KATHMANDU: Kedar Bhakta Mathema is a popular civic figure, active for four decades in reforming the nation’s public education and health sectors. Mathema, a former vice-chancellor of Tribhuvan University and former ambassador to Japan, is vocal against the prevalent anomalies, poor governance, and corruption in the country. He thus considers the recent Gen Z movement to be the result of bad governance. Mathema believes the current government’s main task is to conduct elections and to present an agenda for constitutional amendment to the new parliament. For this, he suggests an immediate working mechanism, such as a Constitutional Drafting Commission, should be formed. Presented here is an edited excerpt of the conversation Mathema had with Prashant Aryal and Baburam Bishwakarma for Nepal News on October 14:

Why were institutions not formed in the country, and why were the few that were formed destroyed?

I have been advocating for strengthening nationality and institutions for 30–35 years. That was, and still is, my first piece of advice to democratic leaders. The tragedy is that leaders destroyed the institutions themselves. I have looked at the World Development Report from the World Bank in 2011. According to that report, even with fast-paced work, it takes 20 years to build a good governance system. It takes 26 years to reduce corruption. It takes 36 years to establish an efficient state mechanism. There is something called the CRS (Country Risk Service) Group, which analyzes how much risk a country is under. Building institutions takes a long time, many years, and the contribution of many generations.

But it didn’t take us long to ruin them, did it? It happened quickly.

I remember my time at Tribhuvan University. No matter what else goes wrong, institutions must not break down. If the institution itself is gone, nothing remains. If there is no concern for or upliftment of Tribhuvan University, nobody even dares to touch me. I will not yield on anything or anyone. In Japan, I took an unwavering stand: I would not execute any order, even from the highest office, if my conscience ruled it was not in Nepal’s best interest. The widespread deterioration of our institutions today, which lack this moral foundation, is what now brings me such profound sadness and distress. It has been 30–35 years since I left the university and 20–25 years since I returned from Japan. While saying, “Maybe it will improve now; things will be alright after this bend,” we have crossed so many bends. The question for me is, why didn’t they listen?

It was around 1994. There was a seminar called ‘State Leadership in Politics’ where I spoke. I said then that “it is not working.” I mentioned that the enthusiasm the public had when democracy was restored was gradually turning into disappointment. Why do I get angry? I spoke at the Pokhara Literature Festival in 2017. I spoke even more intensely there. Many thoughts run through my mind, perhaps because of my age; sometimes I feel angry all day long. I get angry seeing the country failing to gain momentum, getting entangled in one political conflict after another, widespread corruption, thousands of young people migrating abroad daily, mafias dominating everywhere, the declining condition of public institutions, and the overall chaos in the country.

You’ve been continuously angry for thirty years, but now it seems ‘Gen Z’ is angrier than you?

It’s like this: there was a writer who used to say, ‘I wish I could turn into a bomb and explode.’ That’s how much anger there was. We were restless with the incompetence seen in Nepal. After resigning as vice-chancellor, I started issuing frequent press releases. There is a collection of the press releases I issued from time to time. Some were political, and some were related to the university. Let me talk about an old press release: there were about 30 of us, including Dr. Sanduk Ruit and Dr. Bhagawan Koirala. We told them, “Don’t engage too deeply in politics; it will ruin things.” We asked them to make an agreement similar to the 12-point agreement. We asked them to declare that they would stop interfering with the university. Can the country improve if the university is ruined? Employees, ministers, and prime ministers are produced from there. When Pushpa Kamal Dahal was prime minister, we gave him the letter. We gave it to the then Education Minister Sumana Shrestha as well. We gave it to leaders of every party with the message that there should be an ‘All Party Conference.’ Ruin the university, and that’s enough to ruin the whole country.

Will things now move in the right direction? Given the new change that has arrived?

Rather than saying it will, the struggle must continue. I am happy because I keep this book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire, right here because I am a great follower of it. I brought out this book in around 2013. It says that education is about giving consciousness, and this consciousness tells you to fight against whatever oppression exists. I was genuinely pained, thinking, what kind of children are these? They know nothing about Nepal; they don’t care. Now, seeing Gen Z, I feel, “Wow! They have arrived!” They sent the message: we are not just going to suffer the consequences of what you have done; we are going to be the change ourselves.

