घुसखोरी रोक्ने हो भने कर्मचारीलाई मात्र गाली गरेर पुग्दैन, सिस्टम बदल्नुपर्छ
नेपाली
नेपालका सरकारी कार्यालयमा घुस सधैँ “घुस” भनेर मागिँदैन।
कहिले त्यसलाई “खाजा खर्च” भनिन्छ। कहिले “सिस्टम” भनिन्छ। कहिले “माथि बुझाउनुपर्छ” भनिन्छ। कतै “खुसीयाली”, कतै “कमिसन”, कतै “हाकिमलाई पनि मिलाउनुपर्छ” भन्ने भाषा सुनिन्छ।
काम कानुनी रूपमा पूरा भइसकेको हुन्छ, तर फाइल अघि बढ्दैन। बिल तयार हुन्छ, तर भुक्तानी रोकिन्छ। कागजात ठीक हुन्छ, तर हस्ताक्षर हुँदैन। अनि बिस्तारै कुरा पैसामा पुग्छ।
“कति लाग्छ त?”
“यो त म एक्लैले लिएर हुँदैन।”
“अलि कम गरिदिनुस् न।”
“माथि पनि बुझाउनुपर्छ।”
यसरी राज्यले नागरिकलाई दिनुपर्ने सामान्य सेवा नै मोलमोलाइको बजारमा परिणत हुन्छ।
यस्ता घटना सुन्दा हामीलाई रिस उठ्छ र सजिलै निष्कर्ष निकाल्छौँ—कर्मचारी भ्रष्ट भए।
मलाई पनि कहिलेकाहीँ प्रश्न उठ्छ—लोकसेवाको कठिन परीक्षा पास गरेर आएका कर्मचारी किन केही समयपछि यही संस्कृतिको हिस्सा बनेका जस्ता देखिन्छन्? के उनीहरू सबै भ्रष्ट भएरै सरकारी सेवामा प्रवेश गरेका हुन्?
त्यस्तो निष्कर्ष उचित हुँदैन।
धेरै इमानदार कर्मचारी पनि सरकारी सेवामा छन्। समस्या व्यक्तिमा मात्रै खोजेर यसको जरा भेटिँदैन। अझ महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न यस्तो हो:
एउटा सामान्य मानिस सरकारी सेवाभित्र प्रवेश गरेपछि उसलाई कस्तो संरचना, अभ्यास र संस्कृतिले घेर्छ?
यदि नयाँ कर्मचारीले कार्यालयमा पुगेर “यहाँ यसरी नै चल्छ” भन्ने सिक्यो, पुरानाले पैसा उठाएको देख्यो, पैसा नलिने व्यक्ति मूर्ख ठहरियो, काम ढिलो गर्दा कुनै कारबाही भएन र घुसबाट लाभ हुने तर इमानदारीबाट खासै पुरस्कार नपाइने वातावरण बन्यो भने समस्या व्यक्तिको मात्रै रहँदैन।
त्यो सिस्टमको समस्या बन्छ।
Transparency International को 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index मा नेपालले 34/100 अंक पाएको छ। यो सूचकले सार्वजनिक क्षेत्रमा भ्रष्टाचारको धारणा मापन गर्छ; यसले सबै कर्मचारी भ्रष्ट छन् भन्ने अर्थ दिँदैन। तर सार्वजनिक संस्थामा भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रणको चुनौती अझै गम्भीर रहेको संकेत अवश्य गर्छ।
त्यसैले प्रश्न अब “भ्रष्ट कर्मचारीलाई कसरी समात्ने?” मात्रै हुनु हुँदैन।
घुस खान चाहने मानिसलाई पनि घुस खान गाह्रो हुने सिस्टम कसरी बनाउने?
