A person who runs away from questions can never be a leader of the people. Because in democracy, every leader’s life must be transparent and must be accountable to the people. If a leader does not have these two things, maybe he can be a good leader, but he cannot be a democratic leader. Such leaders are authoritarian. World history has already proved this.
Failure of Old Political Leadership After Republic
After the republic system came, the country did not develop as much as promised. For this, K.P. Oli, Prachanda, Sher Bahadur Deuba, Madhav Kumar Nepal—meaning the old parties and their leaders—are mainly responsible. There is no debate on this.
And with the same working style of these parties, the country will not be built in the future either. There is also no doubt on this.
New Leaders Are Not Automatically the Solution
But while saying this, it does not mean that the so-called new leaders are perfect in every way or that they have come with some magical weapon to build the country. Leaders like Balen Shah, Harka Sampang, Rajendra Lingden, Kulman Ghising, Gagan Thapa, or Rabi Lamichhane, who are seen in the race of future prime minister—what vision do they actually have?
If they become prime minister tomorrow, on what basis can we believe that they will really build the country?
Why Public Debate Is Necessary Before Election
All these questions must be heard by every Nepali living in the country and abroad before the election. And the easiest and most suitable way to make everyone hear these things is public debate. Before the election, there must be an environment where all prime minister aspirants are brought to one place and people can directly question them.
Different Questions for Tested Leaders
In such public debates, people like K.P. Oli, Prachanda, and Madhav Kumar Nepal—who have already become prime minister many times—should not be kept in the same line with new candidates.
These tested former prime ministers should be asked: why did you not do these things during your leadership? Why could you not give the country a way out even after so many years? What is your answer to the questions raised against you?
Instead of again asking them “What is your vision?”, they should be asked why they failed to fulfill the visions they repeatedly promised to the people in the past.
Separate Debate Tracks for New and Old Leaders
Therefore, public debate before election is necessary, but not by putting everyone in the same basket. New aspirants and old tested leaders should be kept in separate tracks.
Debate Reveals Real Capacity of Leaders
Public debate is needed to clearly understand the capacity, expertise, and vision of each leader. Anyone can sit inside a room and write Facebook status, sit in party office and issue press statement, or call press conference and speak one-sided things.
But public debate is different. In debate, citizens ask questions. If people are not satisfied with the answer, another question comes immediately.
While pointing out each other’s weaknesses, everyone’s actions get exposed. People do not just read records, but see live—what kind of leader someone is, how intellectual they are, and how strong their vision is.
Debates Can Change Election Results
World history shows many examples where leaders who were expected to win lost after debates, and leaders who were expected to lose won. Aware citizens also mostly decide which party to give their proportional vote after watching such debates.
That is why public debates before election are necessary in democratic countries. And in a country like ours, where information and technology are still developing, this is unavoidable.
Who Should Ask Questions in Public Debate
There are many models of debate. But for Nepal today, the needed model is this: leaders are kept in one place, there is one host to run the program, but questioners are divided into groups.
One group of aware women, one group of aware youths, one group of aware children, one group from minority communities, and one group of political analysts and intellectuals. This model of asking questions turn by turn from different groups is the need of Nepal today.
Leaders Who Avoid Debate Are Not Democratic
If any leader tries to run away from such public debates, that person cannot be a leader of the people. Even if that leader has some good qualities, he cannot be democratic. Such leaders are authoritarian.
A leader is a leader of the people. And a real leader never runs away from questions. A leader always stands with the people.
Khoj Samachar’s Commitment
Therefore, we request all political parties and all candidates claiming to be future prime minister not to try to escape from this opportunity. For this debate, we—Khoj Samachar—as a responsible media, are ready to support as much as we can. If needed, we are even ready to conduct such public debates ourselves.