For the last month, the direction we have been going in—are we on the right track, or what’s the situation?

This last month, I feel pity when I think of Gen Z. The demonstration was peaceful and against bad governance and corruption. When infiltration happened later, it was disheartening. It set Nepal back a long way. It created a situation that made us bow our heads in the international arena. I was an ambassador during the Royal Palace massacre. I couldn’t go out anywhere for a year. I couldn’t attend palace programs. The infiltration in the Gen Z movement has caused similar damage and destruction. However, regarding the demands of Gen Z, a new government has come, and the previous status quo has changed. It is an initial stage. There is much work to be done. The government must guarantee peace to every person and political party. There is a huge task of boosting the confidence of security personnel. We talked about institutions; there must be trust. We are talking about elections, but there is a lot of work that needs to be done before the elections.

How is boosting confidence possible?

I don’t have expertise in that. But the point is, there must be action taken against the destruction that occurred. Action must be taken immediately. Action must be taken on the incidents of both September 8 and September 9. Democracy originated from ‘Right to Property.’ In America, people’s homes are fenced. Government people cannot enter without a warrant. Now, no matter whose property it is, the movement has affected a lot of it. I don’t know how this is done. It happens only after a preliminary investigation and penalizing the culprits. The Mallik Commission report came out, and many such commissions will be formed, but the recommendations of the Rayamajhi Commission were not implemented later. We ourselves have encouraged the rise of impunity in Nepal. I have seen impunity at the university. Once, while I was teaching, I had a fight with a student. I hit the school’s window, and the glass broke. The next day, the principal called the parents and scolded them severely. They were told, “You must fix the glass no matter what,” and we did. There is plenty of impunity in the university. The leader started protecting his people. In law, there is no ‘my person’ and ‘someone else’s person.’ Running the state cannot be like that.

Looking at the character of our society today, everyone has a complaint against everyone else; everyone is angry and resentful towards everyone else. What is this? Where are we going? There is no trust between anyone. How will things get better? How will a society be built? It’s very difficult, isn’t it?

When it comes to my related work, I have spoken about public schools dozens of times. Why do we need public schools? Because they build society, they create an amicable society. Why does Singapore emphasize public schools? Why do Canada, Australia, America, and Germany provide public education? Have our leaders ever thought that education is about building society? Look, when we were in school, society was right there in the school. The children of today do not have that society at all. The high-class stay with the high-class, and the low-class with the low-class. Once, when I was giving an interview to the BBC, Surendra Nath Shukla was with me; he said, ‘Education is a private good,’ and I said, ‘Public good.’ My point is that we should have built strong public schools after the advent of democracy. Before, we had public schools like Patan, Juddhodaya, Padmodaya, Durbar School, and Vishwa Niketan. We remember all of them by name, and thinking about them makes me, not Gen Z, angry.

Is all this anger because you are the son of a martyr, or is it because of the saying ‘I wish to turn into a bomb and destroy everything’?

It’s that I don’t like disorder. How much sacrifice can one make? How long can one wait? I came to Nepal to work here instead of living abroad. I worked as much as I could. It is my nature to get angry when I see the same thing over and over. Where do I vent? I issue a press release, but no one listens. Bringing harmony to society requires public education that promotes equality, without placing anyone above or below another. Public education builds society. Public schools create conscious citizens. Nobody here cared. Even those who call themselves socialists didn’t care. Doesn’t that make one angry? When going to an election, the slogan is one thing, and the action is another. They did not focus on bringing harmony. In my 40–50 years, I published a textbook for schools, and my students say they read that book. After the advent of democracy and change, schools should have been prioritized, but that didn’t happen. Another point is, I used to work at the World Bank. The private sector is necessary. But not everything should be privatized.

