bahadur Chand, on April 6, 1990, Nepalese government was led by Marich Man Singh. Marich Man Singh’s government was dissolved on the very day, when the radical communists had called for the Nepal bandh. It was a mere coincidence but the radical communists took the credit. The incident of 6th April encouraged the movement and the demonstration of that day, apparently showed that the people of the country wanted a total change.

The new cabinet led by Lokendra Bahadur Chand seemed so loyal towards revolutionaries that they started informal discussion by meeting the leaders of the movement to draw conclusion about how they would be able to solve the problems. The newly formed government released the political prisoners to improve the situation for dialogue and invited them for this purpose too. In such a situation, the leaders of the movement forwarded for points demand before the state authority in that dialogue. The points were: 1. lifting of the ban on the political parties. 2. Release of all political prisoners 3. Lift of the curfew. 4. Action upon the assassins of the people. At last, on

April 8, 1990 the leaders of movement were called at royal palace to meet the King, in that meeting, the King removed the ban of the political parties under the constitution of 1962, thus, the situation of party-less and ban on the political parties was ended in the country. Therefore, we can find that the removal of the ban on the political parties was one effect of the movement.

2. Formation of Interim cabinet:On April 6, 1990, a people’s procession with great mass was organized at Tundikhel, Kathmandu, to mark the victory of revolutionaries. Several leaders form Nepali Congress and United Left Front addressed the gathering. They demanded to form interim government in that mass meeting. They claimed there that the people’s movements were not over. From April 9, to April 15, 1990, the posters pasted on the public walls including walls of several houses at Ratna Park, Dillibazar, Baghbazar demanding the establishment of constitutional monarchy, dismissal of the organs of panchayat, action upon the assassins of People like Marich Man Singh, Navaraj Subedi and Niranjan Thapa. On April 10, 1990, the meeting of the revolutionaries put forwarded seven points demands including the dismissal of Rastriya Panchayat, the then council of ministers, the articles of the constitution which were against multiparty system and release of political prisoners. On April 15, the building of Royal Nepal Academy was decided as the venue for the meeting between the state authority and the revolutionary forces. The building of Royal Nepal Academy was blockaded by thousands of demonstrators, who were in aggressive mood and stayed there. The demonstrators did not allow the representatives to leave the building until the early hours of next day. As its result, on April 16, the king announced that the Rastriya Panchayat, the Panchayat Policy and Evaluation committee and other organs of Panchayat including the Council of Ministers were to be dismissed. On April 19, 1990, the king constituted the new Council of Ministers including four representatives from Nepali Congress, three from United Left Front, two from nominees of the king and two from Human Rights activist or as independent candidates under the leadership of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai. This was the interim cabinet and it was given the responsibility of overseeing the difficult transitional period between the legislation of multiparty system and general election to be held under a new constitution. Thus, as the effect of the movement, the interim cabinet was formed on the basis of multiparty system.

3. Promulgation of new constitution:On May 11, 1990, the king announced the formation of a Constitutional Reform Recommendation Commission without any consultation with the interim government

through Radio Nepal. Reaction of that announcement came swiftly. The same day Nepali Congress and United Left Front issued an official condemnation. The following day, they asked their own members, who were appointed by the king as the members of the commission, to resign. They did it promptly and was followed three days later by the chairman of the commission, Bishwanath Upadhyaya, the then judge of Supreme Court. After some days, the king asked the government for recommendation to appoint the commissioners of the constitution commission and accordingly the government did so. The king, taking the advice from the interim government, formed a Commission for Constitutional Reform headed by Bishwanath Upadhyaya. The draft of the new constitution was prepared by this commission and amending some points in this draft, the government recommended the constitution to the king for its promulgation. On November 9, 1990, the king announced the new constitution and it was declared by the king that the new constitution would e promulgated from te next day. The constitution was promulgated on the base of multiparty democracy.

4) The Power of the King: Reduced

In respect to the proclamation to the nation from king Birendra on the occasion of the promulgation of the constitution of the kingdom of Nepal on 9th November, 1990, it was stated that the Constitution Recommendation Commission was set up to draft a constitution reinstating multi-party democracy in the country as directed by the people. The Council of Ministers, after careful consideration of the draft, had forwarded it to us recommending promulgation. In the brief that the proposed constitution would help to forge the people in a bond of unity and advance the cause of multiparty democracy in constitutional monarch, we had exercised constitutional prerogatives and on the advice of the Council of Ministers, promulgated the constitution of the kingdom of Nepal, 1990 with immediate effect.

The constitution of the kingdom of Nepal declared the nation as a multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, democratic, independent, indivisible, sovereign, Hindu constitutional monarchical kingdom. In the Preamble of new constitution is mentioned that the people of Nepal are sovereign and it is the result of the desire of the people that translated into a mass- movement in order to bring about changes in the constitution with a view to providing them social, political, and economic justice, basic human rights, adult franchise, parliamentary system of government, constitutional monarchy, multiparty democracy and the promotion among the people of Nepal the spirit of fraternity and the bond of unity of the fundamental basis of liberty and equality as well as the establishment of an independent judiciary based on special justice in order to transform the concept of rule of law throughout the kingdom of Nepal. But in the constitution of the Panchayat period, the sovereign-right and its use was done by the king even not taking an advice to other authority. However, at the first time of the history of the country, the constitution of 1990 was promulgated by the king with the advice and consent of the Council of Ministers. The king was

declared as constitutional head as mentioned in this constitution whereas he was all in all during the Panchayat system.

5) Lack of National Unity and Norms of Democracy:

The right of executive of the state was transferred from the hand of the king to parliament or political powers by the constitution. There was necessary for a unity among the political parties and the people even for a fixed time to sustain the new democracy and to develop the system. But after the restoration of multiparty system in Nepal, the nation, society even a family too divided into the base of ideology, party politics and negative dispute arose among them. The political trust as well as moral trust among the parties on each other could not establish. As its result, the nation fell into a ditch of mud of trust. Due to this kind of lack of unity in the nation the political leadership failed to make the policy, about the policy of foreign affairs, national security as well as domestic affairs.

