Nepal at crossroads, bid to establish people's rule may get dashed before it truly began: Analysts

Kolkata: Large-scale turmoil and subsequent collapse of the government in neighbouring Nepal have put the Himalayan nation at the cusp of possibilities that could lead stakeholders in that country to find solutions beyond its existing Constitutional framework, quashing the current experiment of a federal republic to dust even before it properly took off, top Nepalese political analysts said.

The current Constitution of Nepal, all of 10 years old, was promulgated on September 20, 2015 establishing the country as a multi-party democracy, marking a shift from a constitutional monarchy to a federal republic.

Nepal reeled under a grave political crisis since Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and key cabinet ministers stepped down on Tuesday amid massive violence in Kathmandu and across the country, with protesters setting on fire the leader's private house and attacking the residences of former PM Sher Bahadur Deuba, Foreign Minister Arzoo Rana Deuba and other former ministers.

Protests by youths, termed the Gen Z agitation, against a government ban on social media sites rocked Nepal on Monday, with police's use of force leaving at least 19 people dead and over 300 injured.

The agitations have since snowballed into defiance of orders, loot, arson, rampant vandalism and attack on government institutions at a scale unseen.

Despite the Army taking control over the country's administration as its only effective institution and clamping prohibitory orders, violence continues.

Ramesh Parajuli, editor and senior researcher with Nepal-based NGO Martin Chautari pointed towards the possibility of stakeholders opting for an "extra-constitutional solution" to the present crisis.

"At the moment, it is difficult to foresee the course Nepal would take," he said.

"The constitutional track has been derailed, and there is a tilt towards finding a solution from an extra-constitutional framework. The Parliament is no longer in operation and the PM or the President are no longer present in the administrative horizon to take the country out of its current quagmire," he added.

Parajuli cited three options which are before Nepal right now: solutions which are available within the Constitution, those which can be found by "slightly deviating from it" and the third, by doing away with the Constitution altogether.

"To me, the first option doesn't seem likely. Option two, and the more probable one, is to make a slight deviation from the existing framework and set up an interim government while preparing for fresh elections. The option of doing away with the Constitution entirely and finding solutions outside of it is also a possibility. I am not ready to discard because there are certain powerful forces acting in this country who are vying for this option," he said.

Asked which option he would prefer, Parajuli settled for the first.

"The Constitution is new, and governments are yet to complete two full terms. It's early to say whether the experiment worked or not. It needs to continue for more time," he stated.

Senior journalist and vice president of the Nepal chapter of South Asian Women in Media (SAWM), Namrata Sharma, questioned how, without a caretaker government in place, could an election be conducted.

"The Gen Z has insisted on proportional representation and structural changes. Without an interim government, the task cannot begin, and Nepal would continue to reel under uncertainty," she said.

Author and senior political analyst, CK Lal, said the government was likely to run on "auto-pilot mode" for the foreseeable future.

"This has happened before in Nepal in the aftermath of the Nepalese Royal massacre in June 2001," Lal said, referring to the killing of nine royal family members, including King Birendra and Queen Aishwarya, in a mass shooting at the palace.

"But the worst possible scenario is of the army trying to run the country on its own without reverting to the democratic set-up. Any further continuation of this violent anarchy will provide the army with a watertight case of doing so," he warned.

Lal also questioned the Nepal army's move to exclude established political parties and calling only Gen Z representatives, besides some well-respected individuals, for a crucial meeting to resolve the impasse.

"No one knows who the true leaders of this organisation are. I have doubts whether such a meeting can yield a stable solution without elected political party representatives participating in it," he said.

Lok Raj Baral, former Ambassador of Nepal to India, said the idea to exclude political parties may have been aimed at finding a stopgap solution to diffusing the present anger among people.

"Given the existing organisational set up the political parties, I believe that excluding them for long would be difficult. What's more likely is that the parties would return to governance once the dust has settled," Baral, also a professor of political science, said.

Defending Gen Z's position to not engage in any dialogue with politicians, Sharma said the proposed meeting should ideally have taken place with the President instead of the army.

"The whole point of the Gen Z movement was to alert the authorities of the sustained tyranny and corruption these leaders have engaged in. They want fresh faces with a clean track record to lead this country," she said.