KP Oli and L’etat c’est moi again?

ANGEL SHARMA

The words of Louise XIV “L’etat c’est moi” means I am the state in English. It expresses the
spirit of the rule in which the king was completely authoritative. His absolutism is one of
those things that the French would like to forget. Sad but truth, the recent release of ex-
Maoist rebel Balkrishna Dhungel makes us wonder whether our country is truly exercising
people’s rule or is Nepal turning into the new Louise (KP Oli)’s own state?

Balkrishna Dhungel was arrested by Nepal Police Central Investigation Bureau and sent
behind bars on Tuesday, October 31st 2017. He was convicted for the 1998 murder of Ujjan
Kumar Shrestha, a resident of Okhaldhunga. Earlier in 2004, the local district court of
Okhaldhunga had convicted Dhungel of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment but
in 2006, he received clean chit from Rajbiraj Appellate Court. It was only in 2010 when the
Apex court upheld the decision by Okhaldhunga district court. Finally, the case researched
the Supreme Court, which then ordered Nepal Police to arrest Dhungel on April 13, 2017.
However, the arrest only took place on 13 years later when senior advocate Dinesh Tripathi
filed a write against the then IGP Prakash Aryal for neglecting the SC’s verdict.

Delay due to political affiliation

Even after the Supreme Court’s verdict, Nepal Police still failed to arrest Dhungel. Dhungel
was elected as a lawmaker in 2008 Constituent Assembly elections from the Maoist party. His
political affiliation alone undermined the decision of the country’s Supreme Court. His party
had been protecting him despite orders from even the Chief Justice Sushila Karki to arrest
Dhungel within a week.

In the aftermath of the murder, Shrestha’s brother Ganesh kumar had filed a complaint at
District Police Office, Okhaldhunga. The Maoist cadres murdered Ganesh kumar as well for
filing the case against Dhungel on June 24, 1998. Why did the investigation of Ganesh
Kumar’s murder go unheeded? This all happened due to strong political backing for Dhungel.
In 2011, Baburam Bhattrai’s government had recommended presidential forgiveness for
Dhungel, only to be later rejected by the court. In our country, does one’s political affiliation
mean that they are above law?

Unravelling events after arrest

Even after the arrest of Dhungel, Pampha Bhusal (the then party spokesperson) condemned
the arrest citing that the arrest was against the peace agreement. Pampha Bhusal made
inferences to the settlement of Maoist cases by Truth and Reconciliation Commission and
demanded his immediate release. Dhungel was sentenced to 12 years 5 months and 22 days.

Soon after his arrest, the Young Communist League (YCL) also the youth wing of then CPN
(Maoist Centre) demanded immediate release of Dhungel, citing that the matter be resolved
through Truth and Reconcilation Commission. YCL protested against the sentencing saying
that it was against their Peace Agreement, and referred to it as a ploy to disrupt elections.

The arrest of Dhungel was only possible because the government at that time was led by
congressman Sher Bahadur Deuba. On February 15, 2018 KP Sharma Oli took oath of the
Prime Minister’s Office as the 41 st Prime Minister of Nepal. During the elections, the CPN
(Maoist Centre) and CPN-UML had formed alliances, and by doing so had secured highest
number of seats in the parliament. On the 17 th May 2018, the two leftist parties CPN-UML
and CPN (Maoist Centre) merged to form Nepal Communist Party. On the occasion of
Republic day, which was observed on May 29 th, Dhungel’s name was recommended for
waiver of prison sentence. He was recommended for the waiver based on his good conduct.

Easy get away with murder?

The case of Dhungel has left serious eyebrows raised among the public. Good conduct within
prison was cited as the reason for his pardon, but what about his absconding since the
Supreme Court upheld the district court’s verdict? Why was not that taken into account? Was
he pardoned because he was affiliated to the party that is in power?

Murder is a serious crime and normally a state does not intervene in such circumstances.
However, in the case of our country it is easy to get away with murder simply because one
has some sort of affiliation to a political party. The case gets covered under the sand if the
affiliated political party is in government, as seen with Dhungel’s case. KP Oli who had
constantly echoed the idea of Nepal improving in all aspects seems to have remained silent
with regard to the case of Dhungel. In a country where laws become flexible for political
cadres, how can the common people expect justice?

This trend of politicians getting away with crime is very disturbing to normal citizens like us.
It goes on to show that with power cadres of political parties can do whatsoever they want
and get away with it. The chief question is why has our belligerent prime minister who was
vocal about such incidences in the past remained silent? Is it because party’s unification is
more important than moral values or is it because KP Oli has turned into the new Louise XIV.
This incidence alone has greatly devalued people’s revolution against monarchy, and has in
fact given people an example of a completely authoritarian regime. KP Oli’s silence on this
matter leads us to question whether his views are in line with Louise XIV’s L’etat c’est moi.

As normal citizens, we can only expect justice. But in an authoritarian regime such as this,
our fundamental rights often get ignored. Let us hope that we do not have to revolt again in
the future because of incidences such as this.

The author is a research student with the Department of Management, University of Otago,
New Zealand.