The system was called the democracy but the norms of democracy were in weak position as mentioned in the constitution. To have and enjoy democracy properly, the people should not led by the minorities. So long as they remain to be led by minorities, they will never be free and sovereign even during the reign of multiparty democracy, though the minorities, the leaders, will state the sovereignty is in the hand of people. Sovereignty is not a vote to cast in the election for a leader of one’s choice, but an independent power to govern and command. There is a heaven and earth difference between the two. In fact democracy, it is to be properly exercised in Nepal partycracy, mobocracy, and leadercracy, but could not be peoplecracy. Actually in the democratic system of the state, people themselves govern their country for their own welfare without any discrimination. But Nepal as its own operational definition of democracy i.e. rights or ‘haves’ protected at the cost of the rights of ‘have nots’. Politicians and leaders of Nepal exhibited their unwavering support to solve any constitutional crisis that may arise with heavy emphasis and strong commitment. They never attempt to consolidate the cultural, social religious and economic bonds of Nepalese society, but they themselves have been parting with the ways for solving the huge problems brought out by caste, creed, colour, sex, religion, language, national dress etc. by violating the constitution. For them democracy is of the leaders, for the leaders and by the leaders. That is why; democracy has become a game of musical chairs for the leaders and politicians. From this exercise in politics could not restore to health for social, political, economic, maladies but likely created clash, conflicts, misunderstanding and constitutional crisis in all areas.

6) Confrontation among the political parties:

The people’s movement restored the multiparty system, which was known as democracy too, but it was exercised with wrong application by the politicians. The confrontation among the political parties appeared after just after the completion of people’s movement of 1990. The ULF was a front of seven parties’ alliance of leftist power split after the movement. The confrontation

between Nepali Congress and CPN –UML (firstly CPN-ML and later CPN-UML) arose in the politics. However, they did not show their confrontation as a climax point during the constitution was not promulgated and the first election of the parliament was not held. After the election of parliament, which was held on May 12, 1991, the relation between them started to strain due to the squabbles and feuds and sharp division among their respective cadres and activists. The general election was at the hand and the disputes at various places were multifaceted because of growing attitude of election competition. Due to the extreme anti communist attitude, Girija Prasad Koirala was misbehaved by the communist cadres in several places before the election. He was also humiliated by the large mass of the people in a mass gathering by shouting the slogan “quit Girija, and go out Girija”, which was held on April 9th 1990 as a victory procession of the people, but the person who was rejected by the people, had become the prime minister of the country. This situation brought a confrontation among the political force.

When the government was formed led by Girija Prasad Koirala, the government employees launched a nationwide movement putting some points of demands. The government took suppressive step towards the movement instead of tolerable behave. This movement increased the political confrontation. Likewise, the Tanakpur treaty, which was completed between India and Nepal made another issue of the confrontation between the government and other political parties due to the false matters made by the then Government led by Girija Prasad Kiorala. The political parties raised the movement against the treaty as well as government and several people were killed by the government in that movement. In the meantime of Tanakpur issue based uprising, Das Dhunga accident was happened as a conspiratorial murder in which Madan Bhandari and Jibraj Ashrit, the top leaders of CPN-UML were killed. This accident also invited next agitation between the governments and the oppositions. Not only between the governments and oppositions, the conflicts inside the ruling party also appeared. After the death of Madan Bhandari, an election was going to hold for the constituency No.1 of Kathmandu to fulfill the seat from where Bhandari was elected at the first time. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, the then president of Nepali congress declared his candidacy for that sub-election from his party. But Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala broadcasted his statement from Radio Nepal showing a stand against his candidacy. As its result, Bhattarai defeated the election. But the next result came out in the street, on 10th of July 1994, which was in session of parliament defeated the Government’s policies and programs as 36 dissidents of the ruling party’s parliamentarians remained away from the crucial voting. The government failed to pass the documents for next fiscal year. As its result, the prime minister recommended king under Article 53($) of the constitution for the desolation of the House of Representatives. In the meantime, Manmohan Adhikari,of CPN-UML and Mahendra Narayan Nidhi of Nepali congress submitted a petition letter to the king a constitutional monarch bound by the provisions of the constitution requesting to deny the claim of prime minister. Such activities were not in favour of new emerged democracy.

The election of 1994 failed to provide the majority government of a single party. The CPN-UML formed its minority government led by Manmohan Adhikari under Article 42(2) of the constitution. But it was thrown out by the political parties due to its popularity was increasing among the people. After the failure of UML government, the nation went to be guided by an ill culture of the politics. Such political situation provided a chance of corruption from the parliamentarians to a low-level employee too.

7) Foreign Influence:

After the people’s movement of 1990, the influence of India as well as western countries fell upon the Nepalese politics. The reason was for it that the movement could possible to be success due to the support from those countries. Therefore, the leaders of Nepal became liberal towards them. The movement became successful after the economic blockade done by India and a mentality emerged among the Nepalese Multi-party supporter politicians that they would not success without getting support of India. Due to this concept of Nepalese political leaders, the foreign influence as a dominative way increased in Nepal. Tanakpur treaty can be an example for it.

At Tanakput is a place of of Mahakali River lies in Nepal where India made a barrage, not taking advice and consent from Nepal, during the Panchayat period. The Panchayat Government denied in providing consent to India for this construction. After receiving the post of prime minister in 1991, Girija Prasad Koirala made a goodwill visit to India. The communiqué released by the government was stressed that a mutual understanding or compromise with India regarding the Tanakpur Barrage was completed. The language of communiqué created an illusion as to the fact of compromise of treaty. All the oppositions of the parliament could not believe the statement of the prime minister and demanded to present the treaty before the parliament because it was intensively related with national interest. According to the Article of the constitution, such treaty should have been passed by the 2/3 majority of the parliament. But Government never accept it that it was a treaty.