The government should not shirk its responsibility regarding education, health, and public transport. Everyone should get concessions. A gap started to appear in Nepal in these matters. Especially in urban areas, there is such a gap. I had written earlier that such a situation would arise. I hadn’t estimated it would be this terrifying. But I did expect something to happen. We have everything, but for some, there is nothing. The policy of running the state is within an amicable society. Some earn, some become rich or poor. When I lived in Japan, 80 percent of the people were middle class. In the six years I lived in Japan, I never saw anyone speak in a loud voice, let alone fight. We couldn’t build such a society. While advocating neoliberalism, everything went downhill; one group became rich, and another couldn’t even make a living. People came to the city from the village, but the differences became huge. At one time, there was massive load-shedding. I installed an inverter at home. My house would be brightly lit, while everything around was dark. I felt embarrassed, so I told them not to turn on the lights on the upper floor until the electricity came back. The lower floor was needed for studying.

Imagine an old man waiting to go to Panauti for two hours, but no bus has arrived, and I am driving by, turning on the AC and kicking up dust, and this is the difference. Everyone in Nepal is a fake socialist. They show one thing in elections and do another. That has increased the anger; they are wearing a mask. If they were what they truly are, why would one get angry?

Power-sharing must be removed from the constitution itself when appointing the Chief Justice, CIAA chief, ambassadors, and others with authorities. What I want is that there should be no politics at the local level.

How are we going to fix them? What is the way? They also need to improve; they are also institutions, aren’t they?

Improvement means the public must be able to say, “we don’t need you”. Before, the public was innocent, but now they can say, “we don’t need you”.

Even when they are ousted from power, the political party leadership still doesn’t seem to change, does it?

I am also surprised. But now, it must be shown in the elections. The public must be conscious. Public schools are the place to prepare conscious citizens required for democracy, not just to teach mathematics and pass the SEE.

To show in elections, we also need political forces. Now, who will show whom? The parties don’t seem to be in a condition to improve.

I am a little optimistic. Since I first started working, I used to challenge my department head. I would tell him, if you are going to complain like this, you run it yourself. I said, “That is what I want.” I took over the department.

But that wasn’t seen here?

Yes, you are right. They don’t seem to have a challenge. The ones at the top are already set; I only see the ones below as priests. The idea itself is a challenge; education itself is a challenge. How can a party be formed if this is the case? There must be democratization within the party. There must be a constitutional change.

The movement on September 8 brought about a change. Is that change only until the election? Is it only a change to hold the election? Was all the sacrifice, where people were killed, just to hold that midterm election?

No, no. We didn’t want to discard the constitution. Because making another constitution takes a lot of time, leads to instability, affects development, and affects foreign investment, among other things. Even before the election, we must prepare an agenda for the government that comes next. We have experienced a lot. Many things need to be improved. The current government’s task is to hold elections. It is to create an environment for the election. It cannot do much other big work. If there is time, a commission can be formed to amend the constitution so that time is not wasted on deliberation in the next parliament. That won’t distract the government much. Let’s form a commission, including a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or experts, to determine what reforms are needed. The politicization of parties, bad governance, and corruption—why are they being promoted? Political power-sharing must be ended through the constitution itself.

What are the points that need to be amended in the constitution right away?

There aren’t many points. One is the democratization of the party. There is too much authoritarianism going on there. The issue of party democratization must be enshrined in the constitution. Do representatives get selected just because of favoritism in the election? Do they sideline a capable person just because they are or have a familial connection with their own known person? No competition? The election is expensive, and the original source of corruption is also the donations raised by the party. Bribery has been institutionalized. Such things must be removed. Rather, maybe the state should provide funds to the parties for elections! I am not an expert, but experts will bring suggestions.

Power-sharing must be removed from the constitution itself when appointing the Chief Justice, CIAA chief, ambassadors, and others with authorities. What I want is that there should be no politics at the local level. I am in favor of the ward chairman being independent. They should be people who focus on development. Not people who are calculating political arrangements. Unions and organizations are political, and they must be abolished. They have introduced many anomalies. Once, I went to the place where Prime Minister Sushil Koirala was staying. Other former prime ministers were also there. I told them: a dangerous word has emerged now; that word is ‘all-party.’ It has ruined villages. We three or four people got together, and then we ruined things? We have already suffered the anomalies brought by democracy. This must be ended.