१. नागरिक होइन, फाइल दौडिनुपर्छ
नेपालका धेरै सरकारी सेवामा समस्या त्यहीँ सुरु हुन्छ जहाँ नागरिकले आफ्नो फाइल बोकेर एउटा टेबलबाट अर्को टेबल धाउनुपर्छ।
“हाकिम भेट्नुस्।”
“लेखामा जानुस्।”
“अर्को शाखाबाट सही गराएर ल्याउनुस्।”
“भोलि आउनुस्।”
जति धेरै प्रत्यक्ष सम्पर्क, उति धेरै व्यक्तिगत विवेकाधिकार। जति धेरै विवेकाधिकार, उति नै मोलमोलाइको सम्भावना।
निवेदन, कागजात, शुल्क, स्वीकृति र प्रमाणपत्र सम्भव भएसम्म एउटै डिजिटल प्रणालीबाट चल्नुपर्छ।
नागरिकले कर्मचारीको टेबल पछ्याउने होइन।
सिस्टमले फाइल पछ्याउनुपर्छ।
फाइल कहाँ पुगेको छ, कसको जिम्मामा छ र कति समयदेखि रोकिएको छ भन्ने नागरिकले मोबाइलबाटै हेर्न सक्नुपर्छ।
नेपालमा यस्तो डिजिटल परिवर्तन सम्भव छैन भन्ने पनि होइन। विश्व बैंकले फेब्रुअरी 2026 मा नेपालको डिजिटल सार्वजनिक पूर्वाधार र सार्वजनिक सेवा डिजिटाइजेशनका लागि 50 मिलियन अमेरिकी डलरको परियोजना स्वीकृत गरेको छ। त्यसमा एकीकृत नागरिक सेवा पोर्टल, सुरक्षित सरकारी डेटा आदानप्रदान र भूमि प्रशासनलगायत उच्च प्रभावका सेवाको डिजिटाइजेशन समावेश छ।
अब डिजिटल सरकार नारामा होइन, नागरिकले महसुस गर्ने सेवामा देखिनुपर्छ।
२. “कति लाग्छ?” भन्ने प्रश्न नै समाप्त गरौँ
सरकारी सेवा लिन पुगेको नागरिकले कर्मचारीलाई “कति पैसा लाग्छ?” भनेर सोध्नुपर्ने अवस्था नै भ्रष्टाचारको एउटा ढोका हो।
हरेक सेवाको मूल्य स्पष्ट हुनुपर्छ।
उदाहरणका लागि:
यो विवरण कार्यालयको भित्तामा मात्रै टाँसेर पुग्दैन। वेबसाइट र मोबाइलमा पनि देखिनुपर्छ।
अनि कसैले त्यसबाहेक पैसा माग्यो भने नागरिकले तुरुन्त बुझ्न सकोस्—यो सरकारी शुल्क होइन।
३. सरकारी सेवाबाट नगद हटाऔँ
“खाजा खर्च” प्रायः रसिदविहीन हुन्छ।
त्यसैले सम्भव भएसम्म सरकारी कार्यालयमा कर्मचारीको हातमा नगद पुग्ने बाटो बन्द गर्नुपर्छ।
शुल्क बैंक, QR, डिजिटल वालेट वा सरकारी भुक्तानी प्रणालीबाट मात्र तिर्न मिलोस्। पैसा तिरेपछि तुरुन्त डिजिटल रसिद आओस्।
यसले भ्रष्टाचार पूर्ण रूपमा समाप्त गर्छ भन्ने होइन। तर नगद कारोबार घटेपछि एउटा ठूलो अँध्यारो क्षेत्र उज्यालो हुन्छ।
मुख्य सिद्धान्त सरल छ:
राज्यलाई तिर्नुपर्ने पैसा राज्यकै खातामा जाओस्, कर्मचारीको हातमा होइन।
४. फाइल कसले रोक्यो भन्ने देखिनुपर्छ
डिजिटल सिस्टमको सबैभन्दा ठूलो शक्ति कम्प्युटर होइन—ट्रेस हो।
एउटा फाइलको इतिहास यस्तो देखिन सकोस्:
- दर्ता — सोमबार १०:१५
- शाखा अधिकृतकहाँ — सोमबार ११:०५
- लेखा शाखामा — मंगलबार २:२०
- स्वीकृति — बुधबार १२:३०
यदि कुनै कर्मचारीले कारणबिना फाइल पाँच दिन रोक्यो भने त्यो पनि रेकर्डमा देखियोस्।
महिनाको अन्त्यमा सिस्टमले आफैँ प्रश्न उठाओस्:
- कसले सबैभन्दा धेरै फाइल रोक्यो?
