Governments succeed not only by making good policies, but by making sure those policies actually reach the people. In Nepal, this gap between intention and delivery has been one of our biggest governance challenges. For decades, citizens have watched plans get announced, budgets get allocated, committees get formed… and then nothing meaningful happens on the ground.

This thought of mine proposes a bold but practical solution: a Public Service Accountability Commission (PSAC); an independent, citizen-elected, transparent watchdog designed to ensure that public servants do their job, deliver services efficiently, and remain accountable to the people they serve.

What Is the Public Service Accountability Commission?

The Public Service Accountability Commission (PSAC) would be a constitutional body whose sole responsibility is to:

• Ensure government offices and public servants actually deliver what they are mandated to do.
• Take direct action against public officials who neglect their responsibilities.
• Conduct continuous monitoring, field audits, and service evaluations.
• Publish transparent, easy-to-understand public reports.
• Recommend systemic reforms for improving governance and efficiency.
• Serve as the permanent watchdog of the administrative system — independent from political influence.

In essence, PSAC becomes the “accountability engine” of the state — where citizens can expect timely action, clear reporting, and visible improvements.

What Powers Should This Commission Have?

To be effective, the PSAC must hold real authority, not just paper power. Its core powers would include:

1. Power to Investigate

The Commission can initiate inquiries into:

• Complaints from citizens
• Service delays
• Corruption indicators
• Poor performance of government offices
• Misuse of authority
• Deliberate inaction by officials

2. Power to Take Immediate Action

Instead of passing files through ten ministries, PSAC should be able to:

• Issue warnings
• Demand explanations
• Order corrective actions
• Suspend public servants for serious negligence
• Recommend prosecution where needed

3. Power to Publish Findings

Transparency is essential. PSAC publishes:

• Monthly performance audits
• Office efficiency scores
• Complaint resolution reports
• Systemic reform recommendations
• Visual dashboards citizens can easily understand

4. Authority to Recommend Structural Reforms

Based on global best practices, PSAC can push reforms in:

• Digital service delivery
• Anti-corruption mechanisms
• Public administration restructuring
• Performance-based promotion of civil servants
• Simplification of bureaucratic procedures

5. Direct Accountability to Citizens

Unlike most constitutional bodies in Nepal, PSAC members would be elected directly by citizens; not appointed by politicians. This ensures:

• Independence
• Public trust
• Reduced political interference

Why Nepal Specifically Needs This Commission

Nepal’s administrative ecosystem faces systemic issues that cannot be solved by “requests” or “directives” from the executive. Below are realities we must acknowledge:

1. No Executive Has Ever Successfully Taken Action Against Public Servants

Despite having prime ministers, chief ministers, and ministers who publicly talk about “good governance,” no executive in Nepal has been able to effectively hold public servants accountable.

The reasons are structural:

• Public Service Commission protects recruitment — but not performance.
• Ministries lack disciplinary mechanisms.
• Transfers and warnings have become tools of politics, not governance.
• Bureaucracy is more powerful than elected officials in day-to-day administration.

This leads to a situation where:

• Services are delayed
• Citizens are frustrated
• Corruption becomes normalized
• Negligence has no consequences
• Public servants become unresponsive

A PSAC solves this by creating a specialized, independent body dedicated only to evaluation and accountability.

2. Nepal’s Constitution Is Not Clear on a “Directly Elected Executive”

Many argue Nepal needs a directly elected Prime Minister or President. But given the political landscape, instability, and coalition culture, such a change is:

• Constitutionally difficult
• Politically unrealistic
• Socially unprepared
• Legally complicated

Instead of waiting decades for constitutional amendments that may never happen, Nepal can work within the existing parliamentary system by introducing a powerful accountability body through legislative agreement.

A strong watchdog can be established without rewriting the whole governance structure.

3. Current Constitutional Bodies Are Politically Appointed

Today:

• All heads of constitutional bodies are appointed by political leaders.
• This creates political bias, lack of independence, and low public trust.

To break this cycle, PSAC must be:

• Directly elected by citizens,
• Independent from the ruling party or opposition,
• Transparent,
• And backed by legal authority to act, not just advise.

If political actors oppose it, it clearly signals:

• They fear accountability
• They prefer opaque systems
• They want to avoid scrutiny
• They do not want genuine reforms

In such a case, the very opposition becomes proof that PSAC is necessary.

4. Reports Should Be Visual, Simple, and Citizen-Friendly

One major flaw in Nepal is that reports are:

• Complicated
• Full of jargon
• Not public
• Not media-friendly
• Not actionable

PSAC must break this cycle by:

• Publishing simple performance dashboards
• Broadcasting findings online
• Offering district-wise scorecards
• Translating reports into plain Nepali
• Making videos summarizing findings
• Helping citizens understand where the system is failing

By doing this, PSAC turns governance into a public conversation, not a secret file system.

Pros and Cons of the Public Service Accountability Commission

✔️ Pros

• Faster administrative action
• Reduced corruption
• Increased citizen trust
• Improved service delivery
• Real-time monitoring
• Performance-based culture in government
• Transparency by default
• Public participation in oversight
• Independence from political manipulation

❗ Possible Cons / Risks

• Resistance from bureaucracy
• Pushback from political parties
• Attempts to limit its powers
• Risk of becoming too powerful if not balanced
• Needs strong legal safeguards against misuse
• Requires stable funding and skilled professionals

These risks can be controlled through:

• Strong legal frameworks
• Clear mandates
• Transparent processes
• Independent audits of PSAC itself

What the World’s Good Governance Models Teach Us

Globally, the best governance systems rely on:

• Ombudsman institutions (Scandinavian countries)
• Performance audit offices (UK’s National Audit Office)
• Anti-corruption commissions (Hong Kong ICAC)
• Public service scorecards (Singapore, Estonia)
• Digital transparency dashboards (New Zealand, South Korea)

Nepal can borrow these global principles:

• Continuous auditing
• Citizen complaint portals
• Timely action guarantees
• Public dashboards
• Whistleblower protection
• Annual “State of Public Services” report
• Quality ratings for each government office

With PSAC, Nepal can integrate these best practices into a single, powerful institution.

Conclusion: A Practical Path Toward Better Governance

Nepal does not lack plans, resources, or capable people. What we lack is accountability.

A Public Service Accountability Commission is not a luxury — it is a necessity.
It is the missing link between promise and performance.

By establishing a citizen-elected, transparent, and empowered watchdog body, Nepal can finally:

• Ensure public servants work for the public
• Build trust in government
• Deliver services efficiently
• Reduce corruption
• Move toward a modern, responsible, responsive state

If we truly want development, accountability is non-negotiable.
And if anyone resists this idea, it raises a simple question:

What exactly are they afraid of?