Kamal Thapa, Chairman of Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal (RPP-N), is a former key figure in Nepal’s monarchist movement. He also held the position of Deputy Prime Minister in democratic secular republic of Nepal from June 7, 2017 to February 15, 2018. Kamal Thapa now feels that democratic governments have been failing to uplift the lives of ordinary citizens or meet their aspirations for the past 18 years. He declares that reinstating the monarchy with the identity of a Hindu state will deliver the ‘good governance’ with fuller utilization of resources of the country as it used to happen in the past during the time period between People's Movement-I and People's Movement-II. He is sure in his assertion that the intervening time period of 15 years (from 1990 to 2005) was much better than that of the present secular democratic republic of Nepal.
However, during the same time period the then King Gyanendra dismissed the “all party government” led by Sher Bahadur Deuba on January 1, 2005 and declared a state of emergency to impose direct rule. This is how the stage was set to launch People's Movement-II in Nepal. Constitutional restraints in dismissing the democratically formed governments were not seen even when the first elected government of Nepal under the leadership of B. P. Koirala (as the first democratically elected Prime Minister) was functioning. The then king Mahendra had sacked B. P. Koirala's government on December 15, 1960 before completion of its full tenure. This incident is infamously known as the black day for democracy in the history of Nepal. On that very day (Poush 1, 2017 - the Bikram Sambat), the then king Mahendra imposed the state of emergency in Nepal leading to a 30-year-long Panchayat rule (absolute regime controlled from the palace) that lasted till 1990.
In a democratic political system, political parties have to be ambitious as they compete with each other to come into power with their respective agendas. If the former King Gyanendra is inspiring the political parties, who are supporting the reinstatement of monarchy with the explicit identity of making Nepal as a Hindu state, there is nothing wrong in it constitutionally. But for that to happen, the former king and the pro-monarchy political parties have to set a political agenda and get the mandate from the people of Nepal through general elections in order to fulfill this political ambition. This is the only way out left for the former king Gyanendra and the pro-monarchy political parties as per the provision of the Constitution of Nepal, 2015. Therefore, it augurs well for a serious debate on this matter in academia as well as in civil society.
Article 4 (Clause 1) of the Constitution of Nepal, 2015 declares Nepal as an independent, indivisible, sovereign, secular, inclusive democratic, socialism-oriented federal democratic republican state. This is the present political setup of Nepal. Pro-monarchy political parties including the former king, if they want to bring any changes in the current status of the state of Nepal, must muster enough support in the federal parliament (more particularly in the House of Representatives). Constitutional provisions show the way to do it by garnering people’s support through general elections, not by street protests, as we saw happening in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in the recent past. Article 61 (Part 6) of the present constitution further declares that there shall be a President in Nepal and that President shall be the head of the State. How can this provision be changed by just the ‘vehemence’ of street protest to install a monarch in the constitutionally led modern state of Nepal? If pro-monarchy political parties form the executive government by claiming majority in the House of Representatives, they can, without doubt, elect the former king as President of Nepal by invoking Article 62 of the present constitution.
If pro-monarchy political parties form the executive government by claiming majority in the House of Representatives, they can, without doubt, elect the former king as President of Nepal by invoking Article 62 of the present constitution.
The former king (or queen or any Shah relative for that matter) needs to join active politics and even become Prime Minister of Nepal as some former kings like V. P. Singh, Madhav Rao Sindhiya – s/o Vijaya Raje Sindhiya, Digvijay Singh, Dr. Karan Singh in India did so. Nepal is a multi-party, competitive, federal democratic republican parliamentary system that follows the principle of plurality. It is well within the constitutional provisions (and individual rights as well) to adhere to a specific political ideology on the spectrum of left to right color of thoughts till the time s/he partakes in the democratically held periodic elections and accepts the mandate of the people.
What is more intriguing and confusing at present is that key players of pro-monarchy protests have been a part of all hues of political ideologies. They have been switching sides frequently to safeguard their own relevance in politics. Rajendra Prasad Lingden, chairman of Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), is believed to be enjoying the close proximity of the former King Gyanendra. RPP decided to join the leftist coalition government in 2022 and Rajendra Lingden became the Deputy Prime Minister.
Another ‘poster boy’ of the pro-monarchy forces in Nepal at present is Durga Prasai, who was arrested in India and brought to Nepal to face the law over violent pro-monarchy protest (that took place on March 28, 2025), has a history of subscribing to multi-color political ideologies and carries multiple identities (like a political maverick). Once a Maoist, Durga Prasai rose to hold a position in the central committee of CPN (UML). Now, all sorts of labels he carries with himself – an anarchist, populist, rightist, royalist, billionaire and a successful entrepreneur, to mention but a few. He engineers his way out to do ‘something ‘ that creates cacophony in political circles and hits the headlines. It is immaterial if one hates him or loves him but one cannot ignore him.
The pro-monarchy political parties and forces have not been able to fully convince the people of Nepal that reinstating the King would not lead to another political crisis, like the one witnessed in the past.
Other democratic parties (and forces) are watching the sporadic outcry of pro-monarchy forces for reinstating the former King Gyanendra Bikram Shah in Nepal because there is a palpable skepticism and fear that the monarchy will metamorphose into kakistocracy. Let us wait and watch!
(Binod Kumar Pathak is an editor (of academic books), educator and academician)
.
