Vantage | Why Nepal doesn't need to replace its democracy with monarchy

The streets of Kathmandu have become the stage for a peculiar demand—one that contradicts the global trend towards democratic governance. In a surprising turn, thousands of Nepalese protesters are fervently advocating for the reinstatement of their monarchy, challenging the very foundation of their republic.

Seeking return of monarchy

The voices of these demonstrators echo sentiments of a bygone era, where the king reigned supreme. “Our country will retain its value and identity only if it is turned back to a monarchy, and the king is reinstated back to the throne,” asserts Rudra Raj Pandey, a vocal supporter of the former Nepali king. Others, like Pasupathi Khadga, see the monarchy as intrinsic to the nation’s identity, stating, “For the continuation of Nepal and Nepali people, we need a monarchy. Without a king, we have no identity as Nepalese and all of us might as well just declare ourselves as refugees.”

This fervour for the monarchy is particularly intriguing against the backdrop of Nepal’s recent history. Until 2005, the country operated under a constitutional monarchy. However, King Gyanendra’s authoritarian actions, including the dismissal of the parliament and the curbing of civil liberties, led to widespread unrest. Public protests erupted in 2006, demanding the king’s abdication, which eventually resulted in the transfer of power to the parliament and the subsequent abolition of the monarchy in 2008.

More from Opinion

Why Trump’s tariffs on India are a colossal mistake Apache induction and Aatmanirbhar Bharat: Striking the right balance in defence modernisation

Struggle under democracy

So why the clamour for a return to monarchical rule? Many argue that Nepal’s experiment with democracy has been fraught with challenges. Since transitioning to a republic, the country has witnessed a staggering turnover of governments—13 in just 16 years. Political instability has become the norm, with coalitions forming and dissolving at a dizzying pace. The recent shuffle in coalition partners, reminiscent of previous political manoeuvres, serves as a stark reminder of this volatility.

Economic indicators paint a grim picture, further fueling disillusionment with the democratic system. Nepal’s GDP growth has been sluggish, inflation remains high, and unemployment, particularly among the youth, is alarming. The exodus of young Nepalese seeking opportunities abroad underscores the deep-seated frustrations with domestic prospects.

Impact Shorts

View All

Why Trump’s tariffs on India are a colossal mistake

Putin-Trump talks: Can a fragile trust lead to a Ukraine ceasefire?

However, while the grievances are valid, the solution proposed by the monarchists is contentious. Restoring the monarchy, they argue, will safeguard national identity and stability. Yet, critics caution against romanticizing the past, emphasizing that it is the failures of Nepal’s political class—not the democratic system itself—that have led to the current predicament. Moreover, the resurgence of royalist factions within the democratic framework underscores the complexity of the debate.

As Nepal grapples with this existential question, the imperative remains clear: to address the root causes of dissatisfaction within the democratic framework rather than resort to a regressive solution. Ultimately, the fate of Nepal’s governance lies not in the hands of a monarch, but in the collective will of its people and the ability of its leaders to govern effectively.

Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.