Hridayesh Tripathi is an outspoken person in the politics of Nepal. Being a five-time MP, he is one of the few people who have spent a long time in Parliament. He entered politics from his student life in 2033 and was elected to the House of Representatives for the first time in 2048. After that, he was elected from different regions of Nawalparasi in the first Constituent Assembly elections of 051, 056.

He came into politics from a left background and was active in it from the beginning when Gajendra Narayan Singh founded the Sadbhavana Party. Later he joined Terai Madhesh Democratic Party under the leadership of Mahant Thakur. After separating from Thakur, he became a candidate from UML's Surya sign in the 2074 election  won .

In the House of Representatives elections of 2079, he was defeated by industrialist Vinod Chaudhary, the candidate of Nepali Congress from Nawalparasi West-1. Now he has formed Janata Pragatisheel Party under his own leadership. Hridayesh Tripathi, who is active in the Madhesh rights movement, talks about Nepali political ups and downs and current affairs in Kantipur, edited by Rajesh Mishra : Your activism, which is always visible in Nepali politics, seems to be less these days, isn't it? After being defeated in the last election (2079), the arena has only changed . Earlier, I used to attend the parliamentary field . Sometimes I was in the government too . Now I am especially busy among the people of my area . I am spending time in discussions with my friends from different districts . We have opened a new party only three months before the previous election. We participated in the election from that. My presence in Kathmandu may have been less because I was also involved in the organization of the party. 

You leader is old but your party is new . What makes your party different from other parties?

has a slightly different opinion on some subjects . The class base is farmers . Politically, we are supporters of the federal democratic republic. It is believed that patriotism should grow in the country. The word nationalism has been misused a lot. There should be extensive reforms in the selection of officials in the judicial system and constitutional structure.

There is no substitute for democracy. That is the basic principle . All producers in the world set their own prices for their products . Except only farmers . Farmers work hard, produce . However, the price is determined by the middleman . Therefore, the condition of Nepali farmers has deteriorated even now. The overall condition of agriculture is weak. Investment in agriculture and investment in farmers are two separate issues. If we look at the budget, the entire budget that went to the Ministry of Agriculture is called investment in agriculture. However, the investment on farmers is only 18 percent. Because of that, the farmers are in a distant state. Agriculture contributes to the survival of today's economy . It contributes 30 percent to the GDP . 

On the other hand, the bright side of the constitution is that it has made the Nepali people the source of sovereign and state power for the first time. However, there are some errors. Nepali politics is always suffering from a commentary of nationalism and patriotism. Both are different subjects . Nationalism is an idea, a word that came from the national liberation movement. It is aimed against someone. A patriot seeks sacrifice . There are numerous nationalists in Nepal. However, there are few patriots . To take all these ideas a bit further is . 

The federalism that we have adopted is a distorted type that is not found in the world. Provinces are weak and powerless, without resources . The local level has been given more powers than necessary . There is also a big question about the financial discipline of the local level. We have created an organization with new ideas by including all these. I don't claim that it is very strong . However, we have made a start, we are in the process of building an organization.

There has been a saying in the political circle, Hridayesh Tripathi prefers to be a second line leader rather than leading. It was also seen in the past . Are you trying to destroy that understanding by forming a party under your own leadership?

My politics started from leftist thought . However, after the 2046 movement, when the Sadbhavana Party was formed, I joined it. The issue of Madhesh, the discrimination against Madhesh, the issue of tribal tribes became a mission for me. That's why I didn't show the desire of leadership to include everyone. As many friends came from different parties while making Tamalopa, respected Mahanth Thakur came as the leading leader. Naturally, as he was senior to me in everything, I considered him as the leader . As long as Gajendra Narayanji was there, no question arose. In between, not in principle, the division was opportunistic. I didn't go to that race . The Madhesi problem was a mission for me, a movement. I had no desire to lead or become president. Sadbhavana's office secretary also became the president, everyone junior to me became the president . I don't want to join that race . Because purpose was important to me. 

Now I don't have a leader. Both character and ethics or knowledge and experience. In life, many people were considered as leaders . Gajendra Narayan Singh also stayed with Mahant Thakurji . However, that is no longer the case.

In recent times when Tamalopa went into an unnatural integration . And, I knew . That integration is difficult to succeed . I was not against integration . My wish was that there should be integration on the basis of values, recognition and standards . That was not accepted and suddenly it became Rajpa . From Jhapa to Kanchanpur, we used to consider Terai as Madhesh. However, Rajpa left only 8 districts as Madhesh. That was the most painful moment for me. Terai districts in the then number 1, 5 and 7 provinces were boycotted in the local elections by the decision of the party . When local elections were held in the then 'Province 2', now Madhesh, he participated. I felt at that time that leadership is opportunistic. Thinking that the work cannot progress by sitting with them, they separated. 

You said 'distorted federalism', how did it happen?

I was myself in the first Constituent Assembly. In the deliberations of the Constitutional Committee, especially the CPN-UML was not in a position to accept federalism. He used to abstain from words. They started with the campaign to weaken the province. Congress could not take a stand. I was not in the second Constituent Assembly. There was also a similar feeling. The term federalism has been misused. There is no federalism in Nepal according to global values . This is distorted federalism. So it's not working . It is being discredited because it has been distorted . This is not federalism, but perverted federalism. Federalism is not discredited. The local level has been made more empowered. It is not according to any federal system of government . Federalism has not come, distorted federalism has been brought. It was used perversely. It was made only as a place to gather and fill its workers. After not being able to give tickets to become parliamentarians in the union, the task of making those leaders parliamentarians and ministers in the state has been done.  It is made like a place of employment.  Like

federalism, the proportional election system is also being attacked . Proportional election system is brought for the weak . Nepal is not the first and not the last to adopt this system. It has good experience in other countries . Those who are senior to us, who can come through direct election, need to be proportionate to bring those who cannot come through election. The leadership has misused, now the system is being blamed . Is it the leadership that made a mistake such as putting proportional relatives or selling, and the proportional system itself is called bad ? It is said that no one got a majority with the proportional system, it became difficult to run the government. This is also a matter of ritual . 

Federalism has been in practice for 7 years. Questions have been raised about it. How do you look ? 

The first positive aspect, federalism decentralized the psychologically and naturally centralized budget system . The custom of going to the state's dhukuti started in the village. The staff structure was also established. However, local level leaders have become like eating Ajambari boots. Arbitrary work is also being done. Even though it is distorted, a change has been seen due to federalism. At the local level, from the ward president to the president, they have started receiving their monthly salary . About 8 billion is going to it across the country. At first, he used to get only allowance for the first meeting. After changing the system, it should have been built according to where and how much structure is needed.

Unnecessary structures also make the system burdensome. 8/10 signboards can be seen in a single office, may not be necessary . It is said to make a cooperative authority right now. Of course, we are engrossed in building new structures. For example, why the national identity card ? When citizenship or other document is needed, what is the use of it? In developed countries, one national ID is enough. However, we need everything and it was also said that we need a national identity . Such works are started on the basis of commission . New structures and mechanisms have been created to make it burdensome and cause trouble to the people. Such work has raised questions about the system. 

Two big parties Congress and UML are running the government now. How do you evaluate the government's actions?

There may be various reasons behind the formation of this government. I don't consider the merger of two big parties as bad, it should have happened . There is no question about its validity . But its authority is getting weaker . They seem to be busy finding excuses with Ghari Kulman Ghising, Ghari Balen Shah. Being stuck in it, its authority was getting weaker .

The structure of the current civil bureaucracy is so flawed that no government can be popular as long as it remains. The administration group has 70 percent more staff than required but the number of technicians is less . Technology plays a greater role in development. Due to lack of technology, the allocated budget has not been fully spent. That's why no matter how strong the government is said to be, it cannot deliver . No government will work if it cannot provide 'service delivery' to the people. I wish that this government will do a great job . 

There is a kind of dissatisfaction among the people . A commentary is being created – parties don't work, leaders are corrupt. A strong government should have tried to tear down that comment . But one incident has increased it. After the US government fined a company 5.5 million US dollars in the widebody case, there is international talk of massive corruption in Nepal. The Bhutanese refugee case also did the same. The government should conduct a deep investigation into these incidents. On the one hand, the recession in the economy is disappointing. The impact of recession has reached Chulhochoukou . Businesses and industries are collapsing. The lower and middle class people have suffered due to co-operative misappropriation. 

Similarly, the understanding that 'there is no future in the country' is increasing . The order of departure also shows that . It has increased the feeling of despair. This is not a topic that has suddenly been planted or spread by someone.  However, the government has not been able to crack it. 

You are also one of the few people who spent a long period in the parliament . What is the role of the parliament at the moment? 

If the condition of the parliament is weak, the road will become strong . Even now, chaotic and disorganized groups have sporadically protested on the streets. The purpose of which is not clear, the destination is also not clear . Parliament is getting weaker . I see that the parliamentary committees are getting weaker, this is not a good sign . The soul of the parliamentary system is the parliament. If that is weak, other things can also become weak automatically . Parliament is the place to make the government responsible and accountable. Because the parliament is weak, the government has not been held accountable. 

How is the parliament getting weaker?

We must remember Damannath Dhungana in the first parliament. After the historical change, if he had not become the speaker, that parliament would not have been so effective. After that, the leadership gradually got weaker . If the leadership becomes weak, it will be necessary to wait for the instructions of the parliamentary party and the party in every matter. In the first Constituent Assembly, the legislators did not feel as much freedom in the second. 

The state of making or collapsing government, the budget and passing policies and programs should only be the whip of the party. Apart from that, there should be a free and healthy debate in the Parliament, which used to happen before. But now the parliament has started to come under the control of the party leadership. When control increases, there is no free discussion. Whatever agenda is discussed in the parliament, that is the agenda of the people. It creates an atmosphere of satisfaction in the people . Our topic is being discussed . However, that is not happening now. The agenda of the Parliament has not been cleared. If economy, agriculture or politics, personnel administration or foreign policy started to be discussed on any agenda, public opinion would be formed correctly on one agenda . Parliament is not only its premises, its impact is on the common people. That is a voter-made poll . However, to control the discussion is to weaken the parliament.  

What do you see as the role of the speaker and committee chairmen to make the parliament effective?

Speaker is helpless. Committee chairpersons are also seen as weak, I think so . MPs are influential, can debate well, can deliver  However, I feel that the strict discipline of the party has controlled their presentation. If there can't be an open debate in the Parliament, it will be like Bhardari Sabha. When there is no discussion in the parliament, people think that what Durga Prasai said is right. This kind of situation means that the parliament is weak. 

You also chaired the audit committee . The leadership of the Audit Committee is now in the hands of the ruling party. How fair is that? 

is absolutely illegal. Accounts Committee is the only committee that is given to the opposition. The opposition is its chairman. Its philosophy is that the executive submits the budget, the legislature passes it . The executive spends, others including the Accountant General audit it and the parliamentary committee led by the opposition discusses and makes necessary decisions about it. It is also given to the opposition for credibility . However, not trying to give to the opposition now is also a fear. 

Why seek your man in the constitutional body? Authority needs its own people . There is a trend that the Election Commission does not have its own opinion. Since the practice of looking for their own people through bhagabanda started in all agencies, those structures became relaxed . Parliament has become ineffective. And the government is sitting on itself. 

Let's change the context, two big parties have come together with the intention of amending the constitution. What things in the constitution seem to be about to be amended?

Then it seems that the matter of constitutional amendment was brought to say that two big parties have not come together just to form a government . It is trying to spread the message that 'We have come together to do great work'. But after the question started to arise, a working group has been formed. They didn't believe, when people thought they didn't believe, it was done .  I see the possibility that they will enter into the matter of constitutional amendment only after the election of 20 seats in the National Assembly . Now only engagement is done . After the election of the National Assembly, what is in their mind, or whatever is agreed upon between them, should be carried forward. 

Our concern is that there should be no regressive amendments . Because when this constitution was issued, we raised the issue of amendment out of necessity . Now they might be thinking, 'Madheshi, tribal, tribal, Tharu, Dalit have become weak.' They may think that 'whatever was written in the constitution because of their struggle, we have removed it, this is the chance'. They are blaming the proportional system. Let's not doubt too much now, let's wait until then .

In particular, UML General Secretary Shankar Pokharle has been raising the issue that the country should now be taken to a two-party system . Two-party means they understand UML and Congress . This system was not brought by two parties, it was brought by all parties together . The late leader Madan Bhandari is a multi-party  It was called democracy. That is not bipartisan . Now if the two parties want it  Will the country be ready to go to a two-party system? Even its diversity does not allow it to be like this . It is not possible if you have the 'nadani' thinking of increasing the threshold . That leads to a new conflict . If they think that only they will come, that is authoritarian thinking. 

It has been said that because of this electoral system, a single party won't get the majority.

The majority will be given by the people. But the people didn't give, didn't believe . It is possible that the people have given an order to 'do it together'. They are trying to humiliate the people and the mandate. We had to do the work of bringing the majority, the people were not seen as guilty. Complexity seen in practice can be openly debated .  Even with the direct election system, no one got majority in the mid-term of 2051 . If you say that the majority did not come because of proportionality, then it is wrong, the system is not to blame. The culprit is their way of working, thinking and thinking . 

The political parties especially on the issue of Madhesh have been fragmented and weakened. You have also opened a separate party . What do you see as the future of Madhesh politics?

Madhesh movement, Madhesh is an important part of this country. Madhesh has influenced the politics of this country. Once upon a time, Madhesh lived patiently. Later advanced his authority and identity . There were large-scale movements, Madhesh had a role in the country's movement as well. Madhesh has reached a height.

However, the situation of Madhesi political parties is very interesting now. Any division is not ideological, it is an opportunistic division . Until yesterday, Madhesh was from Jhapa to Kanchanpur . Now it is divided into castes, the ideologically weak leadership resorted to castes. Madhesh got divided due to casteism, the leadership of the party started to form an organization based on their caste. That is why Madhesh is now in a state of destruction, but it is not over. I say emphatically, Madhesh is not over.