These days, Nepal's problems appear so overwhelming that writing a column to explain, analyse or understand
one aspect of any of those problems becomes an act of quiet despair.

How many times is anyone to write about brazen political incompetence, of crumbling states of infrastructure, of the economy drip-fed by remittance and aid, of the nation supposedly run by foreign powers, of country-stopping quarrels among groups over picayune matters, of the apathy of the state machinery towards those who are poor and vulnerable, and of the future of a young population held hostage by doddering old netas who seem intent on politicking for another 30 years?

Amidst the varying degrees of politics-induced dukha that Nepalis have faced, it's tempting to put on a cheery face, wax eloquent about Nepalis' innate resilience, and continue to hope for a democracy responsive to citizens' concerns. But with the rising political certainty that has meant many of the young and the able have effectively given up on the country and left en masse, columnists' celebrated capacity for resilience is hardening into collective resignation and fatigue. "Let politicians do what they want, as long as my narrow personal or commercial interests are safe and sound," seems to be the unspoken mantra of those who have given up being a part of a better Nepal in their lifetime.

As the two-year term of the 601 elected and unelected Constituent Assembly members ends, perhaps it's better not to indulge in answers and ask these open-ended questions about a way forward:

1. If the CA's tenure is extended, what guarantee is there that it will complete the process of writing the constitution within a year? Who foots the bill? How? How much?
2. Is there anyone, a person or a group, who should no longer be in the extended CA if it gets extended for their stark failure of leadership to get the constitution drafted and ratified? Or, is this failure partly due to the lack of a mechanism to hold any individual or party responsible, so they can continue on their merry way at the expense of domestic and foreign taxpayers' money, time and patience?
3. Do elected netas even understand the importance of a constitution as a document that lays out the guidelines for all activities that are to be carried out in Nepal? Trade, commerce, foreign relations, development work, local decision-making processes – all these and more cannot operate on the whims of politicians and local lords. Do CA members, collectively or individually, understand this?
4. What moral responsibility should the plethora of agencies that have sprung up in the last two years to 'help' the CA and CA members write the constitution bear? They flew CA members around the world and across Nepal to understand the finer points of constitution-making, and to listen to grassroots voices. Now that the deadline is over with no constitution in sight, shouldn't they be reflecting on whether their resources were used for the most pressing priorities or for 'nice to have' filler activities that amounted to so little?
5. When the Interim Constitution was amended several times to suit the party-political needs of the day, was it not a clear signal to the rest of us that this CA viewed its role not as one with a clear job description and a firm deadline, but one that allowed for immense flexibility and political expediency? Given this, should we be surprised that they've failed to deliver what they were put together to do?
6. Other than lamely asking for an extension, is there a way non-political citizens who just want to live and work in a rule-of-law driven country can express justified outrage in Nepal?

READ ALSO:
United we fall, Indu Nepal
Flex-ible, Prashant Jha
Engage the monarchy, Biraj Bahadur Bista
Politics abhors a vacuum, Publisher's Note
Ready, steady, no?, Dewan Rai
Just questions, Ashutosh Tiwari
Two seconds to midnight, Ass
Whither constitution writing