Bal Krishna Neupane, an advocate filed a writ in the supreme court to get dictum of a judiciary whether Tanakpur issue is a compromise or a treaty, and whether it should be ratified by 2/3 majority of the parliament or not. Supreme Court gave a verdict that it was a treaty not compromise. The verdict of the judiciary proved that the government was in wrong box whereas the UML was on right track. In these issues, the oppositions as well as the supreme leader of Nepali Congress, Ganesh Man Singh demanded the resignation of the government due to moral defeat of the government. CPN-UML including other leftists parties launched a protest movement against the Tanakpur treaty. Due to the protest of Major Opposition of the parliament, the government could not face the problem presenting the treaty as a bill in the parliament to pass from parliament under the Article 126 of the constitution. The government accepted the treaty as influence of India fallen upon Nepalese Government.

The Major Opposition Party of the parliament led by Madan Bhandari was in the field of anti Tanakpur treaty. On may 16, 1993, Madan Bhandari died from a car accident. But his accident was not natural or sudden. It was conspiratorial accident and was doubted that the conspiracy was plotted by the foreign powers. After the death of Bhandari, CUN-UML also could not go forward on the way of Bhandari after his death. Madhav Nepal who became the leader of UML after Bhandari went to recognize the treaty from the next door. During the governing period of UML, Madhav Nepal was the minister of foreign affairs and proposed the treaty of Mahakali instead of Tanakpur during his visit in India. But after the down fall of UML Government, the Nepal Government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba signed in the Mahakali treaty which was presented by Madhav Nepal. In Nepal, all the communist factions including a large part of UML opposed the treaty and they requested the UML not to pass from the parliament.

On September5, 1996, the Assistant Secretary of the United State of America (USA), Robin Raffle visited Nepal. She as well as the then Ambassador of America to Kathmandu Ms. Sandra L. Vogelgesang attempted to bring under an influence of their interest, which was developed as an Indo-America tie in those days, by saying “Mahakali Treaty is important and it opens the market power sale which will be key to international financing in Hydro power project in Nepal” . Coming to the influence of foreign powers, the Nepalese political leaders passed the treaty with 2/3 majority in the mid-night of 20 September 1996. From such kind influence of international power which fell in Nepalese politics, as its result, Nepal went to be a playground for the foreign elements for future.

8. Corruption:

The democratic Government came to be a matter of corruption with a message of Laura Bowing, which was going to sell for Nepal Airlines. After this several issues rose about the corruption which were happened by the parliamentarians themselves. To throw the government or to sustain the government, they practiced, even up to that work, to buy and sell of the parliamentarians to achieve majority in the parliament. It was apparently seen in the field which was the bad practice for corruption. They involved in the activities having wine and prostitution during those time staying in Hotel while they were kept there before the session of parliament was started. The political leaderships of the parties had been exposed among the people and to them these were not real democrats. The leaders of the political parties earned a lot of money. Overnight, they became millionaire, and reached the capitalist class from the lower class, but the people got nothing. An authority named Commission for Authority Abuse Research was mentioned in the constitution but its commissars were appointed by a constitutional committee headed by Prime Minister and this commission could not take any effective action against the corruption. The Supreme Court too, could not be clean for which the example can be given the verdict of 28 August 1995 in which there was restored the dissolved parliament. From this time the parliament itself became most unpopular and infamous from the immoral and corrupted activities. This situation and activities was inviting another tsunami in Nepalese politics.

The people’s movement of 2006

Causes:

Political causeConstitutional cause Socio-economic cause International causeMaoist movementImmediate cause- Alliance between Seven Parties and Maoist

1) Political Cause:We have already mentioned under the topic “the effects of the people’s movement of 1990 and are given above in the sub-headings “lack of national unity, confrontation among the political parties and the corruption were the factors which were inviting the next movement. During the 10 years of democracy (1991-2001), the political parties led the state. But they could not be able to form the instable and clean government as well as to provide the satisfaction to the people. They formed 10 governments within 10 years while the general election of parliament would be held within five years except the condition if midterm election was not declared. Three elections were held within these years and among those one was mid-term election. For the two times, the people provided the chance to Nepali Congress to hold the state by giving majority in the parliament, but this political party became fail to hold the state. We can make a picture of the governments which were formed at that time and cause for their failure to govern the state as following:

1) The first general election was held in May 12, 1991, after the restoration of multiparty system in Nepal. Nepali congress formed a government winning a comfortable majority of 110 seats in the parliament. But this government dissolved in 1994, due its intra-party conflict and the midterm election was declared and this party achieved 2nd largest position in the parliament.

2) In 1994, after the Mid-Term election, CPN (UML) became largest party in the parliament and formed the government of minority led by Manmohan Adhikari. Huge efforts were attempted seriously by the UML government in order to launch development plans, programs and welfare activities throughout the country. The government seemed to highly dedicated and sincere enough to undertake its tasks with the tune of Nepalese nationalism when compared and contrasted with the previous government’s exercises. Therefore the UML government was thrown out by the other political parties, majorly Nepali Congress.

3) After the dissolve of Manmohan Adhikari’s cabinet, on 22nd September 1995, the coalition among the Nepali Congress, the Rastriya Prajatantra Party and Sadbhawana party formed the government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba. This Government also failed due to the internal clash of Nepali Congress as well as other coalition partners. Losing the

vote of confidence in the House of Representatives on 6th March 1997, Deuba tendered his resignation from his dignified post.

4) The parliamentary leader of Rastriya Prajatantra Party, Lokendra Bahadur Chanda, appointed the prime minister after Deuba on12 March 1997 getting the support from the largest party, UML and other Sadvawana Party. During the period of Chand, the ruling party, RPP split into two factions and one led by Surya Bahadur Thapa did not support to the government and this government also failed to hold the state.

5) After the resignation of Lokendra Bahadur Chand, Surya Bahadur Thapa became the prime minister but he could not go ahead more than six months. During this time, the largest party, UML split into two factions and was formed CPN-ML from the split faction led by Bamdev Gautam. From the split of UML, NC got a chance to be a largest in the parliament and Girija Prasad Koirala attempted to be the prime minister under the Article 42(2) of the constitution replacing Surya Bahadur Thapa. At first, making a coalition partner to the new formed CPN-ML, Koirala formed government led by him and the next time, just before the general election of 1999, made next coalition with UML.