We didn’t want to discard the constitution. Because making another constitution takes a lot of time, leads to instability, affects development, and affects foreign investment, among other things.

In the amendment, for example, regarding the concerns raised by the common people, should the federalism model also be changed in some way?

That might be possible. We need federalism. The demand for federalism originated during the Madhes uprising; it must be respected. But there are many things we must reconsider.

Also, to ensure inclusivity, anomalies were seen in the proportional representation system. Is there a need to improve proportional representation?

Yes, there is. Is inclusivity meant to promote one’s wife or girlfriend to a post? Do they have no shame after getting involved in politics? We feel shame. Before, husbands and wives wouldn’t walk together; they felt shy. Don’t they feel shy in politics? I am astonished.

What caused the loss of shame, shyness, and morality you mentioned?

The society also accepted it; it did not protest or boycott. There was a father of my father. He was in government. He was a bribe-taker. I was a child when my father met him. I never greeted him. Once I knew he was a bribe-taker, my hand would not go forward; it does not go.

Today, people know so much; they have learned a lot because the media has exposed many things. The media has written so much, citizens have understood, and enlightened citizens have spoken repeatedly. Why are they not listening?

You are absolutely right. In fact, we talk about the same thing when we meet friends in civil society. Why has this happened? They have become deaf due to their ego. Where did the ego come from? — We are elected by the people. The people have chosen us and brought us here. The ego that ‘the people have chosen me’ has grown. The people did not give them the state as a birthright, did they? The mandate was simple: govern, run the country, and set the nation on the right course. They chose, instead, to operate with absolute caprice. The level of arbitrary rule we see is shocking; one wouldn’t even manage a household with such inconsistency.

One person came with a bag. He said, “I have brought three now; I will bring two more later.” He left a bag of Rs 30 million. There is no account or record of that money. There is no record of who gave it. It just belonged to the leader who received it. It was not registered with the party. That made the leader autocratic. The system itself made them authoritarian. Those changes and amendments must happen. They have become pretentious. They are sitting on such a throne, but their intelligence is not equal to the throne.

Who taught them to sit on a throne and to look different from others? The seating and demeanor of the leaders who fought against the Panchayat system looked ordinary. How did this pretentious culture emerge in recent times?

You might have read Animal Farm by George Orwell. The pigs start walking on two legs; it is like that. I see how simple things are elsewhere. Here, they have to be different. Intellectual people do not need such pretension. There was Prime Minister Abdul Kalam in India, wasn’t there? He was so simple that when they brought a different chair for him, he said, “Bring one like the others.”

Was it noted that the Prime Minister took issue with the media employing a tone or language he deemed insufficiently deferential toward him?

One should seek respect through one’s actions. Everyone will respect them then.

However, our society is facing a crisis of trust. We have to go to the elections at this time. What is necessary to immediately build trust, and how can we create an atmosphere to go to the elections?

I don’t know much about this. The role of political parties is huge in elections. Our anger is not towards the political parties, but towards those who led and directed the political parties, who showed incompetence. I also have a little anger towards the lower ranks. Why didn’t they oust such leaders earlier? Political parties must be accountable.

But that didn’t happen, did it? Before the constitution was made in 2015, they said, “We apologize for all the mistakes we have made so far, and now we will make a new constitution and move forward by correcting ourselves.” After that, there were two elections, but they did not correct themselves. What is the basis for trusting that they will correct themselves again?

We must choose young people, people who are mature in terms of both age and work. The public must be informed about what kind of people to choose. We must choose people who can work and who have new ideas. If good people come, I feel that those with old ideas will naturally be rejected. Now, the public has become very conscious. They feel that whoever comes, this malgovernance must end. The public needs a certain kind of awareness. Political parties must reform; there must be turmoil; it must start from the party itself.

But not much change or assimilation is seen among the political parties. In the current situation, do the parties want elections?

