Administrative System in Nepal: Structure and Evolution

Place of the Kirti Administrative System

Introduction. The Kirti system (Kirti Prakriya) was the civil-service and administrative reform effort of the Panchayat era, introduced in the early 2020s BS under King Mahendra, after the 2017 BS royal takeover and the party-less Panchayat order of 2019 BS. It is usually discussed as one of the main attempts to build a modern, orderly administration after the Rana and early democratic periods.

Context.

• The Rana legacy was a personalised, kinship-based administration without merit recruitment.
• The 2007 BS to 2017 BS decade of political instability left administration weak and politicised.
• The monarchy needed a loyal, uniform bureaucracy to carry out centrally directed development plans (the first periodic plan began in 2013 BS).

Main features

• Central direction of administration, with the palace at the apex and the bureaucracy accountable to the Panchayat order.
• Reorganisation of ministries and departments, and creation of a hierarchy of development administration up to districts and zones.
• Efforts to classify posts and standardise recruitment, promotion and service conditions through the Public Service Commission.
• Emphasis on a development-oriented, disciplined and loyal civil service.

Contributions (positive place)

• It marked a shift from a ruler-centred to a more institutionalised, rule-based administration.
• It strengthened the state's capacity for planning and development work in the districts.
• It expanded the base of the civil service and encouraged merit-based entry through the Public Service Commission.
• It laid foundations that later civil-service legislation built upon.

Limitations

• Administration was subordinated to the palace and the Panchayat system, so political loyalty often outweighed merit.
• Power remained highly centralised, with little room for local initiative or citizen participation.
• Accountability to the people was weak; corruption, nepotism and favouritism continued.
• Reform was top-down and the bureaucracy stayed resistant to change.

Assessment. The Kirti system holds an important place as an early step towards a modern, development-oriented civil service in Nepal, but its value was limited by its authoritarian political setting. Real professionalism and accountability required the democratic reforms that came after 2046 BS.

The Lichhavi period (roughly 4th–8th century CE, from about 400 to 750 CE) is called the "Golden Period" of Nepali history because it was an era of political unity, territorial expansion, economic prosperity, remarkable cultural and artistic achievement, and systematic administration. The main reasons are explained below.

1. Political unity and strong administration The Lichhavis established a unified and well-organised state with Kathmandu as the centre of power. King Mandev, the greatest Lichhavi ruler, extended the kingdom from the Terai to the Himalayan region. The administration was systematic, with officials such as Mahasamanta, Dandanayaka (judge/commander) and Pradhana (chief officials). Village assemblies (Panchali) and local bodies enjoyed a degree of autonomy, which shows an early form of decentralised governance.

2. Economic prosperity Agriculture, trade and industry flourished. Nepal acted as a transit point in the trade between India and Tibet, exporting wool, herbs, timber and handicrafts. Land grants and endowments (including Guthi) were recorded in inscriptions, and the use of coins and standard weights and measures indicates a developed economy. Prosperity supported the construction of temples, monasteries and public works.

3. Cultural and religious harmony The Lichhavi kings were tolerant of all religions. Hinduism and Buddhism flourished side by side. Hindu rulers such as Mandev (a Vaishnava, as the Changu Narayan inscription shows) and Amshuverma patronised Hindu temples while also supporting Buddhist monasteries and viharas. This spirit of tolerance laid the foundation of Nepal's tradition of religious harmony.

4. Golden age of art and architecture The Lichhavi period produced some of the finest examples of Nepali art and architecture. The Changu Narayan Temple (inscription of Mandev, 464 CE), the Pashupati area, and the early Boudhanath and Swayambhunath stupas, along with fine stone and bronze images, date to or were developed in this period. Later monuments such as the Krishna Mandir of Patan (1637) belong to the Malla era. The stone inscriptions of Mandev at Changu Narayan are among the earliest written records of Nepal and show high skill in sculpture and calligraphy.

5. Development of language, literature and script Sanskrit was the language of the inscriptions, with some early Nepali and Nepal Bhasa words appearing in them. The Lichhavi inscriptions are the oldest reliable written sources of Nepali history. The development of the Lichhavi script (an early form of Devanagari) contributed to the growth of language and record-keeping.

