Kathmandu: The Deputy Speaker is supposed to be neutral and non-partisan by virtue of the post. The political party s/he belongs to should impartially question them if they breach parliamentary proceedings or engage in any type of malfunctions. That is the basic parliamentary norm. After being elected, the Deputy Speaker disassociates from their political party to make the position free, impartial, credible, and respectful. The Deputy Speaker holds the eighth position in the order of precedence in Nepal.
But these norms do not hold in the case of incumbent Deputy Speaker Indira Rana Magar, nor does the Rastriya Swatantra Party–the political entity she belonged to before becoming the Deputy Speaker–seem to uphold the principle of neutrality.
The Deputy Speaker on January 23, 2023, announced her dissociation from her political party—Rastriya Swatantra Party. She was elected as the Deputy Speaker on January 21.
Rana faces a serious allegation of misusing the power of her office by writing a letter to the US Embassy in Kathmandu to facilitate the visa process for some people. In a letter that was leaked, Rana was found to have written a letter to the American embassy to arrange the interview dates for six persons including herself to participate in the 67th session of Commission on the Status of Women that was being held in New York on March 6 to 17, 2023.
The incident caused a lot of stir in political and social spheres in Nepal. While the matter was raised in parliament for fair probe in her alleged role in breaching the diplomatic code of conduct, some political leaders even demanded that Rana should be relieved from her duty on the moral ground.
While it was expected that the Rastriya Swatantra Party–which rose to power raising the agenda of fairness, transparency and moral conduct–would help in probing the case, nearly all RSP leaders defended her move.
The expectation was fair given that RSP claimed itself to be a force for peaceful transformation with a group of informed politicians as flag-bearers of change at least during the last federal parliament elections and the by-elections that followed.
Rana has been blamed for corresponding with a diplomatic agency bypassing Parliament Secretariat and the foreign ministry—that too for individuals not related to the parliament.
Sumana Shrestha, former Education Minister and the RSP leader, tried to divert the issue by raising the issue of fake Bhutanese refugee issue in parliament. “I object to the media trial on Deputy Speaker Indira Rana Magar,” she told the parliament. “If we are to talk about the conduct of a political leader, let’s talk about the conduct of all,” she said. “Is this really an impeachable offense? What is this?” She roared. “If you are to declare the offense of human trafficking [on Rana], let’s also declare who did the fake Bhutanese refugee scam.”
Further defending Rana, Manish Jha, who is the acting spokesperson of RSP, said that the letter written by Rana was not registered in the embassy and challenged the other political parties to prove otherwise, suggesting that Rana has committed no objectionable offense.
A source familiar with the functioning of embassy mechanisms said that it is unfair to drag the embassy into such controversy and that the embassy does not disclose the information about the visa proceedings to the public. “This only shows immaturity and lack of understanding on the part of the leader regarding how the embassy protects the privacy of the applicants or whatsoever letter is written to the embassy,” he said.
RSP’s defense of questionable conduct of Rana has not only created the public perception that RSP is no different from traditional political parties whose credible alternative the RSP claimed itself to be, it has also raised the question mark about its future course of politics: Will it be any different from traditional political parties or will it be like one of those who tend to defend every single move, fair or unfair, of their leaders?
Comment