As finance secretary Rameshwor Khanal resigns after standing up to political pressure, it is an appropriate moment to look back more than three decades ago, when another secretary preferred to defend his principles and walked out of government service.
Devendra Raj Panday's decision then, as a mark of opposition to the Panchayat system, was an even bolder one since the regime then did not take too kindly to dissent. Few have done as much since to push the boundaries of social democracy, ignite debates on meaningful development, champion human rights, and argue for integrity in public life as Panday. What makes his life and work even more striking is that a man who was born to a privileged and traditional Bahun family, and had close links with the palace, went beyond his class and caste interests and sought to understand Nepal in all its complexity and diversity.
After quitting government service, Panday slowly become involved in the struggle for democracy. He publicly criticised Panchayat development strategies; built close links with NC leaders who often asked him for assistance; expanded links with professionals yearning for an open society; and built networks with the emerging community of human rights activists. All this was to play an important role in 1990, when Panday became the de facto civil society leader for the movement for democracy.
In recognition of his role, and the respect in which he was held by all the political forces, interim PM Krishna Prasad Bhattarai appointed him finance minister. Panday was frustrated by his limited brief to 'keep the economy on track'. He often recounts how he could not push welfare measures as the PM wanted the focus to remain on constitution writing and holding the elections, and sought to avoid any complications.
As the 1990s progressed, Panday became increasingly disillusioned. He felt there was little attempt to reconceptualise development from a democratic perspective, and the new governments had adopted core elements of the Panchayat development strategy. Except for the new rulers and the rank and file of the newly legalised political parties, democracy did not bring about a transformation in the lives of Nepalis. There was no distributive justice, leading to increased inequality. State structure remained exclusionary; inter and intra-party rifts had distorted democracy; politicisation of civil services became entrenched; the armed conflict was taking its toll on people.
Incorporating many of these concerns, Panday produced 'Failed Development'. He also mounted a stringent criticism of the international aid industry in Nepal, highlighting its failure to aid productive sectors that could generate lasting economic growth and allow a sustainable welfare state. He pointed out that while foreign aid had led to awareness among marginalised groups and enabled them to articulate their demands, it also helped sustain traditional power structures, protecting them from having to adapt to the new consciousness.
Panday flirted for a short while with direct politics in the 1990s, setting up his own party. But his primary role was in civil society, battling corruption and fighting for human rights, including at the regional level. As the conflict deepened, he felt he had a responsibility to find a solution. He was the first civil society leader to meet Pushpa Kamal Dahal in the early years of the last decade, and he had a simple message for the Maoist supremo – "Give up violence, and enter open politics. The entire left and social democratic space is vacant, and you will be successful."
As the palace began actively intervening in politics, Panday made the transition from a constitutional monarchist to a republican. The Citizens Movement for Democracy and Peace (CMDP) in 2005-06, which he led, was the game changer in the fight against the royal autocracy by mobilising the masses and urging them to have faith in the political parties, which had made such a mess of the 1990s. He was also an active behind-the-scenes player in preparing the ground for the broader Maoist-parties accord.
Since 2006, even as other civil society stalwarts have gone around lobbying to become MPs or obtain certain posts, Panday has rejected all that has come his way, including CA membership. Instead of personal gain, he has kept his focus on the bigger picture. At the cost of being called a Maoist, a ludicrous label for a committed democrat and human rights activist, Panday has consistently argued for continued collaboration between the parties and the Maoists in the spirit of the 12-point agreement; stood for inclusion, federalism, a new political culture and radical social welfare measures; spoken out against violence; and opposed all constitutional violations.
Thirty years after Panday left government service, it is beyond doubt that the establishment's loss was a tremendous gain for Nepali democracy.
READ ALSO:
A Civil Servant, ASHUTOSH TIWARI
No, minister, Nagarik