6. Flourishing of art, crafts and social life Pottery, metalwork, woodcarving and stone sculpture reached a high standard. Society was organised into occupational groups, and education and learning were encouraged, mainly through religious institutions.

7. Beginning of recorded history Before the Lichhavis, information about Nepal comes mostly from legends and myths (the Gopal and Kirat periods). With the Lichhavi inscriptions and genealogies, Nepal entered the age of documented history. This is why the period is regarded as the true starting point of Nepal's recorded past.

Conclusion Because of political unity, efficient administration, economic prosperity, religious tolerance, and outstanding achievements in art, architecture, language and literature, the Lichhavi period is rightly known as the "Golden Period" in the history of Nepal. It set the cultural and administrative foundation on which later Nepali society and statehood were built.

Fundamental Features of the Rana Administrative System

The Rana regime (1846–1951) was an autocratic family oligarchy founded by Jung Bahadur Kunwar (later Rana) after the Kot Massacre of 1846. Its administrative system was designed primarily to preserve the power, privilege and personal security of the Rana family, not to serve the people. Its fundamental features are examined below.

1. Hereditary and oligarchic rule. The Ranas established a system of hereditary prime ministership. The office passed from one brother to another and then to the next generation, following the roll of succession. The Shah kings were reduced to figureheads confined to the palace. Real power lay with the Rana Prime Minister, who combined the offices of Prime Minister, Commander-in-Chief, Minister of Finance and Minister of Foreign Affairs. Thus the system was a family oligarchy rather than a constitutional government.

2. Centralized and personalized authority. All authority was concentrated at the centre in the person of the Prime Minister. There was no separation of powers, no cabinet in the modern sense, and no independent judiciary. The Prime Minister ruled by decrees (sanads) and orders. Administration was personal rule rather than rule of law.

3. Absence of representative institutions. There was no parliament, no elected body, no political party and no local self-government. The people had no share in governance. The system was completely non-participatory and undemocratic. Any expression of political opinion was treated as sedition.

4. Bureaucratic machinery under family control. The administration was run through a central secretariat and a hierarchy of officials — the Prime Minister at the top, then Chautariyas, Kaji, Sardar, Bhardar and other courtiers. Key posts, especially in the army and in the districts, were reserved for Rana family members and their close relatives. The bureaucracy was loyal to the ruler, not to the state or the public.

5. Military-dominated administration. The Rana rulers maintained a large army not for national defence but for internal repression and for protecting the regime. The Commander-in-Chief was always a Rana. Military force was used to crush dissent, and the army consumed a very large share of the national budget. Administration and coercion were fused.

6. District administration through Bhardars and Mukhtiyars. The country was divided into districts and administrative units headed by Bhardars, Mukhtiyars and later Badahakims. These officials were directly appointed by and answerable to the centre. Their main functions were revenue collection, maintenance of law and order, and supply of labour and resources to the ruling family. Local autonomy was absent.

7. Exploitative revenue and land system. The Ranas expanded the Birta, Jagir and Kipat land systems. Large tracts of land were granted to Rana family members and favourites as Birta (tax-free) land. Peasants were subjected to heavy rents, forced labour (jhara and begar) and various illegal exactions. The surplus was extracted from the peasantry to finance the luxury and army of the ruling class. This made the system economically parasitic.

8. Personal law and arbitrary justice. Justice was not uniform or impartial. The Prime Minister and Rana officials could punish anyone at will. There was no independent judiciary, no codified uniform law applicable to all, and no right of appeal in the modern sense. The Muluki Ain of 1854 was applied in a discriminatory manner based on caste and proximity to power.

9. Isolationist foreign policy. The Ranas followed a policy of keeping Nepal isolated from the outside world. Foreigners were restricted, education and travel abroad were discouraged, and contact with democratic ideas was feared. This isolation helped the regime survive but kept the country backward. The system depended on British support and later on the British-Indian connection for its survival.

10. Suppression of education and public opinion. Schools were limited and controlled. Higher education was virtually absent until 1918 (when Tri-Chandra College was established) and even then kept under strict supervision. Newspapers and political organisations were prohibited. The regime feared that education would awaken the people against autocracy.

11. Absence of accountability and rule of law. There was no audit of public expenditure in the modern sense, no Public Service Commission, and no fixed criteria for recruitment. Officials were appointed on the basis of kinship and loyalty. Corruption and nepotism were institutionalized. The administration served the interests of the Rana family, not the public.

