http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue/304/StateoftheState/12070

-by CK LAL

We need a stop-gap statute for checks and balances during this political interregnum

• On 25 June, two sons of the once all-powerful honorary ADC to the king, Gen Bharat Keshar Simha, tendered an official apology to Ang Dawa Sherpa, the motorcyclist they beat up in the middle of the road at Lainchaur last week.

They also agreed to compensate him for the costs involved in treatment and repairs.

• This week, Tulsi Giri deposed before the High-level Investigation Commission headed by former Supreme Court Justice Krishna Jung Rayamajhi. Giri told reporters he had full respect for the rule of law.


• Media reported that the finance ministry had asked Narayanhiti to show sources of funds that will be used to import a SUV costing about Rs 5 million. The royal family will no longer be tax exempted.

There is a common thread running through these occurrences. It will be a long haul before the king and commoners will be governed by the same laws, but an irreversible process has begun.

Just a year ago, Gen Simha had thundered in public that the authority of a Hindu king couldn’t be confined by any constitution. Giri had similarly argued in a tv interview that the king acquired legitimacy to rule from the loyalty of his subjects who anointed him at the time of his ascension to the throne.

This was the divine right theory that justified the supremacy of the king which in turn was used to create special privileges for royal lackeys. Simha and Giri were notable beneficiaries of royal munificence. They appear to have reconciled themselves to the changed circumstances of the country.

Now it’s the turn of the Maoists to pledge that they too will be bound by the laws of the land. Feudal lords, military juntas, and armed revolutionaries have identical views on the law: it is what they in their infinite wisdom decree.

This is the reason the Maoists leadership’s promise to abide by the decisions of a constituent assembly has given rise to optimism. It implies that they are ready to discard the logic of the gun. Like monarchists, someday the Maoists will also be held accountable for their deeds. Their loyalists too will be asked to testify, depose, and accept responsibility at investigation, truth or reconciliation commissions that will be formed by the constituent assembly or subsequent parliaments.

Meanwhile, excesses that may be committed in the name of the supremacy of the parliament also must be kept in check. As it happens, the restored house has declared itself sovereign at a time when there is no institutional mechanism to ensure the checks and balances so essential for the healthy functioning of a democracy.

To conduct the affairs of the state according to the rule of law, all officials must be bound not by the oath taken inside parliament but by the provisions of a commonly agreed statute. All that parliamentary supremacy implies is a regime run by the laws. The distinction between these two different concepts of legal supremacy shows that all forms of governments are equally likely to degenerate into tyranny if not kept constantly on their toes by a watchful and informed public.

An urgent promulgation of an interim constitution is thus not just a concession to the Maoists but a legal necessity to institutionalise democracy during this political interregnum.

The job of the Rayamajhi Commission will be a lot easier if Laxman Prasad Aryal and his team succeed in making its recommendations binding upon the interim government. If that happens, the commission will have no hesitation in summoning the chairman of the royal council of ministers for questioning. The dream of one nation under one law looks tantalisingly close.