Summary and analysis of recent news. Leaders of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) have emphasized that those appointed through political channels must work to clear the path forward. The RSP has committed to amending relevant laws to appoint capable and independent individuals to constitutional bodies. Even supporters of Prime Minister Sushila Karki have criticized the appointment of Adarsh Kumar Shrestha as Chairperson of the National Nature Conservation Fund as inappropriate. Following the youth-led JNG movement against government irregularities, the RSP secured an unprecedented two-thirds majority mandate. This deep public trust demands not merely a change in leadership or political faces; rather, it calls for ending long-entrenched misgovernance and instituting good governance. Good governance is not confined to mere rhetoric but must be demonstrated through effective actions. To initiate real change, it is essential first to precisely understand the weaknesses and operational styles of the current state apparatus. This analysis and news series “Mandate for Good Governance” aims to reveal these systemic issues and guide the path forward.
RSP leaders, now preparing to form a new government, have begun stating that politically appointed officeholders must “pave the way.” A list of various appointments made by previous governments in different agencies is being compiled, according to one leader from RSP. The leader added that political appointees are being urged to resign so that experts and qualified individuals can make the state mechanisms more efficient. The RSP manifesto mentioned amending laws to ensure the appointment of capable and independent individuals. It pledged, “We will amend the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority Act 2048, Constitutional Council Act 2066, and Judiciary Council Act 2073 to enhance institutional capacity, jurisdiction, appointment procedures, and staff selection, thereby strengthening institutional governance of independent, capable, and accountable constitutional bodies.” As RSP prepares to change laws and thousands of posts across various agencies, it may find some past examples instructive.
One such example is the appointment of Adarsh Kumar Shrestha as Chairperson of the National Nature Conservation Fund. On Chaitra 1, the government spokesperson did not disclose this appointment following recommendations from the Council of Ministers, reports from the Inquiry Commission, and approval of climate change grants. Possibly, the government lacked confidence to announce the decision publicly. Even supporters of Prime Minister Sushila Karki, who secured praise for conducting timely elections under difficult circumstances, have been unable to justify this appointment. Numerous reasons have been cited for it being incorrect. Firstly, it contravenes the new mandate. “Appointments made during a change of government after elections are ethically inappropriate and represent a regrettable tradition,” said former Secretary Sharad Prasad Tritel, who noted that even Karki has reiterated this point.
Secondly, from a subject-matter expertise perspective, Shrestha is not suitable to lead the Fund responsible for valuing, respecting, and conserving nature. Having served as a Supreme Court employee and personal assistant to the Chief Justice, his background is in technology, not conservation. Another former Secretary, Dr. Dwarika Nath Dhungel, stated, “Adarsh Shrestha lacked relevant subject expertise.” Thirdly, this appointment perpetuates a tradition of appointments made through the use of power and influence. Dr. Dhungel described such appointments as conflicts of interest. The situation with constitutional positions is no different; Prime Ministers, opposition leaders, and Speakers have all been known to appoint individuals who favor them. “Such appointments are often made to avoid opening files on malpractices and unresolved issues,” Dr. Dhungel explained.
Appointments before retirement! In Jestha 2080, Chief Secretary Shankardas Bairagi resigned with time remaining in his term, and three days later, Secretary Baikuntha Aryal, just days from retirement, was appointed Chief Secretary. Bairagi, having resigned just over three months before term end, was then assigned as National Security Advisor at the Security Council. Similarly, Auditor General Toyam Raya had been Secretary at the Central Bureau of Statistics before his appointment as Auditor General in 2081, following recommendation by the Constitutional Council and approval by the Parliamentary Hearing Committee. Former Transparency International Nepal Chairperson Padmini Pradhan Rai, having observed decisions at the Central Bureau of Statistics, described these appointments as conflicts of interest. “To prevent this, there should be at least a three-year cooling-off period,” she said.
In Chaitra 2075, when the Constitutional Council recommended Dinesh Thapaliya for Chief Election Commissioner, he was still serving as Secretary at the Ministry of Federal Affairs and General Administration, having secured a subsequent post without finishing his current one. Prior to that, in Baisakh 2074, the Council recommended Tanka Mani Sharma, then Secretary at the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers’ Office, for Auditor General. Chief Secretary Dr. Somlal Subedi resigned early to take a position with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in 2074, even though his term was due until Shrawan 2075. Cases such as this reflect the extent to which senior civil servants can secure appointments before retirement. In the past, when the federal civil service bill sought to remove the ‘cooling-off period’ clause, many senior and first-class employees breached limits, leading the House of Representatives to covertly insert an ‘exception’ clause favoring such employees. The parliamentary investigative committee’s chair Ramhari Khatiwada, Chief Secretary Ekanarayan Aryal, and Secretary Suraj Kumar Durai were found responsible for this irregularity, leading Khatiwada to feel compelled to resign. Ironically, before his resignation was finalized, both the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML reappointed Khatiwada as head of the Parliamentary Hearing Committee. “The RSP should learn that this is the kind of malpractice from which the old parties must not take lessons,” said a federal parliament deputy secretary. “Such contempt towards the people contributed to the foundation of the JNG movement.”
Breaking the cycle of continuity is expected; countries with high unemployment rates often view political appointments as job opportunities. However, politicians must prioritize creating an environment where employment opportunities are generated for all. Influential leaders’ tendency to favor relatives, friends, and party workers for responsibilities denies qualified and honest individuals their chance, directly affecting administration, explained administration expert Kashiraj Dahal. He added the major problem is the influence and pressure of middlemen during appointments. Dahal said appointing authorities often prioritize candidates who would not face corruption charges. Dahal, former Chairperson of the High-Level Administrative Reform Advisory Commission, stressed, “Good governance requires decisions free from pressure and influence.” Many appointments to constitutional bodies have been challenged in courts due to allegations of unconstitutionality. In 2077, the Supreme Court ruled after four years on the controversy surrounding the appointment of 52 officials across constitutional bodies. Dahal recommends avoiding such disputes altogether, saying, “If the government does not require someone, they should be easily removed; cases should not be initiated on their own.” Individuals appointed to constitutional positions must have high integrity and suitability. However, repeatedly recommending controversial figures raises questions. Former Secretary Tritel advises the new government to enact legal reforms to make progress. “Since theoretical and ethical considerations have been insufficient, it is better to codify them into law,” he said. Although regular rotations occur, the process is only worsened by mismanagement, Dahal pointed out. He added, “There is a need for laws to prevent conflicts of interest; routine parliamentary hearings are ineffective.”
The new government’s “litmus test” will be on Chaitra 18, when Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut will retire upon reaching the age limit. Following this, on Falgun 26, the Judicial Council recommended six Supreme Court justices’ names to the Constitutional Council for the now-vacant Chief Justice position. The nominees are: Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Regmi, Hari Phuyal, Manojkumar Sharma, Nahakul Subedi, and Til Prasad Shrestha. Following Parliamentary Hearing Committee approval, the President appoints the Chief Justice as per constitutional provisions. Analysts view the parliamentary hearings for these nominations as the RSP’s first real challenge. Former Secretary Dr. Dhungel remarked, “Saying they won’t politicize the judiciary is one thing; actually implementing it is another. The new government must prove itself in appointing the Chief Justice.” He recommends completely eliminating partisan negotiations during judicial appointments. “Without a fair appointment system like the Public Service Commission, strengthening the judiciary is not possible,” he added.
The previous governments failed to be transparent and uphold good governance, sparking protests that led to RSP winning power with a two-thirds majority. The party mandated with this trust should not repeat past mistakes. The “Mandate for Good Governance” series will continue to explore procedures and reforms going forward.