12. Feudal and hierarchical social order. The administrative system rested on a feudal social structure. The Ranas occupied the top, followed by the traditional aristocracy, then the peasantry and the so-called lower castes. The system reinforced caste discrimination and social inequality through the Muluki Ain.

13. Rigid and unresponsive character. The administration was highly centralized, slow, and unresponsive to public needs. It lacked the concept of public service, welfare or development. Its main concerns were revenue, order and the security of the regime.

Conclusion

The Rana administrative system was essentially an autocratic, hereditary, family-centred and military-backed system. It was centralized, non-representative, exploitative and unaccountable. It preserved the power of the Rana oligarchy at the cost of national development and public welfare. Its rigidity and failure to reform ultimately contributed to its overthrow in 1951.

Examine the importance of interrelationship between central and sub-national level. [5 marks]

Meaning of the interrelationship

The interrelationship between the central (federal/national) level and the sub-national level (province/state and local levels) refers to the continuous, two-way functional linkage through which they share powers, resources, responsibilities and information in order to deliver public services and run the state as one integrated system. In a federal or decentralised set-up, neither level can function in isolation; each depends on the other for authority, finance, coordination and legitimacy.

Importance of the interrelationship

1. Maintains national unity with local diversity. The central level upholds national sovereignty, a common constitution and uniform standards, while sub-national governments accommodate regional identity, language and culture. Their interaction keeps the country together without suppressing local distinctiveness.

2. Ensures effective service delivery. Functions such as education, health, drinking water, local roads and agriculture are shared or concurrent. The central level sets policy, law and standards; the sub-national level implements them according to local needs. Coordination prevents duplication, gaps and wastage of resources.

3. Balances power and prevents concentration of authority. A working relationship institutionalises checks and balances — the centre cannot become authoritarian, and sub-national units cannot become autonomous "states within a state". This protects democracy and the rule of law.

4. Facilitates fiscal balance and resource sharing. The centre collects major taxes and distributes revenue through fiscal transfers, equalisation grants and conditional grants; sub-national governments raise local revenue and spend it. This interdependence reduces regional inequality and funds local priorities.

5. Strengthens accountability and good governance. Regular consultation, reporting, monitoring and coordination committees make both levels answerable to citizens. Disputes over jurisdiction are settled through constitutional and legal mechanisms rather than confrontation.

6. Supports planning and policy coherence. Periodic plans, national budgets and local plans must be aligned. Intergovernmental dialogue ensures that local plans reflect national goals and that national policies are realistic at the grassroots.

7. Promotes political stability and conflict management. In a plural society like Nepal, ethnic, regional and identity-based grievances are better handled when the centre and sub-national units negotiate and share power, as seen in federalism after 2015.

Conclusion

The interrelationship is therefore not merely administrative but constitutional and political in nature. It is the bridge that converts federalism from a legal design into a functioning system. Without healthy centre–sub-national relations, federalism produces friction, duplication and instability; with it, federalism delivers unity in diversity, equitable development and democratic governance.

Constitutional Council: Place and Functions

Place. The Constitutional Council is a high-level body established by Article 284 of the Constitution of Nepal (2072 BS). It is not an ordinary executive office. It sits at the centre of the system of appointments to constitutional bodies, bringing the government, the opposition, the judiciary and both Houses of the Federal Parliament together. This gives key appointments a broad, multi-party base and protects the independence of constitutional bodies from executive monopoly.

Composition (Article 284)

Functions. The Council recommends to the President the appointment of:

• the Chief Justice;
• the Chairperson and members of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA);
• the Auditor General;
• the Chairperson and members of the Public Service Commission and the Election Commission;
• the Chairperson and members of the National Human Rights Commission;
• the Chairperson and members of the National Women Commission, National Dalit Commission, National Inclusion Commission, Indigenous Nationalities Commission, Madhesi Commission, Tharu Commission and Muslim Commission.

It also recommends the removal or appointment of such office-holders in the cases and manner the Constitution and the law provide. Its recommendations are normally followed by a parliamentary hearing before the final appointment by the President.