- कुन कार्यालयमा औसत सेवा समय अस्वाभाविक छ?
- कुन प्रकारका भुक्तानी बारम्बार अड्किन्छन्?
- कुन कर्मचारीकहाँ पुगेपछि धेरै फाइलको गति अचानक सुस्त हुन्छ?
जब यस्तो डेटा उपलब्ध हुन्छ, भ्रष्टाचार नियन्त्रण उजुरी आएपछि मात्रै सुरु गर्नुपर्ने अवस्था कम हुन्छ।
५. “माथि बुझाउनुपर्छ” भन्ने वाक्यको पछाडि जाऔँ
घुस माग्ने क्रममा एउटा वाक्य बारम्बार सुनिन्छ:
“मलाई मात्रै होइन, माथि पनि बुझाउनुपर्छ।”
यो पैसा माग्ने बहाना मात्रै हो कि साँच्चिकै माथिसम्म बाँडफाँट हुने संरचना छ, अनुसन्धानले पत्ता लगाउनुपर्छ।
यदि बहाना हो भने कर्मचारीले आफ्नो व्यक्तिगत घुसलाई ठूलो नेटवर्कको नाम दिएर स्वाभाविक बनाउन खोजिरहेको छ।
तर यदि साँच्चिकै पैसा माथिसम्म बाँडिन्छ भने तल्लो कर्मचारीलाई रंगेहात समातेर मात्रै समस्या समाधान हुँदैन।
त्यस अवस्थामा अनुसन्धानको प्रश्न हुनुपर्छ:
पैसा कहाँबाट सुरु भयो? कहाँ-कहाँ पुग्यो? कसले संरक्षण गर्यो? कसले हिस्सा पायो?
भ्रष्टाचारको जरा माथिसम्म पुगेको छ भने अनुसन्धान पनि माथिसम्म पुग्नुपर्छ।
६. सरुवा गरेर समस्या नसारौँ
कुनै कर्मचारीमाथि समस्या देखियो भने एउटा कार्यालयबाट अर्को कार्यालयमा सार्नु सजिलो प्रशासनिक उपाय हो।
तर त्यसले समस्या समाधान नहुन सक्छ।
यदि कुनै कर्मचारीमाथि बारम्बार गम्भीर उजुरी पर्छ भने उसको विगतको कार्यसम्पादन, निर्णय, सेवा ढिलाइ, सम्पत्ति र व्यवहारको समग्र मूल्यांकन हुनुपर्छ।
“यहाँ समस्या भयो, अर्को ठाउँ पठाइदिऊँ” भन्ने अभ्यासले कहिलेकाहीँ भ्रष्टाचार हटाउँदैन।
भौगोलिक ठेगाना मात्रै बदल्छ।
७. सेवाग्राहीलाई वास्तविक शक्ति दिऔँ
सेवा पूरा भएपछि नागरिकको मोबाइलमा एउटा सरल सन्देश आउन सक्छ:
“यो सेवाको सरकारी शुल्क रु. ___ हो। यसबाहेक कुनै कर्मचारी वा बिचौलियाले पैसा माग्यो?”
“हो” थिचेपछि सुरक्षित रूपमा विवरण दिन सकिने व्यवस्था होस्।
तर उजुरी गरेपछि नागरिक नै समस्यामा पर्ने हो भने कसैले उजुरी गर्दैन।
त्यसैले उजुरीकर्ताको पहिचान सुरक्षा, प्रतिशोधबाट संरक्षण र उजुरीको अवस्था हेर्न सकिने व्यवस्था उत्तिकै आवश्यक छ।
८. राम्रो कर्मचारी पनि देखिनुपर्छ
हामी भ्रष्ट कर्मचारी समातिएको समाचार धेरै पढ्छौँ।
तर समयमै काम गरिदिने, सेवाग्राहीलाई सम्मान गर्ने, अतिरिक्त रकम नमाग्ने र दबाबमा पनि नियम नछोड्ने कर्मचारीको कथा कम सुनिन्छ।
यसले अर्को समस्या जन्माउँछ।
इमानदार कर्मचारीले सोच्न सक्छ:
“मैले राम्रो काम गरेर के पाएँ?”
