Nepal’s hard-earned democracy received a major blow on Wednesday when President Ram Baran Yadav appointed controversial bureaucrat Lok Man Singh Karki as the Chief of the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), in the face of stiff public and media criticism. Karki must now be a relieved man, but millions of Nepalis who fought for the cause of democracy and wanted to see the country tread into a new era of democratic governance must also have had an inkling of how hard it will be to consolidate democracy in this country. Karki’s appointment has created a big rift in Nepali society.
A section of the civil society has already hit the streets. Karki had a major role in suppressing Jana Aandolan II as Chief Secretary under King Gyanendra’s regime. But that is not the only thing that made him unfit to head CIAA. Given his tainted past, the same anti-graft body which Karki will now head had deemed him unfit to hold any public office in the future. The implications are deeply troubling. With such a tainted figure at its head, any future CIAA action, legitimate or not, will come under a cloud of suspicion. There is also a fear that Karki will serve the interests of the political masters that helped him get the coveted post.
The responsibility for this unfortunate appointment must be borne by the High Level Political Mechanism (HLPM). Not only did the HLPM fail to rise to people’s expectations, its constituent parties are now under intense scrutiny for apparently bowing to unwanted pressures from outside. Nepali Congress and CPN-UML leadership tried to come clean at the last moment by appearing to publicly oppose Karki’s appointment, but their initial backing of the former Chief Secretary as the CIAA head makes people suspicious that their last-minute drama was only for public consumption.
The parties’ role in Karki’s appointment will add to suspicions about their democratic credentials.
There are other culprits as well. The Supreme Court refused to extend the stay order barring Karik’s proposed appointment and then refused to entertain a writ petition against the Constitutional Council’s go ahead on Karki’s name. These decisions will be closely scrutinized in the days ahead. The President, only a day after assuring the people that he would properly study Karki’s appointment before clearing it, gave the controversial proposal his stamp of approval early next morning. What forced him to make a complete U-turn in such a short time?
The country’s major political forces played a very important role in overthrowing feudal monarchy, but they have since been complicit in all kinds of anti-democratic moves. It was their incompetence that led to the historic failure of the Constituent Assembly. Now their dubious role in Karki’s appointment will only add to people’s suspicions about their democratic credentials. However, we would also like to reiterate that the latest turn of events should in no way jeopardize the election environment and whatever their differences over Karki, real or cosmetic, the political parties should continue to work together for timely Constituent Assembly polls. At the end of the day, it should be up to the people to decide if they are satisfied with the performance of their elected representatives.
Related story
Black is bold
