Nepal's King Gyanendra claimed to have the good of the nation at heart when he scrapped democracy because he contended politicians were too corrupt and inept to be capable of ending a communist insurgency. More than a year later, his motives are clear - that it was his greed for power and not the country's welfare, that was behind the decision.
If the king had truly meant what he said, Nepal would not be moving deeper into the crisis it has been plunged into. That more than 13,000 people have been killed during the decade-long conflict that is scaring off investors and worsening poverty and disease is tragic enough; that Nepalis are now dying because of their desire for the democracy that was snatched from them is inexcusable.
Proof of the king's real concern for his people was apparent yesterday: he was on holiday in the western resort town of Pokhara, where a curfew had been imposed to prevent pro-democracy demonstrations.
The insurgency remains as strong, despite the king being backed by the military and police. He has used that force to suppress opposition to his rule, sacking the government and arresting thousands of politicians, unionists, human rights workers and ordinary citizens. International calls for democracy to be restored have been ignored.
Even on the 16th anniversary at the weekend of the creation of a constitutional monarchy, the king was adamant that popular opinion should be suppressed; a general strike and anti-monarchy protests to mark the occasion were met with the extension of curfews and shoot-to-kill orders for police. Those instructions have been carried out to the letter in some parts, with a number of people being shot dead.
Efforts to appease critics have been unconvincing. Municipal elections held in February, billed as the first stage of the restoration of democracy, were so heavily weighted in favour of pro-monarchy candidates that they were worthless in the eyes of electoral observers. The point was not lost on voters, either - few bothered to cast ballots.