The country had made a promising start towards moving from monarchy to democracy. But Nepal, despite the popular overthrow of the centuries-old institution, is yet to give shape to the democratic alternative since the parties concerned are failing time and again to arrive at a consensus to author a constitution of the land.
Two constituent assemblies have been formed in the country since May 2008 but yet the question of forming the law of the land has not been solved.
Political differences, personality clashes and groupism have held the country's democratic dreams to hostage and the deadline of forming the constitution by January 22, 2015 has elapsed.
Sharp differences led to vandalism in the House and strikes on the roads
The differences are so sharp that the potential fathers of the new constitution even resorted to vandalism inside the house and called strikes outside to jeopardise the entire exercise.
The tussle between the Nepali Congress and the Marxists on the one side and the Maoists and the Madhesis on the others have put the Himalayan country's political future under a big question mark.
And the political uncertainty is certainly going to leave an adverse impact on the economy of the land-locked country sandwiched between India and China.
No consensus on 4 issues:
The main differences over the formation of a new constitution have been over the nature of the federal division of the country (while the ruling Nepali Congress and Marxists are against dividing the federal structure on the basis of national identity, the Maoists and Madhesis seek exactly the opposite), the nature of the governance (presidential or prime ministerial), the nature of the election (direct or indirect) and the nature of the judiciary (single or separate).
Nepal threw away its monrachy but is struggling to find an alternative system
The constituent assembly dominated by the Nepali Congress and the Marxists have a majority in the constituent assembly and can approve the new constitution by their majority but the opposition has issued a serious threat of disrupting the country if the constitution receive approval of the majority.
Representatives of democracy must know the basic rule: To accept everybody
It is indeed unfortunate that the nation, which was rejoicing the fall of an undemocratic regime a few years ago, is now struggling to come up with an alternative arrangement. If the common Nepalese are in favour of giving democracy a chance, their representatives must learn its preliminary rule, which is to acknowledge everybody and everything.
But the story of post-monarchy Nepal tells something different and this story will only strengthen pro-monarchy voices.
Does Nepal have in it to give its much talked-about political and social project a real shape?