त्यसैले कर्मचारीको मूल्यांकनमा केवल वरिष्ठको राय होइन, सेवा समय, नागरिक प्रतिक्रिया, उजुरी, निर्णयको गुणस्तर र पारदर्शिता पनि जोडिनुपर्छ।
इमानदार हुनु केवल नैतिक उपदेश होइन, करियरका लागि फाइदाजनक व्यवहार पनि बन्नुपर्छ।
९. तलब बढाउँदा मात्रै भ्रष्टाचार सकिँदैन
सरकारी कर्मचारीले सम्मानपूर्वक जीवन चलाउन सक्ने पारिश्रमिक पाउनुपर्छ।
तर हरेक घुसलाई “तलब कम छ” भनेर व्याख्या गर्न सकिँदैन।
दशौँ हजार, लाखौँ वा प्रतिशतका आधारमा कमिसन मागिने व्यवहार केवल दैनिक खर्चको समस्या होइन।
त्यसैले समाधान एउटै होइन:
उचित पारिश्रमिक + कम विवेकाधिकार + डिजिटल सेवा + पारदर्शिता + निगरानी + निश्चित कारबाही
यी सबै एकसाथ चाहिन्छ।
१०. लोकसेवा पास गर्नु अन्तिम परीक्षा होइन
लोकसेवाको परीक्षा पास गर्नु कठिन उपलब्धि हो। तर सरकारी सेवामा प्रवेश गर्नु नै सार्वजनिक सेवाको चरित्र निर्माणको अन्तिम बिन्दु हुनु हुँदैन।
नयाँ कर्मचारीले कार्यालयमा पुगेपछि पुरानो विकृति सिक्ने होइन, संस्थाले उसलाई नयाँ संस्कार दिनुपर्छ।
प्रशिक्षणमा कानून र प्रक्रिया मात्र होइन, वास्तविक परिस्थितिका प्रश्न राखिनुपर्छ:
- “सेवाग्राहीले उपहार दिन खोज्यो भने के गर्ने?”
- “हाकिमले प्रतिशत माग्यो भने के गर्ने?”
- “पुरानो कर्मचारीले ‘यहाँ यसरी नै चल्छ’ भन्यो भने?”
- “ठेकेदारले भविष्यमा सहयोग गर्ने प्रस्ताव गर्यो भने?”
तर प्रशिक्षण मात्रै पर्याप्त छैन।
कर्मचारीलाई बिहान सदाचारको प्रशिक्षण दिएर दिउँसो भ्रष्ट सिस्टममै पठायौँ भने अन्ततः प्रशिक्षणभन्दा वातावरण शक्तिशाली हुन सक्छ।
अन्तिम प्रश्न: मानिस बदल्ने कि सिस्टम?
हामीले वर्षौँदेखि भ्रष्टाचारविरुद्ध भाषण गर्यौँ।
पोस्टर बनायौँ।
नारा लगायौँ।
कर्मचारी समात्यौँ।
अर्को वर्ष फेरि उस्तै समाचार पढ्यौँ।
सायद अब फरक प्रश्न सोध्ने समय आएको छ।
के हामी सबै सरकारी कर्मचारी देवताजस्ता इमानदार होऊन् भनेर पर्खिरहेका छौँ?
राम्रो शासन त्यस्तो आशामा टिक्नु हुँदैन।
राम्रो सिस्टम भनेको मानिस कमजोर हुन सक्छ, लोभ आउन सक्छ र शक्ति दुरुपयोग हुन सक्छ भन्ने स्वीकार गरेर पनि गलत काम गर्न कठिन बनाउने व्यवस्था हो।
हामीलाई यस्तो सरकारी प्रणाली चाहिन्छ जहाँ—
- घुस माग्न गाह्रो होस्।
- फाइल लुकाउन गाह्रो होस्।
- काम अनावश्यक रोक्न गाह्रो होस्।
- पैसा कहाँ गयो भनेर लुकाउन गाह्रो होस्।
- उजुरी गर्न सजिलो होस्।
- र इमानदार भएर काम गर्न सजिलो होस्।
त्यसपछि मात्रै “सिस्टम” भन्ने शब्दको अर्थ बदलिन्छ।
आज कसैले “यो हाम्रो सिस्टम हो” भनेर अतिरिक्त पैसा माग्छ भने भोलिको नेपालमा नागरिकले भन्न सकोस्—
“हो, हाम्रो पनि सिस्टम छ। तर यो सिस्टम घुस खानका लागि होइन, घुस खान नदिनका लागि बनेको हो।”
If We Want to Stop Bribery, Scolding Civil Servants Isn’t Enough — We Must Change the System
In Nepal’s government offices, a bribe is rarely asked for as a “bribe.”