Significance. The Council makes appointments more inclusive and impartial, reduces partisan control over constitutional bodies, and supports checks and balances. Its effectiveness, however, depends on consensus among members and on transparent, merit-based procedures.

Approach to the Need for Administrative Reforms — [5 marks]

Administrative reform is a deliberate, planned effort to improve the structure, processes, personnel and performance of the public administration system so that it delivers services efficiently, accountably and equitably. The need for reform arises when the existing system becomes outdated, inefficient, corrupt, unresponsive or unable to meet new social, economic and technological demands. The approach to reform should therefore be systematic, contextual and participatory rather than ad hoc. The following steps describe how one should approach the need for administrative reforms:

1. Identification of the need and problem diagnosis The first step is to recognise and clearly define why reform is needed. This involves diagnosing the existing weaknesses — bureaucratic red tape, delay, corruption, centralisation, poor service delivery, outdated laws, weak accountability, or mismatch with new policies such as federalism. Tools such as citizen surveys, performance audits, workload analysis and stakeholder consultations help in identifying the real problem rather than the perceived one.

2. Setting clear objectives and scope Reform must have well-defined goals — for example, improving efficiency, transparency, accountability, responsiveness, or cost-effectiveness. The scope should be specified: whether it is structural reform (organisational restructuring), procedural reform (simplifying rules and methods), personnel reform (recruitment, training, motivation), or technological reform (e-governance and digitalisation).

3. Political commitment and legal-institutional backing Administrative reform cannot succeed without strong political will and support from the top leadership. It requires a legal mandate — new or amended laws, rules and regulations — and an institutional mechanism such as a reform commission, high-level administrative reform committee, or a dedicated reform unit to plan, coordinate and monitor the change.

4. Stakeholder participation and consultation Reform affects civil servants, citizens, private sector, civil society and political actors. Their participation ensures ownership, reduces resistance and makes the reform realistic. Consultations, workshops, public hearings and feedback mechanisms should be used at the design stage.

5. Strategic planning and phased implementation A reform strategy should be prepared with priorities, timelines, resources and responsibilities. Since resources and capacity are limited, reforms are best implemented in phases — pilot testing in selected ministries or districts, then gradual expansion. Quick-win measures (such as simplification of citizen services) build credibility for larger reforms.

6. Capacity building and change management Civil servants need new skills, attitudes and incentives to implement reforms. Training, orientation, leadership development and motivation schemes are essential. Change management addresses resistance through communication, dialogue and involvement of employees.

7. Use of technology and innovation Modern reforms increasingly rely on ICT — e-governance, online service delivery, digital records, management information systems — to reduce discretion, delay and corruption and to improve transparency and citizen access.

8. Monitoring, evaluation and institutionalisation Reform must be continuously monitored against set indicators. Periodic evaluation identifies gaps and allows corrective measures. Successful practices should be institutionalised through laws, rules and organisational culture so that reforms become sustainable rather than person-dependent.

9. Continuous and adaptive process Finally, reform should be treated as a continuous, adaptive process, not a one-time event. As society, economy and technology change, administrative systems must be reviewed and updated accordingly.

Conclusion In short, the approach to administrative reform should be need-based, objective-oriented, politically supported, legally grounded, participatory, phased, technology-enabled and continuously monitored. Such a systematic approach ensures that reform improves governance, builds public trust and supports national development goals such as good governance, federalism and prosperity.

Place of Administrative Culture in Good Governance

Meaning of administrative culture: Administrative culture refers to the shared values, beliefs, attitudes, norms and behavioural patterns that guide the conduct of public officials and shape the working style of bureaucratic organisations. It is the "personality" of an administrative system — how officials actually behave, not merely what the rules prescribe.

Meaning of good governance: Good governance denotes the exercise of public authority in a manner that is participatory, transparent, accountable, responsive, equitable, inclusive, rule-based and effective. These are the qualities that make government legitimate and citizen-centred.

Place of administrative culture in good governance:

1. Determines the gap between formal rules and actual practice. Good governance is not achieved by legislation alone. The same legal framework produces different results in different countries because administrative culture differs. A culture of integrity converts rules into ethical conduct; a culture of patronage converts the same rules into instruments of favouritism. Thus administrative culture is the intervening variable that decides whether governance reforms actually work.

