Lets see how do royalists respond to this article that reflect nothing but the truth of the South Asian Dictators Club of which king G is one of the active members who insists in words 'democracy' but like to be absolute dictator in his mind and heart. This may not be obvious FACT to ordinary people of Nepal but a STANDING TRUTH to all Nepalese who witnessed the way king G came in power after the massacre of the king Birendra and his entire family................ DICTORS DO NOT COME IN POWER SIMPLY...... Royal coup has one-year anniversary By Surendra R. Devkota Special to The Epoch Times Feb 20, 2006 DEMOCRACY AT RISK: a pro-democracy demonstrator being beaten on the streets of Katmandu. (AFP/Getty Images) High-res image (2634 x 1870 px, 300 dpi) "Twelve months of palace rule have only made the security situation more precarious, emboldened the Maoist insurgents, and widened the division between the country's political parties and the king" U.S. Department of State, Jan. 31 2006. Right after President George W. Bush advocated for democracy around the globe, in his State of the Union address on Jan. 31, 2006, King Gyanendra of Nepal, celebrating the first anniversary of his royal coup, began a crackdown on political leaders and activists. In Feb. 2005, the King had assumed direct rule of the country, becoming a de facto absolute monarch in what is nominally a constitutional monarchy. For the second year in a row the king has ignored global concerns about democracy in Nepal. While the king was claiming security has improved, the king's army and police forces were busy arresting hundreds of people in their houses in different parts of the country who were planning to protest against the king's rule. As usual during the king's speech day, telephones lines of political leaders were cut. People of different walks of life observed it as a "Black day" in the history of Nepal. Both the common people and political parties have now realized that the monarchy is the major obstruction to the realization of democracy in Nepal. The royal takeover not only violated the 1991 Constitution of Nepal, but subsequent activities of the King have proven that the attempt to reconcile parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy has failed. One year after the takeover, King Gyanendra is fighting for the efficacy and even for the existence of his rule. One year ago King Gyanendra joined the club of South Asian dictators whose members rule Pakistan, Burma (Myanmar), Bhutan and the Maldives. These rulers have a common and unique character: They do not like multiparty politics in their lands but they shamelessly commit in their words to democracy many times a day. In these fake democracies, the role of the army is very important. Nepal's royal ceremonial army has lost its credibility and accountability, as happens in autocratic regimes. When the royal army defied the orders of the civilian government during the early days of the Maoist insurgency after 1996, people wondered about their loyalty. Furthermore, the army appears to be corrupt. The auditor general's annual reports mention that the army of Nepal owes the highest un-audited expenses in the country. Of greater concern, Amnesty International in 2005 documented a rapidly increasing number of "disappearances" of individuals in army custody. Last month, the army killed more than one dozen civilians in a village festival adjoining the capital Kathmandu, and no one knows what further actions were taken. Human rights groups estimate that in the year 2005, more than 1,600 people were killed. The country is deadlocked due to the king's arrogance and absolute rule. A growing crisis of confidence in the king, among the international community and the political parties is an unfortunate indicator for the people of Nepal. International agencies are finding royal words and deeds often go in opposite directions. Recently, seven major political parties and the Maoists reached a twelve-point understanding to end the autocratic monarchy. This political development, which seems unholy to royalists and diplomats, is leading to a political confrontation between the king and the parties. The people believe that the route to democracy and peace would begin with the election of a constitutional assembly. The king offered municipal elections, which were held on Feb. 8. But the major political parties rejected these elections—elections that only affect 15 per cent of the population—as fundamentally flawed; an exercise whose only purpose is to make a false demonstration of commitment to democracy. The king has not been able to fill half of the spots on the ballot, and many candidates are kept in army barracks or police posts. Nepali communities are undergoing great economic hardship, psychological stress, and strain. People living in rural areas are severely affected. The king simply has overlooked these rural masses (85 per cent of the total population of 25 million) as if they don't play any role in his power equation. Many donors who are working in many remote regions had already left due to constant threat from the Maoists. MOURNING DEMOCRATIC POLITICIAN: Grief stricken relatives of the late Nepali politician Umesh Chandra Thapa (C) touch his body as it lies ready for his funeral in Kathmandu. Thapa was shot dead by soldiers of the Nepalese army at Dang in western Nepal during campaigning against the municipal elections, elections boycotted by all major parties and condemned by several Western governments. (AFP/Getty Images) High-res image (2100 x 1441 px, 300 dpi) Nepal is politically independent, but is economically heavily dependent on many friendly countries and donor agencies. Though Nepal has followed a path toward modernization over the past 50 years, as of now nearly two-thirds of the annual budget of about one billion dollars has to be supplemented by international aid/donations and loans. Even so, the country is engulfed in persistent poverty in spite of the huge funds funneled in. The average per capita income is less than $250 U.S., while the annual remuneration of the monarchy is more than one million dollars. Further, the latest sample survey of households gives a very disturbing picture of the "haves" and "haves nots." The bottom 40 percent of population accounts for only nine percent of total consumption, while the top 20 percent consumes nearly 53 percent. The king seems determined to retain his traditional exclusive authority, while the people are in favor of a new constitution that guarantees rights, resources, responsibility, and accountability at different levels. In addition, the people wish to see power present at the local level, rather than having all power in the central government. Nepal will continue to suffer by the ad-hoc rules of the king, rules that are also posing a great risk to the people and the country. The feeling of the silent majority in Nepal is that the monarchy in Nepal is socially unnecessary, economically burdensome, and politically useless. Surendra R. Devkota is a native of Nepal and a U.S.-based research scholar. He may be contacted at: srdevkota@gmail.com