I was doing an analysis of events of 1951 when Rana regime was abolished and ‘democracy’ was established. But, it seem to be totally opposite. The Rana seem to be more liberal than the kings. There was a constitution written three years before Rana were thrown out of power. The constitution at least tells that people had fundamental rights. But, after ‘democracy’ was brought in and Rana were kicked out of power, all the fundamental rights were transferred to the King in the second constitution that was promulgated 15-years later.
Video reports about the 2007 BS event and how India used it to its benefit:
The first constitution of Nepal, released in 1948 (2004 BS) had given all the fundamental rights to the citizen of Nepal. Although other following clauses restrict such rights, it had at-least mentioned the supremacy of the citizen. But, the constitution release by the king, in 1962 (2019 BS) transferred all these rights to the King.