ROYAL DECREE: King Gyanendra dubbed Deuba (below) as incompetent

Till recently King Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev seemed clear about the role the monarchy should play in running the government. Nepal, he said in an interview in July, needed a constitutional monarchy, not an active one. Last week, the king appeared to throw all caution to the winds. Turning proactive, he dismissed caretaker prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, dubbing him as "incompetent" and took upon himself all executive powers.

The king promised a return to democracy but said he would hand-pick a leader to head an interim government, directly controlled and guided by the palace till the internal situation stabilises and general elections can be held. Much to the chagrin of political parties, the king added that the government would comprise people with "clean image" and those who do not have any electoral ambitions.

In response, political parties have threatened to launch a movement against the "unconstitutional and undemocratic act" of the monarch and even warned that they would not recognise such a government. The six parties-the Nepali Congress headed by G.P. Koirala, Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist), Rastriya Prajatantra Party, Nepal Sadbhavana Party, Nepal Workers and Peasants Party and People's Front of Nepal-in a joint petition to the king asked him to rectify the "unconstitutional" act by transferring the executive powers to the people. They wanted any new political arrangement to comprise party representatives in the dissolved Pratinidhi Sabha, the 205-member Lower House of Parliament.

RED STIR: Maoist rebels

INDIAN CONCERNS « Political unrest in Nepal may trigger instability in the region. « Maoist rebels may use the current crisis to expand their area of operations and provide bases for rebels in north-east India such as the ULFA. « Any instability could help Pakistan ferment anti-India sentiments. « India's limited leverage in Nepal's affairs is turning into a migraine.

The king was not without political savvy. Rallies, widely seen as palace-driven, were held in support of his action and important buildings were illuminated for days. Various trade and business organisations were used to drum up support for the king's actions. Many of them took out advertisements in local newspapers expressing "Loyal gratitude to His Majesty the King" for the timely royal takeover which is "compatible with the wishes of the nationalist Nepalese". They said it has happened "at a time when the nation is undergoing a severe crisis because of bad governance, culture of impunity, corruption, irregularity and insecurity in the name of democracy".

The audacity with which the scion of the 334-year-old Shah dynasty dismissed the prime minister made many people compare him with his late father King Mahendra, who snuffed out Nepal's first attempts at democracy in 1960. Mahendra had dismissed the first-elected prime minister, B.P. Koirala, in 1960, usurped all powers, proscribed political parties and then foisted a feudal autocratic partyless panchayat system that ruled Nepal for well over 30 years. Now, after 12 roller-coaster years of democracy, the fear among political parties is that Gyanendra may try to repeat history. A distraught Deuba told India Today after his dismissal, "I am very apprehensive about the future of democracy. Though the king cannot afford to destroy multi-party democracy, it is clearly in danger."

It is ironical that Deuba should be complaining against the monarch, who till recently was believed to have been backing him. Though the former prime minister claims he was removed because of his decision to defer elections, leaders of other parties had no sympathy for him. Nepali Congress spokesperson Arjun Narsingh K.C. said, "The king's act is unconstitutional but Deuba's misrule and his style of functioning invited this."

There may be some truth in this. Despite being backed by the Royal Nepal Army, which is loyal to the palace, and other security forces as well as friendly countries, the Deuba government failed to contain the mayhem unleashed by the underground Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists). According to official figures, over 5,000 people have been slain during the past six years of the Maoist movement and the figure includes 3,500 persons killed during the Emergency since November last year.

While Deuba talked loudly about crushing the terrorists, the Maoists intensified their campaign. They virtually run a state within a state in 22 of the kingdom's 75 districts. After infighting tore apart his party, the Nepali Congress, Deuba erred in getting Parliament prematurely dissolved when it still had two years to go. Many felt Deuba went beyond the parameters of the Constitution to recommend postponement of polls for one year after all parties gave him the "full mandate" to do so. Former attorney-general Meghraj Bahadur Bishta says politicians had turned the last 12 years of parliamentary democracy into a "dark period" in the history of Nepal. "The people are thoroughly disillusioned because of corruption, poverty and growing insecurity," he says.

Nepal's politicians didn't exactly help their cause. Such is the squabbling that the country has had 11 prime ministers in 12 years. In a bizarre game of musical chairs, G.P. Koirala has held the post three times, while K.P. Bhattarai and Deuba have had two tenures each. Deuba had, in fact, played into the king's hand. After he ascended the throne in June 2001 following the massacre of his elder brother, King Birendra, and his entire family, Gyanendra had been trying to get greater control over the government.

Yet, experts feel all this was not cause enough for the king to take the extreme step of overstepping the Constitution. Former Chief Justice of Nepal Biswanath Upadhyaya, considered the father of the 1990 Constitution that paved the way for the return of democracy, warns, "This was a patently unconstitutional act. When the Constitution is violated by force, then there can't be any legal implication. There can only be political implications and this will lead to polarisation and conflict."

The Deuba dismissal did surprise India who believed the king would allow him to function as a caretaker prime minister. Delhi's position is that it supports the two pillars-multi-party democracy and constitutional monarchy-for stability in Nepal. Walking the diplomatic tightrope, India wants the political parties and the monarchy to go beyond their individual positions and reach a consensus for the larger good of the Nepalese people. At the same time, it is also prepared to deal with an assertive Gyanendra. The US is also closely monitoring the situation as it is concerned by the spread of communism in the kingdom.

India's worst nightmare would be a tri-cornered fight between monarchy, political parties and the Maoist rebels, who are threatening to overrun the country. It is in touch with Gyanendra as political unrest in Nepal could have security ramifications for Delhi. There are reports to indicate that Maoists are providing bases to insurgent groups such as the ULFA in India's Northeast and getting arms and tactical training in return. The assessment is that Nepal could be heading for more political instability with Maoist rebel leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda criticising the king for dismissing Deuba. The king also appears to be in no hurry to hold elections. The palace-backed interim administration could technically remain in power for another two years which is when the general elections were originally due.

Yet, it is not going to be easy for the king to impose his writ. Political parties are regrouping to fight with the palace on the question of democracy. The big question is whether monarchy without a popular government can solve the country's problems, contain the Maoists and then bring democracy on track. Clearly, King Gyanendra will have more problems than his handpicked government can handle.

-with Shishir Gupta