State fragility and organized crime (III)

The definition, understanding, and interpretation of organized crime are different and difficult to understand in Nepal. For example, production, sales, and distribution of substandard drugs are as illegal and criminal as selling illegal substances like hashish, heroin, and precursor-chemicals that is used to manufacture illegal drugs anywhere in the world.

For example, if we look at the list of substandard drugs, the responsible department, distributor and the seller of the product need to be prosecuted and penalized immediately. They ought to be treated like the traffickers of narcotic drugs and be prosecuted as severely as any perpetrator of the traffickers of hashish and marijuana. But the public, accountable stakeholders and the government have turned a blind eye because there is a lot of money in this systemic organized crime and corruption.

These cases are as serious as any organized crimes where guns and physical violence is used. This is a particular example of the government’s systemic organized crime in collaboration with the private party.

It is a paradox that all responsible parties are mum in such a serious case putting 3 million Nepali lives into risk. Another case of Organized Crime Groups (OCGs) partnership with the internal agency, the constitutional body and the government of Nepal is demonstrated by the 55th Attorney’s Annual Report as given in the table.

For example, if we look at the table, the annual report of the Attorney General Office of the Government of Nepal shows that the dubious accounting practices and amount embezzled by corrupt government officials at various levels of local units of the provinces. It is also a form of organized crime in partnership with the government constitutional body, government ministry, semi-governmental agency, and the private party. These cases are as serious as any organized crimes where guns and physical violence is used. This is a particular example of the government’s systemic organized crime in collaboration with the private party.

Another example of the crime committed by the public office in collaboration with the international donors and private parties is well evidenced by the expenditure of millions of dollars by the Election Commission of Nepal (EC). The audit report prepared by the Office of the Auditor General and submitted to the President of Nepal where EC had spent millions of rupees from foreign donors without any audit details (EC spends millions, 2018). Election logistics gifted by Indian and China were not taken into account in its report submitted to the OAG even after holding 3 elections.

One of the living examples of the decade long organized crime nexus is the gold smuggling in a low-income post-conflict country Nepal.

It further explains that the EC had received 280.90 million from UNDP, Rs. 290.95 from USAID, and Technical Assistance from IDEA. But the EC did neither bother to submit financial details nor asked for the OAG’s or auditors’ assistance. In this case, the EC was also accused of ‘promoting nepotism in awarding contracts for voter education programs and producing logistic’. It is said that the EC had also provided 121 percent of salary as an additional allowance to election officers during the elections.

Apart from not keeping records of foreign aid and maintaining financial discipline, the EC had not settled Rs. 190.71 million arrear. One of the living examples of the decade long organized crime nexus is the gold smuggling in a low-income post-conflict country Nepal. On May 2018, the violent killing of a gold courier, Sanam Sakya dramatized the decade-old long gold smuggling via Nepal which is guessed to have amounted to 7 tons of gold till the date this case was busted.

As for the defense of the gold smuggling, there was a public outcry to justify the smuggling that advocated the disbalance between the demand and supply of the gold necessitated the smuggling of gold in Nepal. Such alibi and apathy of the government have given enough ground for the organized criminal nexus to run the business for decades in Nepal.

According to reports, 85 percent of gold is imported out of banking process as directed by the Government of Nepal. There is an association of gold and silver business houses that challenges that there has never been an investigation and indictment of any gold business persons, therefore, the government has no authority to declare such transactions illegal. It shows the gap in the investigation, mandated authority for investigation and clarity in substantive and procedural law regarding the gold transaction in Nepal.

The Nepalese government is abusing state funds by arbitrary channeling financial aid to handpicked dubious recipients without any regard for accountability.

As a result, despite a big hue and cry, the investigation of the 33 kg of gold and prosecution of offenders have come to nothing till date. Corruption, in general terms, can be understood as a transaction propagated by people having influence and vested interest. Generally, corruption is willful conduct or intent aimed at securing undeserving or illegitimate gains through illegal, unethical or immoral means which is characterized by deliberate abuse or misuse of one’s authority or position. According to the 2018 Corruption Perception Index reported by the Transparency International (TI), Nepal ranks in the 124th position out of 175 countries in their list of world’s corrupt countries.

The report says corruption rank in Nepal has averaged 127.40 from 2004 until 2018. Nepal has been gradually losing public trust in its financial system, its politicians and political parties. Politicians in power and their coteries are among the leading perpetrators of corrupt practices. Nepal needs to develop measures to prevent the politicization of students, teachers, educational institutions and the civil service as well. The Nepalese government is abusing state funds by arbitrary channeling financial aid to handpicked dubious recipients without any regard for accountability.

Such malpractice has inflicted avoidable suffering of the country and the people. As an accountable entity, the government leadership’s deliberate inaction or reluctance to eradicate this evil is equivalent to becoming a partner in crime and promoting and perpetuating corruption.

(To be continued)