Public Institutional Leadership: How to Reach Out?

26 October, Kathmandu. A high-level political mechanism set up to support the Khil Raj Regmi-led government recommended on March 20, 2069, the appointment of Lokman Singh Karki, the former secretary of the controversial image, as the chief commissioner of the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority. It is not uncommon for a writ petition to be filed in the Supreme Court against Karki’s appointment recommendation. But after the court cleared him on 24 April 2070, Karki became the chief commissioner.

However, Karki did not spend the entire term in power, as a writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court and an impeachment motion was filed in Parliament, questioning his qualifications and efficiency. More importantly, he had conflicting interests with the leaders of the political parties.

Stating that he would open the files of the alleged corruption cases involving the top leaders of the party, Karki had publicly announced that he would immediately investigate the Maoist camp scam. The decision of the parties to appoint Karki, who is said to be unqualified as per the constitution, at the outset and later to impeach him was not an unintentional mistake, it was a deliberate mistake.

Soon after resigning from the post of government secretary, Dinesh Thapaliya was recommended to the Chief Election Commissioner. No one within the ruling or opposition parties disagreed with his recommendation. The answer to the question as to why he resigned from the post before the end of his term and was transferred to the Election Commission the next day was found when the then government started rotating the Election Commission on the eve of the CPN (Maoist) split. Gun Thapaliya paid his appointment to Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli at the same time.

Sushil Bhatt, who became a member of the Planning Commission in the quota of CPN-Maoist Central Committee Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, became close to the then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli with the intention of getting closer to the government. Oli and Bhatt had a close relationship, his brother Deepak Bhatt. As a result, Sushil was made the executive head of the Board of Investment without meeting the minimum qualifications.

There was a big commotion even within the then CPN (Maoist) when Sushil Bhatt was given the responsibility of bringing in investment to move the development project forward on 19 July 2077, ignoring the activities of the Bhatt brothers who were using political access to undertake development projects and leave them unattended. But it was not heard anywhere.

Mahesh Dahal, who suddenly became a Maoist from the Nepali Congress, became the Nepali Ambassador to Australia from the quota of UCPN (M) Central Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal in May 2076 BS. Prime Minister Oli has appointed Dawafuti Sherpa, daughter of Sonam Sherpa, the leader of the Yeti group, as Spain’s ambassador to the CPN-UML.

The practice of using opaque approaches to change political affiliations or appointing top party leaders is considered normal in Nepali politics. But it is a matter of concern that this trend has been increasing in public institutions in recent times.

In the early days of his career, Cholendra Shamsher Jabra, a law officer of the Kathmandu Metropolitan City, was controversial. Being a judge of a special court, his decisions were often discussed but in a negative light. Despite the controversy, the then Law Minister Narahari Acharya, under Prime Minister Sushil Koirala, recommended for a Supreme Court judge.

Deepak Joshi and Gopal Parajuli also became Supreme Court judges in the same lot. But the temporary judges of the Supreme Court, Bharat Upreti and Prakash Vasti, who were considered capable of administering justice, were not made permanent. One of the visible consequences of the parties’ choice and their position abuse was that.

Ignoring Jabra’s weaknesses in the Supreme Court, he was recommended to the Chief Justice, which was approved by the Parliamentary Hearing Committee without hesitation. Now, the judiciary is agitating and demanding Jabbar’s resignation, saying that the same Chief Justice Jabbar has made a deal with the court for political appointments and allotments.

But he doesn’t look like a tosser. Jabra’s morale has not waned as both the ruling and opposition parties have sided with him to make him the chief justice. Educationist Kedar Bhakta Mathe comments that such political appointments are degrading the dignity of the constitutional organs.

“When a person reaches a position, he does not have the qualifications according to the position, but after reaching the position, he is promoted because of the position. Some people are moving away from their old things and moving forward with a little bit of cleanliness, ‘says Mathema,’ but some people are trying to make themselves look like themselves by dropping their position, by lowering their chair. From Lokman Singh Karki to Cholendra Shamsher Jabra, the same ego is seen, because they have leaders in their right hand. ‘

Before the transformation of 2046 BS, there was no idea that public institutions should be strong. People were appointed at the behest of the court, working directly for the court. The general public had nothing but terror, so they did not pay much attention to such institutions.

After the constitution was drafted in 2047 BS, the political parties woke up saying that the public institutions should be strengthened. The appointments from 2048 to 2051 are probably not as controversial as those that took place after 2051.

In 2048 BS, the then Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala made non-Congress leader Suryanath Upadhyaya the secretary of the constitutional drafting commission and laid the foundation of the tradition that better people than us should be promoted. But it was the Congress that shook the foundation laid by Koirala at that time that the right people should be given opportunity in the right place. After 2051 BS, the party started giving seats to those close to the party.

UML Secretary Pradip Gyawali says that there has been a rift between the parties in the constitutional bodies since 2048 BS. “The politicization of the court was started by the then Chief Justice Vishwanath Upadhyaya. We may also be to some extent guilty. If so, we are ready to bear the blame, ”said Secretary Gyawali. For example, the Judicial Council. The Judiciary Council consists of three politicians, the Law Minister, a government-appointed lawyer and a Bar-appointed lawyer. This is where politics begins. ‘

Gyawali says, “Later, there was a division among the judges. Former Chief Justice Sushila Karki has already said in whose presence the judge was selected. It is not a crime for recruiters in public institutions to have a political background. But the main thing is whether politics is done or not after getting inside there. ‘

After 2051, the tendency to appoint anyone to the constitutional organs on the basis of political belief rather than universally accepted and competent person increased. After the year 2056, the economic path started to come more than expected. The process of handing over the key of running the state to those who lead the lives of the leaders has been increasing since the Jana Andolan of 2062 BS.

