Nepal had already lost the distinction of being the only Hindu state of the world, when the country’s popularly elected parliament proclaimed it to be a secular state (i.e. a state without any official religion) by shedding off the status of a Hindu state (i.e. a state with Hinduism as the official religion). And on 28th May, 2008 it also lost the “remaining distinction” of being the world’s only Hindu kingdom, with a special assembly voting to abolish the 240 years old monarchy.
King Gyanendra, who till the other day was the world’s only Hindu king, has now turned into an ordinary citizen of Nepal. He and his family has been given 15 days of time to vacate the Narayanhiti Royal Palace, the abode of his ancestors for years, which the government plans to convert into a museum.
While it is certainly true that the Nepalese royal family was infamous for its lack of respect for democracy, at the same time nobody can deny this fact that the King (i.e. the Monarchy) had already become too weak to create any hindrance for the smooth flow of democracy in the country. Under such circumstances, it was meaningless to abolish the monarchy completely. Rather, it could have been very much retained – by keeping a strong control on the lavishness of the royal family members – as the Nepalese King was some sort of a national icon, something like the “National Emblem” of the country.
However, the Maoists were determined to completely dethrone the Monarch and abolish the monarchy. It is not that they considered the King to be a threat for the smooth functioning of democracy. Their only interest was to see their leader Prachanda as the first President of the country, a long cherished wish of Prachanda which he has never tried to hide. At last his dream has come true.
It may be nice that Nepal is now free from the clutches of its royals. But is it a better situation to be under the clutches of Communists, who themselves are not known to be very respectful of democratic norms? Only time can answer this.
King Gyanendra, who till the other day was the world’s only Hindu king, has now turned into an ordinary citizen of Nepal. He and his family has been given 15 days of time to vacate the Narayanhiti Royal Palace, the abode of his ancestors for years, which the government plans to convert into a museum.
While it is certainly true that the Nepalese royal family was infamous for its lack of respect for democracy, at the same time nobody can deny this fact that the King (i.e. the Monarchy) had already become too weak to create any hindrance for the smooth flow of democracy in the country. Under such circumstances, it was meaningless to abolish the monarchy completely. Rather, it could have been very much retained – by keeping a strong control on the lavishness of the royal family members – as the Nepalese King was some sort of a national icon, something like the “National Emblem” of the country.
However, the Maoists were determined to completely dethrone the Monarch and abolish the monarchy. It is not that they considered the King to be a threat for the smooth functioning of democracy. Their only interest was to see their leader Prachanda as the first President of the country, a long cherished wish of Prachanda which he has never tried to hide. At last his dream has come true.
It may be nice that Nepal is now free from the clutches of its royals. But is it a better situation to be under the clutches of Communists, who themselves are not known to be very respectful of democratic norms? Only time can answer this.
Photo courtesy: www.abc.net.au
No comments:
Post a Comment