6) After the general election of 1999, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, the leader of Nepali Congress was appointed the prime minister. But he could not stay in the post for a period due to getting a mountain pressure from the side of Girija Prasad Koirala, who was the party president. After his resignation, Koirala himself became prime minister. At that time, the Maoist revolt was in developing position. Even not getting the support from the royal palace as well as the Royal Nepalese Army, he also tendered his resignation and Deuba came to the power again. The ruling party NC also split during the ruling period of Deuba and it was formed “NC (Democratic) led by Deuba himself. On 4th of October 2002, Deuba also removed from the post by king Gyanendra charging him as incapable to hold the election. Lokendra Bahadur Chand and Surya Bahadur Thapa respectively were appointed in the post by the king and he appointed Deuba again. At last, the king took over the state power on his hand. Thus, the political instability seemed in the country during the period of parliamentary system, which could be a cause for the next movement because such instability made the people more dissatisfied.The political instability was the outcome of the failure of political leadership. People were frustrated with the system and looking for change. As a consequence, people had widely supported the democratic movement of 1990. General public had great expectation from the 1990’s political change. However, the political leadership could get fail to govern the country based on the democratic ideals and constitutional provisions detailed in the constitution of Nepal 1990. Rather they did even worse than the autocratic Panchayat leaders in many cases. That made the people frustrated and unhappy. Political parties did not sincerely work to restructure the defunct civil administration to make a factually competent system to implement decentralization and reform agenda and exercise inclusive democratic practice. Instead, they are widely perceived as corrupt, inefficient and useless. The main political parties absurdly used bureaucracy to fulfill their personal and party interest, which are often contrary to the will of general public.

These resulted in the weakening of the democratic process. The people were waiting for a suitable time to change the system which was expressed by them in 2006 movement.

2) Constitutional cause:On 1st June 2001, an accident met in Nepalese Royal Palace in where the king Birendra including his whole family was murdered. From this day, the legitimacy of the kingship of Nepal had collapsed. However, as mentioned in the provision of royal laws and the constitution of the kingdom, his younger brother (as nearest relative of the king) became the king of Nepal. The political parties attempted to avoid the constitution during the life time of king Birendra, but he never want to do so. After his murder, king Gyanendra started to abuse his authority decided by the constitution after one year of his ascend in the throne. On 4th October 2002, he dismissed the cabinet led by Sher Bahadur Deuba, which was a people elected cabinet. However, there was not provided the right by the constitution to the king to dissolve the Council of Ministers while he did so. After the October 4 event, major political parties are excluded from the governance process, which was further creating conflict between the king/ the government and the parliamentary parties. Though the king several times publically repeated his commitment to multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy, main parliamentary parties did not believe on these commitments. They blame the king for taking actions against the parliamentary democracy. Some scholars and activities argue that the 1990’s constitution is not able to deal with some fundamental issues that have to be addressed by multiparty democracy. Even some scholars blame the constitution of 1990 as sexist and racist. They argue that the constitution is racist because it does not treat men and women equally in fundamental issue like citizenship. This constitution also promotes majoritarian institutions, which discriminate against minority religious groups, women, and low caste people, etc. They argue that constitution has provided freedom of expression but has not insured equality. This constitution has declared Nepal as Hindu state, which betrayed many non-hindus Nepalese people. As against the non-Hindu feeling, many influential political elites view appropriateness and rationality of the then constitution. They vehemently oppose in developing new constitution that could address some fundamental issues and went to street against the system. This type of constitutional discrimination led the people towards the movement.

3) Socio-economic cause :Social exclusion, acute inequalities, absolute poverty, lack of access to resources and failure of political structures to address these issues made the Nepalese society extremely vulnerable to conflict and mass movement. Deep-rooted social cleavages in terms of caste, ethnicity, gender and regional, cultural linguistic and religious forms of discrimination provided fertile ground to escalate the agitation.Centralism and regional imbalance, skewed distribution, assess and control of natural and other productive resources, dominating influences of religiously and culturally biased

traditional Hindu values and culture, discrimination against women, ethnic minorities, so-called lower castes or dalits have created feeling of injustice, frustration and fueled the movement at appropriate time. Definitive action on radical land reform was not taken by the parliamentary governments. The performance of privatization was extremely poor; market price of basic needs goods was promptly hiked, in other words ineffective regulation of market. The areas for the employment, which was major source of the people’s livelihood, were not created. So a large number of people became unemployed and supported the movement as well as Maoist revolt. There had been domination of certain groups in politics, both in parliament and party structures. The ethnic group and exclusion of other groups such as Dalits in the leadership both party leadership and parliament were dominated by high castes. Civil society was weak and portioned in the line with the political ideology. Media also, could not be impartial and neutral, rather divided into political line of the parties. NGO and business sectors were also politicized. No the pure social and economic institutions or associations, being free from the political ideology, could be established during the parliamentary period. All these events made the people dissatisfied and fueled to initiate and escalate the movement.

4) International cause:The international interest, especially of India was the one cause for the people’s movement. We have already discussed about Tanakpur treaty and Mahakali treaty in other place. These were the example as the foreign influence which had fallen upon the Nepalese politics. Due to the instability in the domestic politics, the foreign powers could get a chance to play the role in Nepalese politics as their interest. During the period of Maoist people’s war, the government of Nepal kept a strong desire for a special help from the foreign powers to suppress the Maoist war. When Nepal was facing the problem of people’s war and feeling a grief due to the Royal massacre, at the same time, on September 2001, a Muslim organization, Al Qaeda, led by Osama Win Laden attacked in the World Trade Centre and Pentagon of USA. The international security interest grew also in Nepal. US Secretary of the state, Colin Powel visited Nepal and for the first time in the history of Nepal, as a high level diplomat of America, visited the head quarter of Royal Nepalese Army to discuss about the problem which Nepal was facing. The strong reaction of the US Ambassador to the Maoist and listing them in the terrorist list by the USA were the examples of hard line stance of USA towards the Maoists. The interest of US seemed towards Nepal that it wanted to suppress the Maoist by the armed force. On the other hand, due to this interest attempted secretly to check China by creating dispute in Tibet from the land of Nepal.The influence of India was on the political decisions made by ruling parties and its perceived security concerned determine the degree of Indian influence upon Nepalese politics. India was publicly supporting the Nepalese government providing several equipments and goods in every time. But in reality India is not really willing to help resolve the Nepalese problems. It wanted to keep Nepal unstable strategic interest. For

