Thanks for revealing the puzzle. Though I appreciate your ideological clarity and consistent activism for republican democracy in Nepal, I am not much impressed by this latest revelation of yours. During the formulation of current constitution, it was well known that palace wanted to retain some power and institution of RNA also needed a credible institution to rely on. So, there are some vague provisions in the constitution such as Security Council and mobilization of RNA under the order of the King. What the elected politicians should have done is, give clarity to such provisions by operational practices. For example, King Birendra could not have dared to intervene if the elected prime minister had attempted to reform RNA. Constitution is just one component of formal institution and what is important in the real world is the informal institutions. Usually change and reforms are realized in the form of formal institutions (such as constitution), which are supposed to bring changes in the informal institutions (power relationships and others). But the new constitution of 2047 and political leadership could not generate kind of momentum that is strong enough to break down the old informal institutions (in leftist lexicon the feudal socio-economic structure). Rather the new leadership found it handy to negotiate for some accommodating space within the old informal institutions (such as UML saw big opportunity in NGO industry). So, Nepe ji, the barrier to republicanism is not King or palace (in fact they are helping it with Raj Parisad like saga); it is the mindset of Nepali people. The unique characteristic of Nepalese people is: Willingness to claim political stakes WITHOUT taking due risks. That always makes them to follow a supposedly easy but muddled path which ends up consolidating the very institutions, which they claim are fighting against. We know majority of Nepali intellectual think that it is not up to Nepali people to decide on the political future, it is the foreign powers, who decide on this matter. We are too good to demonstrate our patriotism through vandalism but too weak even to THINK, let alone to ACT that we CAN decide on what political system we want. -Nispaksha