2. Foundation of accountability and transparency. Where officials internalise the value of public accountability, they disclose information, accept scrutiny and answer for results voluntarily. Where secrecy and hierarchy dominate the culture, formal transparency laws remain weakly enforced. Thus a transparent administrative culture is a precondition for real accountability.

3. Shapes citizen orientation and responsiveness. A bureaucratic culture that treats citizens as subjects or supplicants produces arrogant, delay-ridden service delivery. A culture that treats citizens as clients and rights-holders produces responsive, courteous and accessible administration — the essence of responsive governance.

4. Affects rule of law and impartiality. A culture of neutrality and merit-based decision-making upholds the rule of law. A culture of nepotism, political favouritism and rent-seeking undermines it, producing corruption and unequal treatment — the direct opposite of good governance.

5. Influences participation and inclusiveness. Administrators who value consultation and dialogue create space for civil society, women, Dalits, Janajatis and marginalised groups. A paternalistic or elitist culture excludes them, defeating the inclusive and participatory dimensions of good governance.

6. Affects efficiency and effectiveness. A result-oriented, innovative and learning culture improves service delivery and policy implementation. A risk-averse, rule-bound, "file-pushing" culture produces delays, red tape and policy failure.

7. Bears on political–administrative relations. A culture of mutual respect and role clarity between politicians and civil servants supports democratic governance. A culture of subservience or of bureaucratic resistance distorts it.

8. Key to institutionalising reform. Anti-corruption drives, e-governance and citizen charters succeed only when they are accompanied by a change in administrative values. Otherwise reforms remain cosmetic.

Conclusion: Administrative culture is not a peripheral but a central variable in good governance. It is both a determinant and a reflection of governance quality. Nepal's governance deficits — corruption, delay, impunity and weak service delivery — are as much cultural as structural. Hence reforming administrative culture through ethical socialisation, merit-based recruitment, code of conduct enforcement, citizen-centric training and leadership by example is essential for translating the legal and institutional framework of good governance into actual performance.

What Nepal should learn from Dibya Upadesh (Divine Counsel) of late King Prithvi Narayan Shah

Introduction Dibya Upadesh is the political testament and policy guidance of King Prithvi Narayan Shah, the unifier of modern Nepal. It is a collection of his counsel delivered near the end of his life (around 1774) to his successors and courtiers. Though it was given in the context of the eighteenth century, its principles remain relevant for modern Nepal's governance, diplomacy, and national unity.

Key teachings and lessons for Nepal

1. National unity and integrity: Prithvi Narayan Shah gave top priority to the unification and protection of Nepal's territory. Nepal should learn that national unity and territorial integrity must remain above party, ethnic, and regional interests. This lesson is directly relevant to safeguarding sovereignty against external influence.

2. Independent foreign policy (the "yam between two boulders"): He advised maintaining balanced and independent relations with the two big neighbours, China and India, without being subservient to either. Nepal should learn to conduct an independent, balanced foreign policy based on national interest rather than dependence.

3. Internal unity and harmony: He stressed unity among different castes, languages, religions, and regions, comparing Nepal to a garden of four varnas and thirty-six castes. Nepal should learn to promote social inclusion, tolerance and harmony, avoiding discrimination and conflict.

4. Good governance and rule of law: He emphasised justice, honesty and accountability in administration. Nepal should learn to ensure good governance, transparency, and zero tolerance for corruption.

5. Strong defence and self-reliance: He advised strengthening the army and being prepared for external threats. Nepal should learn to build self-reliance in defence, economy and resources rather than depending on foreign aid.

6. Economic self-sufficiency: He encouraged trade, agriculture and utilisation of local resources. Nepal should learn to promote domestic production, import substitution and balanced trade to reduce dependency.

7. Diplomatic caution and intelligence: He warned against foreign interference and advised vigilance. Nepal should learn to be cautious in treaties, agreements and foreign investment to protect national interest.

8. Leadership with vision and sacrifice: His life itself is a lesson of dedication, patience and sacrifice for the nation. Nepal's leaders should learn to prioritise national interest over personal and partisan gain.

Conclusion Dibya Upadesh is not merely a historical document but a guiding philosophy of nationalism, unity, balanced diplomacy and good governance. For modern Nepal, the main lesson is to maintain sovereignty, unity and self-respect while adopting a pragmatic and independent approach in domestic and foreign affairs.