Sometimes it is called “snack money.” Sometimes it is called “the system.” Sometimes it is “we have to pass some up the line.” Elsewhere you hear words like “a little celebration,” “commission,” or “the boss has to be taken care of too.”
The work is legally complete, but the file does not move. The bill is ready, but the payment is held. The documents are in order, but the signature never comes. And slowly, the conversation arrives at money.
“So how much will it take?”
“I can’t take this all by myself, you know.”
“Can you make it a little less?”
“Some of it has to go upstairs too.”
In this way, an ordinary service the state owes its citizens turns into a bargaining market.
When we hear stories like these we get angry, and we reach an easy conclusion: the staff have become corrupt.
I sometimes wonder too — why do civil servants who passed the tough Public Service Commission (Lok Sewa) exam seem, after a while, to become part of this very culture? Did they all enter government service already corrupt?
That conclusion would not be fair.
Many honest people work in government service. Looking for the problem only in individuals will never reach its roots. The more important question is this:
Once an ordinary person enters government service, what structures, practices and culture surround them?
If a new employee arrives at the office and learns that “this is how things work here,” sees senior colleagues collecting money, sees that the person who refuses money is treated as a fool, sees that delaying work carries no consequence — and finds an environment where bribery pays but honesty earns little reward — then the problem is no longer only an individual one.
It becomes a problem of the system.
In Transparency International’s 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index, Nepal scored 34 out of 100. The index measures perceived corruption in the public sector; it does not mean every civil servant is corrupt. But it is certainly a sign that controlling corruption in public institutions remains a serious challenge.
So the question can no longer be only “How do we catch corrupt employees?”
How do we build a system in which even a person who wants to take a bribe finds it hard to do so?
1. The file should run — not the citizen
In many government services in Nepal, the problem starts right where a citizen has to carry their own file from one desk to the next.
“Go meet the officer.”
“Go to Accounts.”
“Get it signed by the other section and bring it back.”
“Come back tomorrow.”
The more face-to-face contact, the more personal discretion. The more discretion, the more room for bargaining.
Applications, documents, fees, approvals and certificates should, as far as possible, move through a single digital system.
The citizen should not chase the employee’s desk.
The system should chase the file.
A citizen should be able to see from their phone where their file is, who is responsible for it, and how long it has been stuck.
Nor is it true that such digital change is impossible in Nepal. In February 2026 the World Bank approved a US$50 million project for Nepal’s digital public infrastructure and the digitization of public services. It includes an integrated citizen-services portal, secure government data exchange, and digitizing high-impact services such as land administration.
Digital government now has to show up not in slogans, but in services citizens can actually feel.
2. Let’s end the question “How much will it cost?”
The very fact that a citizen who comes for a government service has to ask an employee “How much will this cost?” is itself a doorway to corruption.
The price of every service should be clear.
For example:
Posting this on the office wall is not enough. It should also be visible on the website and on mobile.
And if anyone asks for money beyond that, the citizen should instantly understand: this is not a government fee.
3. Let’s take cash out of government services
“Snack money” rarely comes with a receipt.
So wherever possible, the route by which cash reaches an employee’s hand in a government office should be closed.
Fees should be payable only through a bank, QR code, digital wallet or the government payment system — with a digital receipt issued immediately after payment.
This will not end corruption completely. But when cash transactions shrink, a large dark area gets lit up.
The core principle is simple:
Money owed to the state should go into the state’s account — not into an employee’s hand.
4. It should be visible who held up the file
The greatest power of a digital system is not the computer — it is the trace.
A file’s history could look like this:
- Registered — Monday 10:15
- With section officer — Monday 11:05
- At Accounts — Tuesday 2:20
- Approved — Wednesday 12:30
If an employee holds a file for five days without reason, that too should show up in the record.