example, Bibek Kumar Shah, exposed an event through his writing that India provided the training to the Armed Police Force in India, which forced was formed with a main object to fight against Maoist fighters, but before it in the same place Nepalese Maoists were also trained by India. It was the role of double slandered played by India to sustain instability in Nepal.Nepalese people lost a great amount of the life and wealth during the people’s war period and they were wanted to bring peace in the country. They were not keeping any kinds of desire to increase the influence of foreign powers in their land. Their great interest was only with the peace and removal of foreign interferes from the country. Understanding the desire of Nepalese people, India played a role to win the support of Nepalese people in making alliance between seven parties’ alliance and Maoist, which was completed in India. However, the desire of the people to be free from the foreign interferes and influence was also the cause of the people’s movement.

5) Maoist Movement:

The CPN Maoist was a faction of divided Nepalese communist movement. The Nepali people brought political changes severally through the people’s movement. The movement of 1050 brought a change by throwing the Rana reign and established the democracy. But it could not last long in Nepali politics. The people’s movement of 1990 threw the party-less panchayat system and restored multiparty system after 30 years. But the problems of the people were not solved since their inception.

After four years of restoration of parliamentary system, a political party, the CPN-Maoist started armed revolt known as people’s war, which became the political problem for the state. After two years from the beginning of the armed revolt, the leaders of the revolt attempted to make clear the reason of starting of the revolt by raising some theoretical questions. The causes for starting the revolt, as defined by the leaders of this party, were to liberate from the suppression and exploitation of imperialism, to solve the conflict concerned social and religion relationship, to eliminate the exploitation of comprador bureaucratic capitalism in the industrial sector, to solve the problem concerned regional inequality, and so on. They presented the pictures including the explanation of the problems of exploitation in Nepali society that all the questions concerned to the races, territory, and class and gender discrimination. The solution of these problem have added with anti feudal and anti imperialist movement, and the revolution will be perfect solution. These views attracted the people and a large mass involved in the revolt to get win over the old types of political system and to establish the new system. The state authority of the country, at first, attempted to suppress the revolt but could not get success over it. On the other hand, Maoist was going to be very powerful by getting the support of people especially of low class, but was not being able to win over the state authority. During the period of this revolt, the country lost a large amount of the life and wealth. The people were tired by the war and their strong desire was to establish the peace in the country. After the royal takeover of February 2005, a political

situation emerged for an alliance between seven parliamentary parties and Maoist and they agreed on 12 points demands to establish the peace including the people’s movement, which would be held in future. The people welcomed the alliance and decision of the parties and people’s movement could get success.

6) Alliance between Seven Parties and Maoist :

After five years of the people’s war, Maoist party organized its second conference and the conference forwarded the policy of constituent assembly, which will be the factor for the peace settlement. But the other parliamentary political parties could not ready to accept the proposal of Maoist for a long time. Previously, in a massacre of 1st June 2001, king Birendra was killed together with his whole family in royal palace and Gyanendra, the younger brother of Birendra became the king after the massacre. A new situation gradually evolved in Nepali politics after the royal massacre. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, after being unsuccessful in spite of great attempt to mobilize the Royal Nepal Army against the Maoist, tendered his resignation from the post and Sher Bahadur Deuba, another leader of Nepali Congress was appointed the very post. Deuba called the Maoist for a bilateral dialogue to solve the problem created by insurgency. Responding the cal of the prime minister, the Maoist party also came to the table for dialogue with their demands. The representatives of Maoist party forwarded three points of demand before the government as given below:

1) Round Table Conference2) Formation of Interim Government and3) Election of Constituent AssemblyHowever, the Congress Government could not decided to go either back or forward from the then existing constitution and the dialogue turned out to be the failure due to their own stand. Consequently, the dialogue failed and the Maoist force attacked on Army Barrack of Dang District and seized a large number of modern weapons from the barrack proving itself as a dangerous challenge to the state authority. The government declared the Maoist as a terrorist force, brought the state under the emergency rule and mobilized the Royal Nepali Army against the Maoist. Latter on, Deuba dissolved the House of Representatives to hold the mid-term election and split the party, Nepali congress.

After the step taken by Deuba, Nepali Congress stood against the step of Deuba and demanded to restore dissolved House of Representatives. At first, except Nepali congress, no other political parties were agree to the demand of Nepali Congress. The UML supported the dismissal of House of Representatives due to the split of Nepali Congress not searching the answer of the question - in what condition the parliament was dissolved? UML simply kept its own sight in back with the thought if the election was held in such a situation, there was a strong probability of the formation of its majority government. All these illustrated the opportunist character of the party leadership before the nation’s politics and also exhibited the immature thinking of UML leadership.

After its some months, the situation could not make in holding the general election. Deuba was suggested by the other parties too to postpone the election by making active to the Article No127 of the constitution, which Deuba did so. But king Gyanendra declared that Deuba was in competent as prime minister due to being unsuccessful to hold the general election and using the Article No. 127 of the constitution removed Deuba from his post. Ultimately, the king took over the state power on his hand.

After Deuba, Lokendra Bahadur Chand was appointed the prime minister and he started the dialogue with Maoist to keep the peace. But he also tendered his resignstion during the period of dialogue and Syrya Bahadur Thapa became the prime minister of Nepal. He gave continuity to the dialogue with Maoist but could get nothing. After Thapa, Sher Bahadur Deuba got achance to be a prime minister and formed the government making coalition with UML, but again, he was thrown out and the king himself took over the whole state power by making a proclamation on 1st

February 2005.

The royal take over changed the political situation. All the political parties went to street to launch the people’s movement. But their movement was not being able to get success due to less support of the people. The people were not being ready for the movement whenever they could not get a clear picture for establishing the peace in the country. On December 27, 2005 an alliance was completed between the Maoist and seven parliamentary parties by making signatures on 12 points of demands and after that day and the tempo of the movement could increase. At last, the alliance of the parliamentary parties and Maoist declared a nationwide strike from the day of 6th April 2006. The movement could get the achievement after 19 days. Thus, this alliance was the immediate cause for the people’s movement of 2006.

