Public Authorities Sans Civic Sense

Last week, during our visit to a service operator to pay the landline bills of our residence, we had to face an unexpected aggression by the staff there for no reason at all. Shocked by the behaviour, we were wondering what our mistake was. This left us utterly unsure about whom to report this to and whether reporting such behaviour would change anything.

There is a peculiar silence in Nepal, one that does not come from peace, but from quiet acceptance. We have learned to tolerate what should outrage us. We have normalised a culture where public authority behaves as if accountability is optional, and civic behaviour is someone else’s responsibility. The irony hits hard: in Nepal, the very institutions meant to enforce civic sense often stand as its most visible violators.

"Come tomorrow”

Walk into any public office.  You may see citizens waiting endlessly while officials move files without urgency, delay decisions without explanation and casually dismiss people with a familiar phrase: “come tomorrow”. There is no apology, no accountability, only an unspoken assumption that the public must adjust. Be around a busy intersection in Kathmandu. Watch the traffic. Rules are enforced, but not uniformly. A person riding a bike without a helmet might be stopped or may not. A car violating lanes might pass freely while someone else is fined. The message is clear: rules are flexible, depending on who you may be or who you may know.

We often blame politicians and their system production for lacking discipline. But what happens when those entrusted with authority display immature civic behaviour towards the people they govern? When power becomes a shield against basic decency, the system begins to rot from within. And here is the uncomfortable truth: no one is seriously overseeing this decay.

Oversight and disciplinary systems exist. But where is their presence when rules are openly ignored? Where is the urgency when public institutions fail to meet even minimum standards? The absence of civic sense among public authorities is not just ignored; it is accommodated. This is where our generation must draw a line. We cannot inherit a broken culture and pretend it is tradition. We cannot accept negligence as a normal practice of governance. And also, we certainly cannot just ‘wait’ for change to come from the very sources that benefit from staying unchanged. We are not yet conditioned to accept dysfunction as inevitable. This would be just another inheritance of tomfoolery and disrespect. 

What shall we actually do with it?  The answer lies not in outrage alone. First and foremost, would be to speak. Not cautiously, not selectively, but consistently. Call out negligence as you see it. Question delays, demand explanations, and document what is wrong. Use every platform available, not to vent, but to expose patterns that are too often hidden in plain sight. Individual frustration fades, but collective pressure builds. 

Change in such culture does not emerge overnight, nor does it come deeply from confrontation, but in structured, consistent action. It grows through small, deliberate steps that gradually reshape expectations on both sides, citizens and national institutions. We must engage with awareness and clarity, especially when faced with negligence or inappropriate behaviour. Ask questions, request explanations and seek even written clarification whenever it is possible. This not only asserts your rights but also creates a sense of accountability. Systems often respond not to anger, but to persistence and documentation.

Making better use of existing mechanisms such as the complaint desks, online grievance portals, municipal offices and regulatory bodies may not always function perfectly, but they surely improve when they are consistently used, a reinforcement learning process which we do not even realise. Filing complaints, following up, and encouraging others to do the same transforms isolated incidents into patterns that cannot be ignored. These followed and backed by collective effort matter a lot. Conversations within communities, neighbourhoods, and peer groups can evolve towards organised civic awareness. Whether it be through local groups, youth initiatives or civic awareness through various ranges of perspectives and informal networks, collective voices significantly carry more weight than individual frustration. When people begin to expect better and express that expectation together, institutions are more likely to respond.

Self-discipline also remains fundamental. Practices such as respecting rules, timing and practicing accountability in our own actions fortify the moral ground from which we demand change. Civic responsibility is not a one-sided expectation; it is a mutual standard that must be demonstrated as much as it is demanded. It is indeed acceptable that cultural change is gradual. Resistance, setbacks, and moments of discouragement will exist for sure, but the consistency in behaviour, expectation, and engagement creates long-term pressure that leads to a certain level of impact. The goal is not immediate perfection, but steady improvement.

Development process 

The success of Nepal’s development process cannot be gauged by the presence of infrastructure or policies only. It is the day-to-day interaction between the individual citizenry and the state machinery that will truly determine success. A nation that respects its citizens and a civil society that cultivates civic virtues have to develop in tandem. It is not enough to point out the faults; it is essential to contribute positively to the process of improvement. This is because real change does not begin with sound; it begins with action.

Civic sense is not just about holding others accountable; it is also about setting a standard within us. Discharging various duties, such as respecting public spaces, valuing time, following rules, not out of fear, but out of principle, and upholding the moral values of society. Because the change we demand loses credibility if we are unwilling to practice it ourselves. This is not only about revolting for the sake of noise. It is about responsibility in the face of indifference.

]Nepal does not lack laws, policies, or institutions. It lacks a mindset culture in general, where those in power feel obligated to serve with integrity. That culture will not be handed to us, we will have to build it, challenge by challenge, voice by voice and if we stay silent now, we are not just witnesses to this failure, we become part of it. The question is no longer whether the system will change; the question is whether we are willing to force it to. Because change doesn’t begin when the powerful decide to act; it begins when the rest refuse to tolerate inaction. So, we all should be that voice. Not tomorrow. Now.

(Aditya Tiwari is a Kathmandu-based writer and Yuwaditya N. Tiwari is a media professional.)