It doesn’t look like they want them. But in my opinion, the best thing for democracy, for long-term democracy, is that we must go to the elections now. They must go. Let there be churning within the party; let there be ups and downs. Let the younger generation come forward. Let the old ones go to the back room.

A change in parties, like the rebellion or change of power that happened in Singha Durbar, is required, isn’t it?

Yes, I am absolutely convinced of that. Even in my house, the question comes to me: “Father, you decided to go to Godavari alone?” Now it has arrived here. Yes, this is how it should come. The lower-level leaders should not be afraid; they must be refined. Now, Gagan Thapa is speaking out, and that wave must spread to other parties too. If it spreads, fine; if not, how long will they remain slaves? Rather, go out and become a businesspersonor a contractor. I would not stay like that. I feel affection for the young leaders. The word ‘affection’ has garnered sympathy, but what is the meaning of this behavior where you simply agree to everything, offering a submissive form of ‘yes’ to every demand? History will judge. This tendency has been seen in a few; this change must come in this interim period itself.

For people’s mindset to change, for the style of power to change, 74 people had to lose their lives, right?

They made sacrifices. In fact, the way the country had been running for twenty to thirty years, Gen Z was not happy. When I was a campus chief, I was a ‘Gen Z’ myself. We fought against the Panchayat system there. I resigned, telling them to take it. What the people who died were looking for is that they are absolutely displeased with the work of the leaders. I am not talking to the expired leaders at the top; I am telling the lower-level leaders: if you do not understand this, democracy and the nation itself could be at risk.

Does what you said also connect with geopolitics? What is the analysis after all? What is the current situation of geopolitics?

I don’t understand that much. I see internal infiltration. It is being shown that the governance itself is absent here. Everything has been collapsed. What a terrifying situation! I don’t think it is external. But if such a liquid state persists, there will be many who fish in troubled waters. Unhealthy activities can happen; they can use us. Therefore, the leaders must also consider the long-term stability of Nepal and the stability of democracy when taking a stand. They should not only look at their own ego.

So, they themselves are seen as the obstacle in the current situation?

So far, that appears to be the case. Those in government must maintain openness and vigilance. I recall a fitting analogy from my university days: the conflict between a teacher and a student is like a fight between a knife and a pumpkin—the teacher is the pumpkin. If the knife hits, the teacher is hurt; even if the knife strikes itself, the teacher still bears the damage. Therefore, we must secure consensus among political parties, which requires a sustained improvement in the peace and security situation.

Let’s talk about permanent institutions: the civil service, the police administration, and other institutions. Their confidence is low, and institutions have become crippled due to weak leadership. The civil service has been with the political parties for 30–35 years, and the bureaucracy is supporting all the anomalies of the political parties. How do we fix this? This might not be the task of this government alone, but what could be a rough framework for what it should do and where it should lead?

What you said reminded me of a conversation I had with King Birendra. I said, “Your Majesty, I have not seen fifty years of diplomatic history in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” When I went to Japan, I went as an ambassador without reading a single page. I couldn’t even find the file of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There was no specific briefing. Fortunately, I met Professor Yadunath Khanal. He told me, “You will face difficulties. Last time, in the election for the UN Security Council, Nepal did not vote for Japan; it voted for India. Japan will not take that kindly.” So, how do I talk to India, China, and America if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not behind me? The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not just about wearing a slick tie, suit, and shoes. I say that professionalism must come into any institution. I was in a commission where no one would come on time, and no one would submit reports. Later, it became very difficult for me to submit the report. Professionalism must come. The civil administration must be professionalized.

Once, when talking to the king, what I really wished was to work at the Staff College. No matter what the political parties’ dreams are, they are implemented by the civil administration. If the civil administration is not professional, things get entangled. In India, though not completely, there is a high degree of professionalism. We haven’t been able to achieve it. The Rana period went, the Panchayat period went, and now there is licentiousness.

You mentioned earlier that this government should form a commission for constitutional amendment and show the way to the parliament. What can be done immediately to improve the civil administration?