Topics

1. child marriage2. slavery in Nepal3. world war and Nepal (Nepal and the 1st world war 1914)4. the second world war

Some Social ChangesChild marriage

The practice of child marriage became customary from 200 B.C. child marriage was an institution sanctioned by ancient Hindu Laws and assiduously practiced by their followers. The main reason was the superstation prevalent in the medieval period about Ritu, the first few days immediately after the menses. According to strict moral laws to ensure copulation in the first ritu it was binding on a man to get his daughter married before she reached puberty. Manu has written that if a girl remained unmarried after reaching puberty, the father had failed in his duty towards her. Parasara , a law specialist and sage said that the parents or guardians of a girl in house a girl reached purity before marriage would definitely go to hell. These warnings by sages had their effect upon the credulous minds of the people. Child marriage became a fashion and even the marriage of infants was common. The tradition of child marriage at the age of 6 is still prevalent in some rural areas. Some orthodox peole believe that if a daughter is given away before first menstruation she is a cent percent virgin and giving away of a virgin or Kanya in marriage at a ceremony called Kanyadan or giving away by way of charity is really a great punya or religious credit. Tradition of child marriage is less common among the ethnic groups such as kirati, magar tamang, Sherpa, and other hill/mountain ethnic groups.

In Nepal, among the tharus living in terai there is even the practice of getting embryos married. In these cases two pregnant women have formalities of marriage with the hope that the child born of one would be male and that of the other female. Marriage becomes null and void if it turned otherwise.

Nepalese girls are generally married at an early age. The mean age of marriage for Nepalese girls in 1971 was calculated as 16.8 years while boys it was 20.9. the age of marriage both in boys and girls is quite low. Marriage is universal. About 92 percent of women get married at the age between 20-24. About 66.89 percentages of men are married.

Regarding the social attitude towards early marriage on comparing the statistical data of 1961 and 1971 it is evident that there is a marked decline in the number of even married males and females in lower age group i.e. 6-19. The change is 50 percent for girls in the age group of 6-10 whereas the percentage of ever-married individuals came down from 5.33 to 2.35 percent.

Regional analysis points out that a higher percentage of females is married at an early age in terai than in Kathmandu valley and hills. However, it is surprising to note that child marriage is higher in Kathmandu than in the hills and mountains.

According to research carried out under the aegis of UNESCO, the number of girl students in rural areas is less than that in urban areas by as many as 5 to 35 percent. One of the reasons behind it may be the higher incidence of child marriage together with the prejudice prevailing in the society against women education.

The custom of child marriage cannot be removed simply by laws it needs awareness among the people and the education of the women, especially in rural and hilly areas of Nepal rather than in urban areas.

The National Code of 1963 completely banned child marriage. According to the laws, no girl could be married before the age of 14 and no boy before the age of 18 even with the consent of their guardians. According to the sixth amendment, enacted during the International Women’s Year the minimum age of marriage for girls with her guardian’s consent was raised to 16. The minimum age for marriage without the consent of the guardian is now 18 for a girl and 21 for a boy.

Penalty for the violation of these rules is according to the age of the girl involved in the crime. Any one responsible for arranging the marriage of a girl under 10 years of age is liable to imprisonment for a period ranging from 3 months to 3 years plus a fine from Rs. 500 to Rs. 5000. In the same way, then the girl involved is above 10 but below 14 years of age, those responsible for her marriage may be imprisoned up to a year and fine up to Rs. 2000. If the girl is between the ages of 14 and 16, the punishments will not exceed3 month’s imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000. The fines collected in the case of underage marriage are to be turned over to the girl involved.

Beside child marriage the section of ‘Law on Marriage"’ also deals with the practice of marriage of a young girl to a man many years older than she is. This practice was one of the causes of early widowhood for women, especially when marriage was not socially allowed in some groups and the condition of the widow becomes most unenviable. The existing law does not allow marriage between a man and a woman if there is a difference of more than 20 years in their respective age. Marriage in contravention of the law is punishable but not automatically void. Although such marriages may be declared invalid, the girl of an orthodox Hindu family will find difficulty in finding a second bridegroom when she reaches the legal age of marriage.

According to the present law, a marriage between minors becomes null and void, if either partner does not consent to it after attaining the age of sixteen. This law is consistent with the general provision in the same law that for a valid marriage mutual consent is required. This provision has been reinforced with the addition of section 7 in the sixth amendment according to which no marriage shall be contracted or arranged without the consent of both man and woman. In case a

marriage is contracted or arranged by force, it shall nullify. There are difficulties in the wording of the minimum age of marriage law. Firstly, the term guardians’ consent is used instead of parents’ consent. The word guardian is not defined. Though father is the guardian of the daughter and in the event of the death of the father, mother will act as the guardian. In certain ethnic groups, a girl’s paternal uncle has more say in the matter of marriages. If the parents could be inserted along with the guardian in this clause or better yet a section defining a guardian to include the mother, the mother would be assured her rightful say in decisions concerning the daughters’ marriage.

The second problem is that the provisions for punishment according to the law are based mainly on the age of girl. If the boy involved in marriage is below age but the girl is not, only light punishment is given. As the law runs, all acts prohibited in the forgoing section shall be liable to punishment (in case there is no specific provision for punishment) of a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months or a penalty of Rs. 500 or both.

In addition to it, the important problem with the marriage regulations is the difficulty of enforcement. Though few cases only are reported in Kathmandu valley. There are not successfully prosecuted under the laws. The police do check those marriages but offenders escape punishment. If the enforcement of law regarding early marriage is so ineffective in Kathmandu valley where public opinion is strong against child marriage there are great problems in its implementation in remote rural areas.

For effective implementation public opinion should be built so that laws can bring about change effecting changes in this connection..