Now this trend is spreading. After the middlemen started having direct connections with the top leaders of the political parties, earning money became the ‘side business’ of the politicians. Decisions ranging from political appointments to dismissals began to be made at his behest. This tendency led leaders to associate money and middlemen with leaders. Analysts say that the prestige of public institutions has been declining since then.

In the experience of former Justice Prakash Vasti, the influence of intermediaries in the post-conflict period increased exponentially. At that time, some people who were involved in land brokerage and made a lot of money started making middlemen their profession after the slowdown in the land trade. These intermediaries became active from the courts to the Election Commission, from the authorities to the parliamentary committees. After that, there was no roster of qualifications in the appointment process.

These middlemen began to make appointments and appointments in various positions to suit them, to take advantage of their position, and to gain more power on that basis. A judge in the Supreme Court recounted a similar experience. While he was in the appellate court, a doctor who came in regular contact with him said, “You have to go to the Supreme Court.” He thought, ‘I will go when the time comes, why is he doing this?’ The judge said, “He got a lot of benefits from this assurance and later he became a judge.”

On the one hand, those who have been supporting the parties since the election did not give up until they reached power or parliament, while on the other hand, the party leaders insisted that those whom they had appointed should be in their hands. This double counting of transactions extended from Baluwatar to Singha Durbar, Parliament and Parliamentary Committees. As a result, our public institutions became ghosts.

Former Secretary Rameshwar Khanal says that the appointment of public corporations started after 2065 BS. ‘Initially, appointments were made through bidding for physical infrastructure and irrigation. But after 2065 BS, the same thing started happening in every field. The trend of giving money and taking appointments started increasing. The leaders who made the appointments started taking advantage of the person as long as he was in office, ‘says former secretary Khanal. According to the law, the parties have started using their favorable appointments to spoil the appointments.

The recent decision of the Constitutional Council can be taken as an example of how leaders appoint on the basis of consensus and transactions of the parties.

On 30 December 2077, the Council of Ministers brought an ordinance on the Constitutional Council to appoint members to the constitutional bodies in the presence of only three of the six members of the Constitutional Council. Recommended.

The government repealed the ordinance after informing the Parliament Secretariat about the recommendation for a parliamentary hearing. A writ petition seeking revocation of those appointments has not yet been heard. On the contrary, the current movement for supremacy is also linked to those appointments to the constitutional body.

Of course, it is the constitutional and legal provision of the country for the Judicial Council in the courts and the Constitutional Council in other constitutional bodies to make recommendations for appointment on the basis of merit. However, the country is now facing the consequences of the majority in the Judicial Council being run on the basis of party interests and the government flouting the law on the Constitutional Council.

With the increase in the number of appointments from the pockets of ministers and prime ministers, the Constitutional Appointments Division of the Council of Ministers seems to be ineffective and the Judicial Council cannot take any decision without the intervention of the top leaders of the party. High court judges who went to the UML party office in Balkhu to seek the party’s blessings after their appointment are just a visible example of this trend.

According to Khanal, these trends have led to questions in the appointment process itself. “It is questionable whether the appointment process is wrong,” Khanal said. But our leaders broke the law. Our politicians are bad. Even where the selection process was good, political leaders infiltrated and destroyed it. ‘

According to sources, the parties have been eyeing public institutions to raise the election expenses and have made such recommendations a source of extra income. On the other hand, in order to cover up their mistakes, they started sending such people to institutions like Supreme Court, Election Commission, Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority. However, firstly, they were able to earn a living by being appointed, and secondly, they were able to use those institutions when they were in trouble.

As the ruling political parties involved in the Baluwatar land issue were deliberately acquitted, the alleged scam in the Maoist camp file was not opened. Therefore, the political leadership has kept the constitutional bodies in its grip to institutionalize corruption, says Suryanath Upadhyaya, former chief of Akhiyar.

“When I was the head of the authority, we recommended action against those involved in corruption. Action was taken against some Congress leaders, including Khum Bahadur Khadka, but not against most of them. Why? ‘Upadhyaya says,’ Lately, political parties have started interfering in everything. What is the effect of that, is already seen. What did Lokman do when he came to power? What did Navin Ghimire do? What did Cholendra do when he came to the Supreme? What did Dinesh Thapaliya do in the Election Commission? Didn’t we see and understand? ‘

Expensive elections and economic politics are the main reasons behind giving blind appointments to unqualified people. Therefore, former secretary Rameshwar Khanal analyzes that the first impact of the collapse of public institutions will be on the country’s economy and the daily deterioration of the citizens.

‘The inability of public institutions to work fast has an impact on the economy in the first place. If the economy deteriorates, people will start questioning it, “said Khanal.” Citizens are looking for development, economic growth and employment opportunities.

Khanal is of the view that the role of the three major parties in the parliament is equally important in the deterioration of public institutions. “The Congress has started destroying public institutions. The UML has intensified it. The Maoists have made it a means of earning money,” Khanal said.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *