The Council of Ministers on 4th Chaitra decided to appoint two different posts under the Ministry of Home Affairs - Deepak Thapa as IGP of Nepal Police and Dinesh Bhatt as Executive Head of National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Authority. According to reports, the promotion committee recommended the names of three AIGs (Deepak Thapa, Sudeep Giri, Tek Bahadur Tamang) for IGP. The selection committee formed by the Ministry of Home Affairs recommended the names of Dinesh Bhatt, Dr. Sumankumar Karna and Mandeep Subedi for the head of the disaster authority.

A few days ago, the meeting of the Council of Ministers on February 21 appointed Dr. It was decided to appoint Vikas Devkota. For that position also, the promotion committee on the basis of seniority, Dr. Sangita Kaushal Mishra, Dr. Vikas Devkota and Dr. Tank Barakoti's name was recommended. 

Analyzing the last three decisions, it is known that the final decision of the appointment was made by the Council of Ministers. Among the names recommended for all the three posts, at least one name belongs to a marginalized community. But only Bahoon caste contestants have been successful in the same post. Competitors from marginalized communities have failed everywhere.

I do not personally know Tek Bahadur Tamang who is a competitor for IGP. I have no idea about his abilities, qualifications. However, I know some of the contestants for the remaining two posts very well. 

Dr. for a major position in the disaster authority. This is Suman's second failure. He was also a contender for the same post four years ago. Coincidentally, the engineers who bet both times are old friends of mine at Disaster Authority. I have full respect for everyone's ability but Dr. All I can say about Suman's Sabal is that there is no other shortcoming in her apart from not being able to get the blessings of the relevant minister. 

Dr. who has gained decades of experience abroad after completing his master's degree from AIT Bangkok and PhD from Melbourne University in Australia. It is unfortunate for Suman that he failed time and again with juniors in his own country. 

dr. Sangeeta also suffered a similar fate. Sangeeta, who got a Fulbright Fellowship and got a master's degree in public health from John Hopkins University in the US, entered the government service at the highest level through open competition.

Are such incidents the exception or the norm for competitors from marginalized communities in government services? Somehow I am not generalizing the exceptional cases? In order to gain a holistic understanding of such processes, I spoke to some former and current senior government officials from marginalized communities. Some shared their experiences openly and some anonymously. Similarity was found in the understanding of many. Discrimination in transfer, promotion and appointment of marginalized community employees in government services is understood to be normal. 

I would like to mention the statement of former secretary Man Bahadur Wik - 'My name was recommended as the first number three times for the secretary by the Public Service Commission. He was not made secretary twice. People younger than me are getting opportunities. I was made the secretary for the third time after raising voices in the streets and the House. Perhaps, after me, it will be Dr. Sangeeta whose name was recommended as number one but was not made secretary.' For such appointments, the names of three persons are recommended by the promotion committee. Someone has to do it. Rather than who passed or not, the government should see whether the process has been met. But, there is another side to it. Why is it always the marginalized who fail in that government 'process'? What is the reason why many of those who pass are from Bahun-Kshetri? It is only because of his ability and knowledge that the social background of the decision-maker also plays a role? The question arises, if a system or process always recognizes only certain castes, should we debate such a system/process or not?

Among the characters of the marginalized community, those who are sharp in studies, excellent in qualifications, excellent in work efficiency, senior in experience must get the position if our 'government process' does not give them the position, what can those with average ability expect? 

The second scenario, the main goal of the current government formed on the basis of the seven-point agreement between Congress and UML will be to amend the constitution. According to the leaders of those parties, the proportional election system has caused instability in the country. He wants to end it if possible, if not to make it weaker. Due to the fact that no one party has a majority and some small Madhes parties have also become national parties, there is a sense of uneasiness in the Congress-UML circle when they have to form a power partner. With the aim of preventing such parties, it is being discussed to increase the limit of the 'threshold' by amending the election law. 

The representation of marginalized communities in Nepali politics will further decrease from both the mentioned actions. Are Congress, UML envisioning a Nepal like this, where the marginalized in the bureaucracy will be forced to suffer the fate of Tamang, Karna, Mishra and Vick and reduce their presence in politics? The question may arise, what were the old structural problems in Nepal? How many of them are being resolved and how much are being strengthened? 

