The government has completed its first hundred days in office. Supporters are listing its achievements while critics focus on its failures. However, Dr. Anup Suvedi advises against making a superficial assessment of the government’s performance. He states that the current administration has received unprecedented popular support and rare political opportunity, but it is premature to label it a success or failure within just one hundred days. Nevertheless, during this period, the government has already indicated the direction it intends to follow. While there are some positive signals in controlling corruption and service delivery, serious concerns have arisen regarding the rule of law, institutional democracy, sensitivity to marginalized citizens, and the state’s long-term vision.
In an interview following the election, you mentioned that the country was returning to constitutional rhythm after a period of aimlessness. What is your initial assessment after this hundred-day journey? At that time, following the rebellion on Bhadra 23 and 24 (September), there was significant uncertainty within the country. There were fears that constitutional institutions were dying and the nation might fall into a populist dictatorship, military rule, an unchecked monarchy, or a controlled democracy. Under those circumstances, the completion of the House of Representatives election and the prospect of a new government gave hope. That is why I said the country was returning to a constitutional rhythm.
However, just returning to the constitutional path is not sufficient. The upheaval itself occurred within the constitution. The environment for citizens’ anger to rise, explode, and rebel was developing within constitutional practice. Therefore, the key question now is: How far have we progressed in addressing the grave problems exposed by that movement? In one sentence, we are still not fully on the right path. One leg is in rhythm, while the other seems somewhat off balance.
When reviewing the government’s initial measures, do you see progress towards ending factionalism, or is there a shift merely replacing one party’s dominance with another’s? To put it mildly, there appears to be a lack of groundwork. It’s not enough just to dismantle existing structures; there must also be a clear plan for what will replace them. Merely breaking down a system does not create a new one.
What are three positive and three negative aspects of the government’s performance so far? Starting with positives: first, public service delivery appears somewhat faster. Second, at least until now, there have been no public reports of open bribery transactions or government officials directly involved in such activities. Third, government operations continue to be conducted from Singha Durbar (the administrative center). On the negative side, the state should stand for its most vulnerable citizens. However, I have observed that the government’s treatment of the most impoverished communities has been comparatively harsh.
Finally, will this government become a transformative one or remain limited to the role of a routine administrator? The answer is still undecided. They have the opportunity, but significant reforms are necessary.
