A decade has been completed since the declaration of the Constitution of Nepal. The constitution, which has spent ten years suffering many injuries, is once again 'wounded'. Experts say, "Constitution is in a coma but not dead." The interim government and political parties have given the impression that at least it is alive by celebrating Constitution Day on October 3.

Although Diwali was celebrated in a grand manner as in previous years, Sainik Manch Tundikhel, Rashtrapati Bhavan Sheetal Niwas, programs held in party offices and the statements of leaders gave a feeling that the Constitution is still in the dark. 

Constitutionalists say, 'Constitution does not work by itself, it must be made to work.' Perhaps President Ramchandra Paudel did not let the constitution 'die' by meditating on this principle suggested by experts in the current heterogeneous environment. 

President Paudel was under intense pressure during the national crisis caused by the government's brutal killings and the destruction of street demonstrations started by Generation Z (Gen-G) on August 23. 

The country was at a difficult stage in its history. Confusion, panic, insecurity and despair reached a crescendo and public confidence was shattered. At this time, visible/invisible, domestic/external power interests were trying to bake the bread of demand under its cover by creating planned instability. 

The army was facilitating the exit by taking the lead in the political dialogue. Clouds of confusion and apprehension were gathering. In that situation, the visible role of the President became a 'silver circle in a dark cloud'. He appointed former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as the Prime Minister of the interim government with a mandate to hold elections in 6 months. At the same time, he also dissolved the parliament on the recommendation of the newly appointed Prime Minister Karki. 

The constitution has been hurt again. However, everyone has agreed that the country was/is in a state of extreme crisis. The parties have raised questions about the dissolution of the parliament and have kept their 'position', although they all seem to be unanimous that the constitution should be returned to the leak after the election.

Will the election be held at the appointed time? And, the constitution and the politics of the country will easily return to Lik again? This is a question of general interest at this time. As simple as this question sounds, its implementation will become more complex over time. This analysis will revolve around this question. 

Let's look at the positive side first. Prime Minister Karki of the interim government seems to be in favor of the elections, at this time. First, she became an acceptable figure for the interim government. Due to his impeccable character and hockey nature, people hope that 'something will happen'.

Although some people have expressed their displeasure sporadically, there is hope in the civic circles about his leadership in this crisis. She has received plenty of 'benefit of the doubt'. After taking the leadership of the government, she has put elections on her main agenda. She said, 'This government is determined to transfer power by completing the elections in 6 months.' India has said that it will support and cooperate with more interest. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has encouraged Karki through a phone conversation. Although the major parties opposed the dissolution of the parliament, they did not say that they would not participate in the elections. Instead, they are saying that elections should be held on time and that they should be 'faced'. The Election Commission is already preparing. 

But, are these compatibility sufficient grounds for the completion of elections on time? 

There are as many advantages as there are disadvantages to the government. Especially, if the interim government led by Karki fails to recognize and overcome its challenges, holding elections on time may prove to be an 'iron chip' for it. What might those challenges be?

First, ensuring peace and security and the rule of law. Can the government create an environment where common voters can vote confidently? At this time, the morale of the security administration has fallen to the bottom. During the Jen-G rebellion and subsequent destruction, not only the physical structures of the security administration including the police and armed forces were destroyed, but the morale was also weakened. 

The administrative center of the country, which was under the protection of the Nepalese army, was burnt to ashes. All the incidents of violence and arson that have taken place in the courts, the Rashtrapati Bhawan, and all over the country have made the common people afraid. Civil ranks have not been able to get out of that fearful psychology.

Home administration who go to complain about some problem and judicial bodies who go to seek legal remedy are the ones who are hurt. Policemen have not been on duty with high morale. One of the main challenges of this government will be to create an environment of confidence in the morale of the security administration, the guarantee of the rule of law and the general voters to go to the polling stations without fear.

Second, an environment of trust is created when the government can end impunity. In the same country, questions were raised that the justice system was weak and judicial decisions were not free from political influence. Questions were being raised about the transparency of the prosecution and investigation process, with transitional justice becoming a mere political slogan and impunity becoming a key challenge.

On top of that, impunity has gained more support after the incidents of violence and arson that have spread across the country under the cover of the Gen-G rebellion. Violence, looting and arson have been committed in the name of rebellion of Gen-Ji generation. From the administrative center of the country, Singhdharbar, offices, private business establishments and private homes have been destroyed. The investigation of these incidents and their judicial determination is another big responsibility of the government and also a challenge. To end impunity or to give relief? The government will also be chased by this question. 