Slavery in Nepal:In Nepal, the slavery system was in existence since the inception. The inscription of Ananta Lingeswar inscribed by Narendra Dev has mentioned the matters of Deva Das & Deva Dasi (male and female slave of god). The process of slavery in Nepal was not different than that of other counties. However, except mentioned above, some other causes have seemed as the sources of the slavery in Nepal. These were:

1. Because of being failure in paying revenue: During the whole ancient and medieval period including the former phase of modern period, the revenue would be collected by local landlords. But the revenue would have been collected by landlords from the cultivators. Lack of ownership, the almost cultivators would not be able to pay the revenue and the collector of revenue would make them slaves.

2. During the period of Gorkhali expedition, who revolted against Gorkhali, they were made slaves.

3. If anybody killed the cow would also be made the slave. 4. As an alternative punishment of death penalty, the slavery would be adopted in some

places.Slavery system in Nepal was mostly relating to land system. In ancient and medieval period, there was enough virgin land in quantity in Nepal due to the low growth of population. The land lords made many slaves to fulfil the scarcity of the workers to work their lands. However, in the

series of change, which was coming in international level, Nepal was not exception from this change. Therefore, Nepalese rulers were also feeling a pressure in ending the inhuman custom like slavery from the country. The British ruler, Wilber Force, who was the first man in the history of the world, had taken the step to abolish the slavery. As his tremendous attempt the slavery system was abolished in Britain. Although Chandra Sumsher abolished the slavery in Nepal yet his step was not first attempt. Before his governing period, several rulers had attempted by taking different kinds of steps to ablish the slavery. But their attempts could not abolish the slavery completely.

1. Prithvi Narayan Shah, the founder of Nepal, at first, a step towards abolition the slavery. In 1768 A.D., a slave named Dhanawante Newar of Lutikot; Kathmandu was abolished from the slavery by Prithvi Narayan Shah. In 1773, an order was issued by him among the Danawar creditors of seven villages’ i.e. Banepa, Dhulikhel, Khadpu, Choukot, Panauti, Sanga and Nala, not to make slave to the debtors in the case of failure in paying the debt. In 1775, he made free from the slavery to those, who were working in his own palace and appointed them in civil service and armed force. This attempt of Prithvi Narayan Shah was simple in the general consideration. But its importance was great in the history of the world because it was taken not only as the first step in Nepal but it was also the step, which was taken 20 years before of the British government’s step- in Britain, at first, the slavery was abolished. Therefore, as a first, the step of Prithvi Narayan shah keeps the value in the history of the world. The Lal Mohar of Prithvi Narayan Shah of 1773, which was issued among the Danawar creditors of seven villages, was not implemented after his death. Therefore, we have found that the same order was issued for same community and same places in the time of Bhimsen Thapa.

2. In 1793, from a lal mohar of Girvan Yuddha Bikram Shah, an order was issued to the local administration of Doti not to deliver on the hand of slave owners to those slaves, who had run away from the houses of landlords if it was possible to arrest them.

3. In 1807, next order was issued for the Garawal area to the local administrators not to make slaves to those people, who were being failed in paying tax, fines and revenue.

4. In 1812, for the same area, it was declared that those slaves, who were made slaves due to having been unable to pay the tax or other dues, were made free from the slavery.

5. By issuing a lal mohar in April 1831, Bhimsen Thapa forgave Serma Sahunya Phau dues, which was imposed especially in the place of Marsyangdi to Pyuthan among the untouchable caste’s slaves. In 1836, Bhimsen Thapa ordered the Magars not to give their daughters by making Banda to the creditors and the creditors should not take it.

6. In 1839, a nationwide order was issued by Rajendra Bikram for all castes that the new process of making slavery was banned thereafter.

7. In the code of Jung Bahadur, it was mentioned: a) nobody can make slave to an independent person thereafter. b) if a man of touchable castes committed the crime thereafter he should not be slave due to his crime. C)If any save ran away from the house of master towards India and after returning to Nepal started to stay in Morang and Surkhet, his master was prohibited to make slave him by arresting again.

8. After Jung Bahadur, the next step was taken by Dev Sumsher, as his step was in abolishing slavery in Kaski and Lamjung , where the places were declared as the territory of Rana Prime Minister. But he could not successful.

All the steps, which are mentioned above, were not indicated towards in abolishing the slavery completely. However, these steps created an environment to take step for complete abolition.Chandra Sumsher got success to abolish the slavery in Nepal completely. In 1909, by promulgating the law about the abolition of slavery, it was mentioned that the action in the liberation of slavery would be taken as the interest kept by the slaves. After some years, the government led by Chandra Sumsher collected the data about the number of slaves and their master. In 1921, he Promulgated nest law and it was said that the liberated slaves would be settled in Chitawan. In 1923, Morang and new state (Banke, Bardia, Kailali, and Kanchanpur) were also declared as the places for settlement. But these places were not favoured by the slaves. In this year, a nationwide census of the people was taken from which the data of slaves and their masters were also collected. The total population of nation was 5573788 whereas the number of masters was 15719 and of the slaves 51519.

The data presented the figure that neither the heavy majority people have slaves or nor the majority were slaves. After receiving the records and data, on November 18, 1924, Chadra Sumsher gathered the people and Bhardars of Kathmandu valley at Tundikhel and addressed to the mass with a long speech about the abolition of the slavery. After his speech, three kinds of slave masters appeared in society. The number of slave masters 179 agreed to make free to their slaves without taking any kinds of pay to those who were below 9 years. Number of 1281 accepted to abolish without all kinds of paying and 498 demanded the pay as decided by the law. In February 1925 an office for slavery abolition was established. There were 59873 slaves up to this year. It was declared that if anybody made the slave he would be punished as equal of murder case. Thus, in the period of Chandra Sumsher or from 1929 the slavery was abolished in Nepal.Why did he become successful to abolish the slavery?

1) Among the other rules, he was very powerful as well as careful Prime Minister. Therefore, nobody had strength to oppose of his step.

2) Several attempts were already done before his ruling period from which an environment had created to abolish and he had also become experienced from those steps which were taken before him.

3) The time, when got the state power, was also a period of slavery abolition in the world. His step was a consequence of the international situation.