At the end of each month, the system itself should raise questions:
- Who held up the most files?
- Which office has an abnormal average service time?
- Which kinds of payments get stuck again and again?
- At whose desk do many files suddenly slow down?
Once such data is available, anti-corruption work no longer has to wait for a complaint before it can begin.
5. Let’s look behind the phrase “it has to go upstairs”
One sentence is heard again and again when a bribe is being demanded:
“It’s not just for me — some has to go upstairs too.”
Investigators need to find out whether this is merely an excuse for asking for money, or whether there really is a structure that shares the money up the chain.
If it is an excuse, the employee is trying to normalize a personal bribe by dressing it up as a large network.
But if the money really is shared upward, then catching a junior employee red-handed will not solve the problem.
In that case, the investigation must ask:
Where did the money start? Where all did it go? Who protected it? Who got a share?
If the roots of corruption reach the top, the investigation must reach the top too.
6. Don’t just transfer the problem
When a problem is found with an employee, moving them from one office to another is an easy administrative fix.
But it may not solve the problem.
If an employee faces repeated serious complaints, there should be a full review of their past performance, decisions, service delays, assets and conduct.
The habit of “there was trouble here, let’s send them somewhere else” sometimes does not remove corruption.
It only changes its geographic address.
7. Let’s give service users real power
Once a service is completed, a simple message could arrive on the citizen’s phone:
“The government fee for this service is Rs. ___. Did any employee or middleman ask you for money beyond this?”
Pressing “Yes” should open a way to give details safely.
But if the citizen ends up in trouble for complaining, no one will complain.
That is why protecting the complainant’s identity, protection from retaliation, and a way to track the status of the complaint are just as necessary.
8. Good employees should be visible too
We read a lot of news about corrupt employees being caught.
But we rarely hear the stories of employees who get the work done on time, treat service users with respect, never ask for extra money, and hold to the rules even under pressure.
This creates another problem.
An honest employee may start to think:
“What did I gain by doing good work?”
So employee evaluations should include not only a supervisor’s opinion, but also service time, citizen feedback, complaints, the quality of decisions, and transparency.
Honesty should not be just a moral sermon — it should also become behavior that pays off in one’s career.
9. Raising salaries alone won’t end corruption
Civil servants should receive pay that lets them live with dignity.
But not every bribe can be explained away by “the salary is low.”
Demanding tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or a percentage as commission is not merely a problem of daily expenses.
So there is no single solution:
Fair pay + less discretion + digital services + transparency + monitoring + certain consequences
All of these are needed together.
10. Passing Lok Sewa is not the final exam
Passing the Public Service Commission exam is a hard-won achievement. But entering government service should not be the end point in forming a public servant’s character.
When a new employee arrives at the office, they should not learn the old distortions — the institution should give them a new culture.
Training should include not only law and procedure, but questions from real situations:
- “What do I do if a service user tries to give me a gift?”
- “What do I do if my boss asks for a percentage?”
- “What if a senior colleague says, ‘This is how things work here’?”
- “What if a contractor offers to ‘help me out’ in the future?”
But training alone is not enough.
If we give employees integrity training in the morning and send them back into a corrupt system in the afternoon, in the end the environment may prove more powerful than the training.
The final question: change people, or change the system?
For years we have given speeches against corruption.
We made posters.
We chanted slogans.
We caught employees.
And the next year, we read the same news again.
Perhaps it is time to ask a different question.
Are we waiting for every civil servant to become as honest as a god?
Good governance should not rest on that kind of hope.
A good system is one that accepts that people can be weak, can be tempted, and can misuse power — and still makes wrongdoing difficult.
We need a government system where —
- it is hard to ask for a bribe,
- it is hard to hide a file,
- it is hard to hold up work without reason,
- it is hard to hide where the money went,
- it is easy to file a complaint,
- and it is easy to work honestly.
Only then will the meaning of the word “system” change.
Today, if someone asks for extra money saying “this is our system,” then in tomorrow’s Nepal the citizen should be able to reply —
“Yes, we have a system too. But this system is built not for taking bribes — it is built to stop them.”