Emerging Issues of Administrative System

The administrative system, particularly in developing countries like Nepal, is undergoing rapid transformation under the pressure of globalization, technology, democratization, and rising public expectations. Several emerging issues have come to the forefront in recent years.

1. Digital Governance and E-Administration The shift from traditional paper-based administration to digital platforms (e-governance) has raised issues of digital divide, cybersecurity, data privacy, and the need for capacity building among civil servants. Governments must balance efficiency gains with equitable access.

2. Good Governance and Accountability Citizens increasingly demand transparency, accountability, rule of law, and responsiveness. Issues of corruption, bureaucratic red tape, and lack of citizen participation remain persistent challenges that undermine public trust.

3. New Public Management (NPM) and Market Orientation The adoption of NPM principles — privatization, contracting out, performance-based management — has created tensions between efficiency and equity, and between managerial autonomy and political control.

4. Decentralization and Federalism In federal systems like Nepal, administrative restructuring, intergovernmental relations, fiscal decentralization, and capacity of local governments have emerged as major issues requiring institutional redesign.

5. Public Service Ethics and Professionalism Declining ethical standards, political interference in recruitment and transfer, and lack of merit-based career systems threaten the neutrality and professionalism of the civil service.

6. Globalization and Competitiveness Administrative systems must respond to global standards, international agreements, and economic competitiveness while retaining local relevance and cultural sensitivity.

7. Citizen-Centric Service Delivery Growing demand for quality, timely, and accessible public services — through one-stop shops, e-services, and grievance redressal — has forced administrations to reorient from rule-bound to result-oriented functioning.

8. Human Resource and Capacity Gaps Brain drain, outdated skills, inadequate training, and resistance to change within the bureaucracy are critical emerging concerns.

Conclusion The emerging issues of the administrative system revolve around adapting to a complex, interconnected, and technology-driven environment while upholding democratic values, ethical standards, and public accountability. Addressing these requires continuous reform, innovation, and strong political will.

(a) Why reform is a long-term process

Reform changes not only structures and rules but also the outlook and behaviour of officials, and people resist such change. Some steps are clear from the start, but others need deeper analysis and discussion. The external environment (politics, technology, citizens' demands) also keeps changing, so reform components must be updated continuously. In a difficult, competitive and fast-changing setting, results can come only through the sustained effort of several consecutive governments, with periodic evaluation of each completed step.

(b) Basic considerations in administrative reform

• Wide dissemination of information on the reforms, and mobilising citizens, professional representatives and civil servants to make them happen.
• Democratic exchange of opinions on the desirable and feasible course of reform.
• A base of solid professional analysis of the present state and performance of public administration.
• Periodic evaluation of the consequences of completed reform steps.
• Learning from other countries' experience while respecting our own tradition and experience.
• Treating reform as an open process, with components continuously updated to the changing environment.
• Strong political will and commitment, as the first step.

(c) Measures to make the administration goal-oriented, in the Nepali context

• Political will and commitment from leaders, and placing the right person in the right place (merit-based placement rather than political or personal favour).
• Human resource development: regular training, and capacity building for federal, provincial and local civil servants after federalism.
• Time-bound promotion and career development, so that promotion is predictable and linked to performance (as in the Civil Service Act and the Public Service Commission system).
• Scientific transfer policy that avoids frequent, politically motivated transfers and gives officials fixed tenure.
• Financial incentives and a fair pay and benefits structure, alongside action against corruption.
• Proper performance evaluation with measurable targets, such as performance contracts and indicators.
• Networking and collaboration with the private sector and civil society, for example public-private partnerships, social audit and citizen charters, to benefit service seekers.
• E-governance and simplified procedures to reduce delay and discretion.

(d) Fundamental essence of the text

The fundamental essence of the text is that administrative reform is a deliberate, sustained and open-ended effort to transform public administration, including its outlook and behaviour, to meet new and changing demands. It is not a one-time act but a long-term process needing the commitment of successive governments. It should rest on professional analysis, periodic evaluation, citizen participation and democratic debate, and learning from foreign experience while respecting national tradition. Above all, political will and sound human resource management, together with collaboration with the private sector and civil society, are the essential means of making the bureaucracy goal-oriented and service-oriented.