World Wars and Nepal

Nepal and the First World War 1914:In 1914, there broke out the world war in Europe and Chandra sumsher offered the services of the Nepalese army to the British for the defense of the Indian empire..Accordingly,in March 1914 he sent a strong force of about 17 thousand Nepalese troops to help the British. Of them about seven thousand were under the command of his second son, General Babar Sumsher four regiments under General Padma Sumsher, two regiments under Tej Sumsher and three regiments under Sher Sumsher. Besides, Chandra Sumsher provided the British financial help of a million pounds. He opened the border of Nepal for Britain to recruit the Nepalese people in British army. For this purpose, Chandra Sumsher appealed the Nepalese youth people to take appointment of the British government. During that war period, about 200000 Nepalese youth were recruited by British Government in its armed force. He declared that nobody would be discarded from their

caste due to be gotten appointment of British government and due to be gone outside of the country. British were helped by giving information by him. A letter was sent by government of Germany to Nepal through the younger brother of the king of Afghanistan. Likewise, an Indian citizen, Mahendra Pratap, who was working as an agent of Germany in India, sent a massage towards Nepal by saying that British was defeating in war. The letter sent by the government of Germany and the message of Mahendra Prata were requested Nepal not to help Britain in the war. Such types of information were handed over by him to the British. The British Gorkha troops earned a great reputation for their valour, courage and bravery in several battle-fields of Europe. They fought in Prague, Poland, Mesopotamia and other places with great success. Many Nepalese were honoured by the medal of the Vitoria Cross at that time .the German emperor William Kaiser said of the Gorkha troops once “I do not, in the least, fear to launch my beloved troops against any troops of the world, but to hear the name of the Gorkha troops it strikes terror in my heart.” This assertion bears testimony to the bravery of Gorkha troops. Chandra Sumsher also sent two thousand troops to help the British against Amanullah, the Amir of Afganistan. But as the struggle came to a close very soon, the troops returned to Kathmandu after four months.But though the Nepalese made a great name in the battles of Europe, Nepal had to suffer a great loss in terms of both men and wealth. For all this Chandra Sumsher secured the honour of Honorary General in the British army and Nepal got an annual grant of ten lacks of rupees from the British Indian government. The position of the king and the Prime minister of Nepal got promotion in the eyes f British ruler. The king of Nepal was addressed by British as Hs Highness before the war while they started to address as His Majesty the king after war. Nepal received a status of an independent and sovereign state from British after the war. It will be mentioned in the topic of the treaty of 1923.

The Second World War and Nepal The Perish treaty, which was settled after the First World War, took the aim to make Germany weakest among the European powers. After the First World War, economically crippled, politically segregated, militarily humbled, nationally humiliated, physically exhausted, Germany stood like a pale person, just out of the game. This situation of Germany led to rise of Hitler in that country. The policy of Hitler, nationalism and Nazism, led to the world toward the nest great war.In 1939, the Second World War was started. At that time, Juddha Sumsher was the prime Minister of Nepal. At the beginning of the world war, representatives of great natons came to Nepal with distinguished titles and honours for Juddha Sumsher. The German consul-General conferred on Juddha Sumsher the title of star of German Red Cross and the latter in return conferred on him and his companions the Nepalese title of honour. The Netherlands government also sent to Juddha Sumsher through their Consul-General the most eminent title “Grant cross of the order of the Netherland’s Lion”. The Consul-General came to Kathmandu and invested Juddha Sumsher with the same. In 1939, Juddha Sumsher visited Calcutta. On that occasion he was received with great honour and respect by Governor General and so he decided to help the British. Accordingly, he sent two brigades of eight thousand Nepalese troops to India under General Ekraj Sumsher and General Brahma Sumsher. General Bahadur Sumsher was appointed as G.O.C.of the Nepalese force. A year later General Krishna Sumsher was sent was G.O.C. in his place with General Kiran Sumsher and Nir Sumsher as his staff members. They had their headquarters in New Delhi. As they

got help from Nepal from the very outset of the war the British invested Juddha Sumsher with title of Hohourary General of the British army.The Nepalese force showed great courage and valour in the battle fields of Burma, Egypt, Sudan, Singapore and other places and made their name immortal. There were many among the Nepalese combatants who got the rare award of the Victoria Cross from the British Government. At the close of the war, sir Claud Auchinleck, the commander-in-Chief of the British-Indian army came to the Nepal and the March –passed was held in his honour. He was also invested with the title of Nepal Tara. At that time Juddha Smsher announced that he had established a fund of three lacks of rupees for helping the soldiers and junior officer in times of emergency. It was the time that the independence movement was in rising condition in India though the Rana ruler of Nepal helped the British in Second World War.

ReferencesBaral, Lokraj, Oppositional politics in Nepal, New Delhi: Abhinav Publication, 1977

―――, Nepal Politics of Referendum, Delhi, Vikash Publishing House, 1983

Chatterjee, Bhola, Nepal’s experiments with Parliamentary Democracy, New Delhi: Ankur, 1977

Dahal, Ram Kumar, Constitutional and Political Developments in Nepal, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1994

Gyawali, S.P., Peoples’ History, New Delhi: Nirala Publication, 2010Husain, Asad, British India’s Relations with the Kingdomof Nepal, London: George Alleen and

Unwin Ltd. 1970

Joshi, Bhuvan Lal and Leo E. Rose, Democratic Innovation in Nepal, Berkeley University of California Press, 1966

Kumar, Satish, Rana Polity in Nepal, Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1967Muni, S.D., Foreign Policy of Nepal, Delhi: National Publishing House, 1973

――, India-Nepal A Changing Relationship, Konark: Konark publishers, PVt. Ltd.

Pokhrel, Rajkumar, A Journey of the Communists of Nepal, (twenty three years history of CPN-UML), Damak: Massline Publication

Uprety, Prem R., Political Awakening in Nepal, New Delhi: Common Wealth Publishers, 1992

Thapa, K. B., Main Aspects of Socio- Economic and Administrative History of Modern Nepal, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1980

Vaidya, T.R., An Advance History of Nepal, Delhi: Anmol Publication