What can be done immediately is to simplify and facilitate things that have direct contact with citizens, without creating hassles. We have made services complex. Work involving citizens must be fast and swift. People should feel the change. There are many things. When someone brings an old sick mother from the mountains to Teaching Hospital, what to do and where to go—someone should help there. A desk must be set up to address those citizens. Help with simple things, and simplify and expedite the process.

If I were to get more involved, the buses would be run by the carteling of the parties, and that is why there is a problem with transportation. Sajha Yatayat has not been able to reach everywhere; they throw stones. We must think about that. Public transport must be improved, and services must be accessible. The government should help those who have no support.

The destruction that happened on September 9—government structures and public structures were destroyed—that’s a separate issue. The attack on private property caused us to lose a great deal of international trust. What is the root of this? Is it just inequality, or is there a tendency in our society not to tolerate someone who is doing a bit better? How did this happen?

This is not due to inequality. There is a game being played. Some organized groups have worked there. They set fires; others might have brought matchboxes and fuel, and they might have vented the anger and pain that existed in society, but that is not the cause. The destruction was not just due to social turmoil; I believe it was done by organized groups. It happened in all the villages. The Karki Commission report can be very important. Our state’s intelligence system failed to work on this.

Looking at the developed tendencies and expressions in our society, is earning property, making money, living in a good house, riding a good car, and being well-dressed becoming a crime?

I think social media has a big impact. Someone cannot afford to pay rent; the landlord is yelling, they haven’t found a job, and they are struggling to eat. Then, someone else shows off their birthday cake, saying “Happy Birthday,” live on social media with great fanfare. The middle class is showing off in society. Leaders are showing off; these are all anomalies. Again, these all end up in schools; they reach education.

Before, when visiting any political leaders’ houses, they had simple beds and chairs only. Now, when entering a leader’s house, it is very difficult to reach the living room after crossing two or four security barriers. Once you reach there, it’s a different story. They are also showboating, aren’t they?

When I met Manmohan Adhikari, he was cutting vegetables. When I met Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, he was wearing a dhoti (an ankle-length breechcloth wrapped around the waist and the legs) and sitting in the room below, reciting the Gita on the ground floor. Sher Bahadur Deuba was the Home Minister, and he came and sat down. I connect everything to education; education teaches culture.

Before, during a wedding, a copper pot was used for kanyadan (a ritual where the bride’s father symbolically gives her away to the groom, holding her hand and joining it with the groom’s while asking him to take her as his wife). Now, it is made of silver. Silver is seen in place of copper pitchers. That change has happened, and those who use silver have increased inequality and the tendency to show off, haven’t they?

That has increased significantly. I received a medal from Japan. I tell people not to wear such things when walking with me. They call it a hobby. If someone studied in America, they become a CIA agent; if they worked at the World Bank, they say the same. The point is, where there is extreme closeness with the family, there is more corruption. It is not like that abroad. In our country, all relatives are close. I feel that cultural change is needed. Japan, China, Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia brought cultural change. For that, there must be extensive reform in public education. The knowledge that you should never do anything that affects others must be given. The school prepares the citizen. What did we give for preparation? We gave it to businessmen, and we gave it to foreigners. We have missed many things.

Frankly, the time has come to think big. Given the destruction brought in the name of Gen Z, which has profoundly shaken Nepal, a plan for a new Nepal must be initiated. Change is required in everything: thinking, culture, working style, professionalism, and dedication. Nepal should be a model country in South Asia, distinguished from nations like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, or India, and instead, should reassert its original character. This sweeping change must encompass education, health, public transport, and the media. What I have fundamentally observed is that our institutions lack guardians. In our time, we were prepared to say ‘no’ even if the Prime Minister told us to, prepared to say, ‘We will quit our job.’ Now, however, compromise is ubiquitous. Leadership is not selected by merit. Those whose duty it is to protect and fight for the institution have instead started compromising. There is an injustice in the selection of leadership, and this must be corrected. I am against the quota system and power-sharing. If they are going to share power, they should at least bring in the best people, but instead, they bring in whoever they find. This is contemptible. For instance, they appoint someone who lost an election in the party to be the chairman of the University Service Commission—the very person who selects professors. That is supposed to be an impartial place.