Old things from Nepal 

There were three major structural problems in old Nepal before the Second People's Movement. Absolute monarchy. Centralized state structure. Low presence of marginalized communities in the state and politics. All the three problems mentioned had their own environment. Complexity had its own reasons. There are also examples of Goretto holding onto solutions. The old Nepal is breaking down and forming a new Nepal at its own pace. The question is, what role are today's government, parties and leadership playing in the journey of becoming a new Nepal?

It goes without saying that there were many movements against the autocratic monarchy. It is the latest chapter of Nepali politics, which was dreamed by the leftist movement and the republic was established with the support of the democrats. A lot of Madhesi, Dalits and tribals helped in that fight. For some, the establishment of a republic was the ultimate goal. But for the marginalised, it was just a stopover. Monarchy in Nepal was based on certain tenets. Centralized state structure, Hindu religion, dominance of Khasarya culture, imperative of Khas/Nepali language, dominance of 'Tharghar' in personnel and security agencies. 

According to Sardar Bhim Bahadur Pandey, on the 25th of Bhadra 1616, when Dravya Shah was the king of Gorkha, he assigned 6 different types of Gorkhali responsibilities. Ganesh Pandey (Minister), Narayan Arjyal (Rajguru), Sarveshwar Khanal (Rajpurohit), Bhagirath Pant (Commander), Keshav Bohra (Land Department) and Gangaram Ranamgar (Justice Department). Children of these 6 types are called 'Tharghar' in Gorkha. 

The monarchical system of government that began at that time was continued by many kings of the Shah dynasty. Prithvi Narayan Shah envisioned a Hindu nation. In turn, Jung Bahadur Rana made a civil law in 1910 and gave it legal validity. 

According to Mara Malagodi, a British expert who studied Nepal's constitutional development in depth, the Civil Act had two main purposes. First, to give legal legitimacy to the concept of caste-based purity according to Hinduism. Second, to establish the concept of nation-state in Nepal. 

The civil law legitimized the practice of caste discrimination prevalent in Hinduism through law. According to that, it was done to be in charge of government affairs, to share in the resources of the state, to be punished or to be exempted. The concept of 'nation-state' rejected the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious diversity within the country and established the cultural superiority of the Khasarya. According to Dr. Hark Gurung, the hill ruling castes like Bahun, Chhetri and Thakuri were established as Thalus in Nepal. 

It is since that time that his supremacy was established in the state and politics of Nepal. In the resources of the state, they are still present. The dominance of the same Thargharwalas has continued in the personnel system and security agencies. So, from the perspective of inclusiveness, even though today's Nepal tries to walk a different path than what Dravya Shah, Prithvi Narayan Shah and Jagan Bahadur Rana envisioned, it has not been able to be different in many ways. Especially in terms of Khasarya's dominance in the state and politics. 

In the first democratic period after the end of Rana rule, two constitutions were made in Nepal (2007 and 2015). The system of governance had changed. Nepalis became citizens from Raiti. Democracy came from the autocratic Rana rule. But caste discrimination with Dalits, encroachment on culture of Madheshi, tribes did not stop. Those constitutions continued the concept of 'nation-state' in the context of social diversity. 

The basic principle of the 2019 Panchayat Constitution was based on the 'melting pot' concept. In the matter of social diversity, the concept of 'nation-state' embraced by the civil law was more strictly accepted. Cultural, linguistic diversity was forbidden. Even though all citizens are equal in the eyes of the law, the Hindu nation was declared. There was no legal action against those who committed caste discrimination. Those who spoke about their identity were repressed. The dress, language and culture of the Khasarya community were nationalized. Due to all these reasons, Chhetri and Thakurs dominated politics and security agencies throughout the Panchayat period, while Bahoons dominated the judiciary and civil service. Again, there was no significant change in the relationship between the society and the state from the perspective of inclusiveness. 

The French anthropologist Anne de Sauls called the 2047 constitution a document of agreement between the king and the leaders of the major parties. which guaranteed a multi-party democracy while preserving the centralized structure of the Nepali state, the institution of kings, Hinduism, the cultural superiority of the Khasarya and the supremacy of the Nepali language.