The government has set up a high-level commission of inquiry to investigate the Gen-G movement and the subsequent vandalism. It's a bit late. It is positive though. Now this commission has a serious responsibility to bring out the truth about the events that happened on 23rd and 24th of August. Basically, how did the Commission indiscriminately oppress the youth of Gen-G who took to the streets on August 23? On whose orders? Who is involved in it? Must be searched.

Outgoing Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli has claimed that automatic weapons that the police do not have were used. Did he make such a claim based on speculation or is there any truth in it? There should be an investigation. From the security administration to the political leadership, those who are found to be guilty should be able to take action on the first day's demonstration.

Similarly, the incident of violence and arson on August 24 should be investigated fairly and all those who destroyed national heritages, violence, looting and arson should be brought to justice. That is because, how the government 'deals' with the gen-ji demonstration, then the outbreak of violence, will also help create an atmosphere of trust. 

Thirdly, the government should be able to address the aspirations of the public to convince them. At this time, the expectation of Gen-G movement or common people is to maintain good governance in the country. The current anger has increased due to the increase in extreme unrest and corruption in the country. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister of the interim government, Karki, has repeatedly criticized the political leadership for being mired in corruption. Now that he is in leadership, this case should get justice. 

Some leaders of political parties have also been demanding the formation of a high-level investigation commission to investigate the assets of people in positions of profit after 2046. Even now, there is a demand to form such a commission. The government has also said that it will form a powerful asset investigation commission. However, it has not been announced yet.

Why is this government, which has a short term in office, delaying these works to address public interest? After the year 2046, leaders and employees who are in positions of profit should be investigated for the source of wealth and transparency. In the meantime, the corruption cases that have arisen should also be investigated. That is, the challenge of bringing these issues to a conclusion is also in front of the government. 

Fourth, the Gen-G generation itself is a big challenge to this government. Because, the Gen-J generation demonstrated the streets, sacrificed their lives. Political power was overthrown on the strength of that sacrifice. But, has the dissatisfaction of this generation been addressed? In particular, the Gen-G generation is not an entity, it is an age group.

A face like Jay is in the limelight claiming to be the leader of an entire generation, does he represent this generation as a whole? The limited faces known as the Gen-G generation have neither clarity on the issue nor leadership. The impulsive speech and behavior of some are also questionable. 

Meanwhile, various faces are asserting themselves as the true representatives of the Gen-G generation. Some of them say that the next election should be for the Chief Executive. Others claim, no, go to the referendum. And, thirdly, they threaten, 'I will drag Sushila Karki to the street in the same way as they put her on the chair.' 

In the country, there has been a tendency to glorify the Gen-G generation. But, in reality, the faces known as this generation are full of passion, anger and immaturity. Again there is a risk of infiltration and instability of these elite trends. Therefore, this government formed on the proposal of Gen-Ji has both the responsibility and the challenge to be careful not to infiltrate again, to explain its limited agenda and to teach its activists about basic political/constitutional principles. 

Fifth, the next main challenge to the government will be the old political parties. Also, the political parties themselves are in a challenging situation. The issue of reorganization and generational transfer within the parties has been raised more strongly. Early indications are that these parties are not looking to recover after such a disaster.

Failure to improve this means more challenges for the interim government. Because, on the one hand, these parties will be in domestic conflict and they may not be ready for it internally even if they give election slogans. If the parties do not participate in the election, its validity will be questioned. 

At this time, it seems that the idea of ​​moving the issue of parliament restoration rather than party reorganization is becoming dominant within the parties. Also, parties opposing the dissolution of parliament can also go for a judicial/constitutional trial. This could be another challenge for the interim government. However, the parties should understand, for them, the restoration of public trust is the main thing before the restoration of parliament. 

The constitutional/political crisis facing the country has been averted for now, not gone. Therefore, the future destination of Nepalese politics cannot be determined right now. Basically there are three ways, before us. 

First, to enter the era of political restructuring with wisdom and prudence. Where the young generation has a decisive role in the administration of power. Where transparency, good governance and leadership transfer methods and policies are consistent. 

If we can't do this, our situation will be the same as it was in 'Business as Use'. If it goes on the second path, the old parties will revel in the status quo, even if they raise the slogan of an alternative political force, it will not be decisive. The power alliance, mixed division, disappointment and suffering will remain in the people.