After a long struggle, Nepali politics changed its path. Federalism, republicanism, inclusiveness and secularism were constitutionally established. All this did not happen by accident. A topic that has been aspirational for a long time was established.

Now all the four topics are being disputed. Who is trying to dispute ? Why are you looking for ? We have not entered into a deep constructive discussion . By portraying federalism as an expensive state system, the tone that the state cannot afford it has been raised . Monarchy has been advocated because after the republic there has been more chaos. Inclusion has been blamed for lack of political stability .

is trying to make a comment that secularism helped conversion. Was our politics more progressive yesterday than today? That's not happening . The current state system has not done what it should have done. Today we have progressed more than yesterday . Why are such comments being made? This is the subject of great research.

The expenses of the state or the citizens in the operation of the state

First let's discuss the federalism. Due to the provinces, federalism is expensive and unaffordable. After all, the province spends only 10 percent. It is true that the province has not been able to function according to the spirit of federalism. But it is illegitimate to question the concept of federalism because of the province itself. No Madhesi leader says that federalism has become expensive. No tribal intellectual or leader says that federalism has become costly. No Dalit leader or intellectual talks about the cost of federalism. Rather, it talks about strengthening .

If so, who said that federalism has become expensive? Who yesterday wore the umbrella of the king and ran over the centralized governance system . Who had single-handedly captured the state without meaning of proportionality and inclusiveness . Who was able to show official pomp under the guise of Hinduism . It is clear, whoever said that federalism has become expensive, he wants to kill proportionality by making federalism a target.

It is heard everywhere that federalism has become expensive, why ? Only a very few people got hold of the process of knowledge creation in Nepal . Most of those who speak today on a daily basis were directly or indirectly benefited from yesterday's power . No one can accept the loss they have suffered. These issues have been raised by giving it a political form. The intellectuals who were brought up in the pot of King Mahendra yesterday are still working on creating a vision. They seem to know.

It is said that federalism became expensive based on them. The self-esteem of a large number of Madhesi communities has been accepted by naming Madhesh province. How much will it cost? The direction of the self-esteem and identity of the tribal community has been understood to a certain extent. How much will it cost?

The Madhesi community, who have stopped being Nepali for years, has started their journey to become Nepali, how much will it cost? Although Hinduism is practiced in practice, theoretically, secularism is widening . How much will it be worth if the tribal communities enjoy their language and culture? In villages, local governments are working with priority on education and health.

It has become a situation that people who took two days to go to the health post yesterday will get treatment at their own municipality's hospital today, how much will it cost? It has no value in economics. But in the broader political environment, its value is huge . Until yesterday, women rarely reached the parliament, today 33 percent have reached . It remains to reach 50 percent. But what will be the price of 33 percent MP? Every municipality has a female mayor, president or vice president, deputy mayor, how much will they be worth?

Now the high-level bureaucracy is aligned with the regressive agenda . Even the higher level bureaucracy does not prefer federalism. There is an undeclared alliance, of senior staff and advocates of regression. They are united, they want to crush all four pillars (federalism, republicanism, inclusiveness and secularism) by targeting the republic. There are some who want to crush all four pillars by targeting federalism. Whereas, the foundation of this state system is based on these four pillars.

The relationship between the state and the people

In fact, the relationship between the state and the people cannot be harmonious in a centralized state system. The kingdom is far away . The voice of the citizens does not reach the state. Centralized state system means that the people have to walk in search of the state . The majority of the people, the marginalized communities do not find the state .

The theoretical foundation of federalism has been built by assimilating this fact. What is meant to be said is that federalism is the only state system that seeks the people. Federalism is intended to be developed as a system for searching for people by the state. Of course, there is an expense in relation to the state and the people. In a centralized state system, it costs the people to find a state .

Yesterday I usually had to come to the agricultural office of the district to get seeds . When coming and going to the district headquarters, citizens had to spend everything from bus to lunch. Even when he was sick, he had to come to the district hospital, people's money was spent. Teachers had to come to the district headquarters to collect their salaries, people's money was spent. How much would such expenses be across Nepal? There is no accounting anywhere .

was a personal expense of the citizen . Expenditure statements were not organized, had no data, were completely informal. Now it seems that taking the state to the citizen's yard has cost a little more. But how much is the value of the facilities that citizens get? Birthing centers opened in villages, which were opened at the initiative of the local government, have reduced the number of deaths of women who could not give birth. How much is it worth? Bagmati, Madhesh Pradesh is having nurses in schools counseling girls and helping them chart the future, how much is it worth ?

is spent on state operations . The main question is who will do it. Yesterday the money did not reach the village, the lack of money in the village means that the elders have control over it . Today, the local government has reached 28 percent of the amount. But this is very low, yet those above have lost 28 percent and have a fever . Opposition to unionism is linked to financial management and control.

Money has reached the reach of the village people, it has become an irreconcilable matter for the above . In a centralized state system, the people spend, that is nowhere to be seen . Now the state is spending for the convenience of the citizens, it seems. The state system should not be maintained only on economic scales . It has social and cultural aspects, it is hidden .

Actually, federalism is an attempt to redistribute rights . It is the distribution of rights in a fair way between the state and citizens. Federalism is said to be expensive by hiding all these aspects. The question of who said why is important again. There is a loss now for those who can access and control yesterday's power, who are at a loss compared to yesterday, but they are still at the forefront of society and are speaking .

that has benefited from federalism . His speech is not heard in Kathmandu. Although the state system has changed, most of the speakers are from yesterday, who grew up reading Mahendramala . Those who read Mahendramala are transferring knowledge to the new generation . There is no talk of a new political system in our universities or schools.

Yesterday's story is being read . After the restructuring of the state system, there is no restructuring of education, and this contradiction is intensifying. The centers of knowledge production have not moved to the rhythm of the new state system, which is a major weakness of federalism. In simple analysis, federalism is good for the exploited and the oppressed. But they don't have the voice and space to say yes. Those who have voice and space are against federalism. So their voice has been heard.

federalism and the place of citizens

In fact, the biggest beauty of federalism is to give space to citizens in the garden of politics . Managing identity and self-esteem is . It is to give ownership to the citizens in the running of the state. But it is true that there is a confusion now that there are no skilled gardeners in the garden of federalism. But again, the community has got more space than yesterday. Not enough, make it. But it is one step ahead of yesterday . Instead, the current government is trying to tighten the civil organizations .

It is being tried to distrust social organizations by introducing a new law. Groups like Swayamsevak and Guthi are being tried to curb . The Associations Act, 2082 has been brought out to direct and narrow the democracy . The Act seeks to direct organizations, cultural groups, volunteer groups from one room under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Now it is not possible to shrink democracy .

The government may wish to abolish all social organizations through the Association Act, but community autonomy, the expansion of democracy is the need of the moment. If the Associations Act, 2082 is passed, there will be no civil society. There will be no civil organization. All the organizations will be transformed into government and Maharaj's Sadiksha will be completed - all Panch are Nepali, all Nepali are Panch . After not accepting the existence of civil society and civil organizations, the path belongs to Maharaj.

Institutional restructuring in the rhythm of federalism

The economic, social and cultural aspects of federalism were mentioned above. But it is not that there is no place to reduce expenses in federalism . I am also in favor of reducing expenses. First of all, the expenses can be reduced by canceling the district coordination committee, which is not recognized by the constitution.

The main district officers who have been placed in such a way as to make a mockery of federalism will be removed today and the expenses will be cut . There is no need to keep the Ministry of Water Supply in the union since all the rights of drinking water are in the province. Federal special projects related to drinking water are conducted in a special way in cooperation with the local governments.