Ann the Sals is an anthropologist who has long focused on the Khammargar community of Rolpa Rukum. According to him, the constitution of 2047 was different from the previous constitutions and other constitutions in many ways, but it gave the same result in continuing the dominance of Khasary.

New things about Nepal

Especially in Nepal, the marginalized communities like Madhesi, tribals, and Dalits need something new. They want protection of their identity, culture, dress and language. He has sought to change his face in the state and politics and finally in the power relationship between the society and the state. 

It was the Maoist people's struggle that established these aspirations of the marginalized as a political agenda. Restructuring of the state with republicanism, federalism and inclusiveness were the clear agenda of the People's War. Republic was the imagination of Nepal without monarchy. Federalism was an alternative to the centralized state structure and the 'nation-state' concept, with the creation of provinces with the right to self-governance, while preserving the identity of various social groups. Inclusion was a way to increase the access and representation of Madhesis, Dalits, tribals, women in Nepal's state apparatus (where government guns, pens and money are used) and in politics. 

Congress-UML did not agree on all the political agenda mentioned. That is why the people's war was fought against him. However, Raja Gyanendra's move on January 19 forced the Congress, UML and Maoists to come together. As a result, the 12-point consensus and the second mass movement became possible. A republic was established. Differences of opinion remained on the rest of the questions. It also has some social aspects. A republic increases political space for the entire Khasarya, while federalism and inclusiveness only extends to marginalized communities. That is why there is social polarization in Nepal from time to time regarding the last two agendas. 

As we can see, after the establishment of the republic, the movement of Congress-UML stopped. But it seems that the movement of Madheshi, tribals and Dalits has just started. After that there were revolts in Madhesh. It was agreed to federalize the centralized structure of the state. Reservation in government services started. Proportional election system was started to make politics inclusive. 

At that time the Tharu movements were suppressed. Now there is a movement of tribes in the east, sometimes in the name of province and sometimes in the name of no cable car. The question arises, how have the government and major parties viewed all these movements? Only or the conflict of peace protects peace, as those communities are struggling to their identity? & Nbsp; The movements that marginalized by the marginalized by the

, the remaining structural problems of Nepal (centralized and uninterrupted). & nbsp. To practice federalism in the true sense, the state should give the solution to the second structural problem of Nepal. & Nbsp; The non-agricultural problem in

politics and state parts were started in proportional electoral systems and reservation in government services. 60 percent of seats were settled on the election of the two Constituent Assembly elections. Therefore, marginalized politics had increased by the representation of the marginalized politics. By reducing the proportional force in the 2072 constitution, it has reduced 40 percent, which has reduced the representation of the marginalized community. In the process of

15/16, both proportional issues and reserves have seen innumerable weaknesses. But if you are now in conflict, it will eventually blocade the process of inclusion in states and politics. The marginalized community is to reduce the representation of the marginalized community and represented the community community again in the old way. It does not bring a change in the power of the new Nepal's main task and the power between society and the state. & Nbsp;

Nepal is relevant to a context associated with Girija Prasad Koirala: & NBSP;

reference is the year of 2063/64. Girija Prasad was the Prime Minister of the Interim Government. Madhes was turbulent. There was a long man arrested. Another rebellion was struggling. Dozens of emergences were active. The number of men to write the Minech government has increased by deleting the Government of the Government Office of Madhes. There was a feast that Madhes was about to go to the fragmention. & NBSP;

became a matter of a serious discussion in Balutar circle, "after Away Madhesh Why is it so great? '& NBSP;

had said that the Prime Minister said in light note, 'There are Said Secretary, CDO, SP, DSPs in Nepal, but how many Madhesi faces are in it in it? Are they unworthy cdo, secretary? Let's arrange at least in Madhesi CDO / SP, and Indiscipses will also get your face in the kingdom. '& NBSP in the state. Sena-Break Prasad was heard from Girija Prasad that the Girijah Prasad had to search for 6/7 people to find a 6/7 Madhesi CDO. Due to administrative and legal complexity, there was not a 6/7 Madhesi face in order to make CDO. A special arrangement of the service change was filed by the Ministry of Home Assistant by renting the Home Ministry to the Ministry of Home Assistant and sent CDO. & Nbsp;