Nepalgunj has one major road. Sukhet Road stretches from the base of the hills in the north across the border with India to the south. Along this road there are three traffic circles and in the middle of each traffic circle there is a pedestal with a statue on top. The northernmost statue is of a leader from the Nepali Congress Party, the southernmost statue is of a Maoist leader and the middle statue is King Birendra (reigned from 1972 until 2001.) Despite the pronounced political differences between the men being memorialized, the statues are strikingly similar. All three are wearing the same clothes, making the same gesture (either a wave or a salute) and all have more or less the same face. While this similarity certainly leaves an Orwellian metaphor to be drawn regarding political leaders and parties, I will leave the dots unconnected for now.

My reason for introducing these statues is that there are no longer three. One morning I awoke to found the king knocked from his dais and smashed on the ground. Now we have uncovered the symbol I want; the King, the incarnation of Vishnu, lying in pieces on the street. This statue, the King, was knocked down by…let us call them ‘the people’… Now it is up to the authorities to decide whether the statue should be left on the ground, quietly removed and hidden from the public eye, or restored to its position lording over Sukhet Road.

If you are familiar with Nepali politics you will recognize this situation with the statue as a reflection of the quandary faced by Nepali politicians regarding the actual King of Nepal. Last year King Gyanendra was forced to remove himself from Nepali politics by the ‘People’s Movement’ but today it is still unclear what will be done with the monarchy as Nepal starts the process of creating a new constitution and system of government.

Many supporters of the King argue that he should maintain an active political role within a constitutional monarchy; others argue that he should be kept out of politics but maintained as a figurehead. Much of the population would just like to see him disappear quietly from the public eye while some would even like to see him put on trial for human rights violations committed by his police and military. While it is clear that a majority of the population would like to see the King somehow become a private citizen, it is still unclear whether those with influence will concede to this majority. During the writing of the interim constitution a majority of the drafters advocated for keeping the King in some sort of reduced public role.

Some parallels might be drawn between the current affair and the situation following the first People’s Movement in 1990. In 1990 King Birendra was forced to give up ruling absolutely and accept the primacy of parliament within the structure of a constitutional monarchy. Despite this, within a few years loopholes in the constitution and political instability allowed the King to reclaim his position of uncontested power. The 2006 movement more explicitly called for the complete removal of King Gyanendra from politics, leaving it less likely that a similar process will play out but the current ambiguity and the events of the 1990s suggest to me we have not seen the last of the King.

Within 48 hours the pieces of King Birendra had been collected from the streets of Nepalgunj and removed from the public view. Below the empty pedestal, traffic took no notice of the change and life went on as normal, even without the King’s watchful eye.