http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=133764
Kantipur Report KATHMANDU, Jan 9 2008 - Politicians and legal experts here Tuesday said the decision of the government and the major political parties to restructure the nation as a federal state could be the beginning of Nepal's disintegration.
Legal expert himarjunAcharya, speaking at an interaction organized by the National People's Front (NPF) in the capital, claimed that by embracing federalism the country would be heading in a completely opposite and wrong direction.
"There are three clear reasons for adopting federalism: to create a strong nation by unifying scattered states; to unite states that are on the verge of separation; and to liberate states from a colonial power," Acharya said.
Hence, he added, there is no relevance and logic for adopting a federal system in Nepal's case. "We are trying to bring about the disintegrate of a nation that is already united and organized," he said. "This can be the most dangerous thing for national integrity." According to him, Nepal could have been structured as a federal nation before its unification by King Prithvi Narayan Shah. "There is no country in the world that could avoid disintegration after transforming itself from a unitary to a federal structure," he claimed.
Criticizing the idea of the right to self-determination being raised from certain quarters, Acharya stated that after being conferred this right any state could opt to secede and then might go on to join another country. He was of the opinion that opting for a federal model on the basis of ethnicity would be the biggest political blunder.
Acharya also claimed that though the slogan of the April Movement was for inclusive democracy, later the leaders translated the term "inclusive democracy" into "federal democracy" as per their own convenience.
Dila Ram Acharya of NPF presented a paper prepared by Mohan Bikram Singh, General Secretary of CPN-Masal.
"Lately, apart from a federal system, voices are being raised for right to self-determination and right to secede. This will clear the way for disintegration," Singh's paper said.
He accused the seven political parties of adopting a federal system largely due to Indian pressure rather than on the basis of their own conscience.
‘UN representatives transgressing mandate’
Acharya also said that many statements made by United Nations representatives in Nepal are contrary to the UN's norms and standards. "Some UN officials are frequently found to be saying that the madhesi and other communities should be given the right to self-determination," he said, adding, "Such statements by UN representatives are against UN norms."
Posted on: 2008-01-08 21:17:24 (Server Time)
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Nepal royalists rally for monarchy
AFP Posted online: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 at 0000 hrs
KATHMANDU, january 8 : Two thousand pro-royal demonstrators massed in Nepal’s capital in the first major protest against a decision by Parliament to abolish monarchy and create a republic.
“Long live the constitutional monarchy,” shouted the protesters as they marched through the centre of the ancient capital, led by the pro-royalist Rastriya Prajantantra Party (Nepal).
The protest marked the first major demonstration against Parliament’s decision last month to end the 293-year-old monarchy and declare the country a republic — one of the key demands of former Maoist rebels.
“For a long time we remained silent and were spectators to political developments, but now we’re forced to take to the streets to save the nation,” party leader Kamal Thapa told the crowd.
The Maoists quit the Government in September in a row over the future of the monarchy and other issues, but returned late last month after lawmakers agreed to abolish the institution.
The ultra-Leftists, who waged a bloody decade-long revolt to topple the monarchy, formally ended their insurgency in late 2006 when they concluded a landmark peace deal with Nepal’s mainstream parties.
King Gyanendra has already been stripped of most of his powers. He was forced to end 14 months of direct rule in April 2006, following mass street protests staged by mainstream parties and the Maoists.
KATHMANDU, january 8 : Two thousand pro-royal demonstrators massed in Nepal’s capital in the first major protest against a decision by Parliament to abolish monarchy and create a republic.
“Long live the constitutional monarchy,” shouted the protesters as they marched through the centre of the ancient capital, led by the pro-royalist Rastriya Prajantantra Party (Nepal).
The protest marked the first major demonstration against Parliament’s decision last month to end the 293-year-old monarchy and declare the country a republic — one of the key demands of former Maoist rebels.
“For a long time we remained silent and were spectators to political developments, but now we’re forced to take to the streets to save the nation,” party leader Kamal Thapa told the crowd.
The Maoists quit the Government in September in a row over the future of the monarchy and other issues, but returned late last month after lawmakers agreed to abolish the institution.
The ultra-Leftists, who waged a bloody decade-long revolt to topple the monarchy, formally ended their insurgency in late 2006 when they concluded a landmark peace deal with Nepal’s mainstream parties.
King Gyanendra has already been stripped of most of his powers. He was forced to end 14 months of direct rule in April 2006, following mass street protests staged by mainstream parties and the Maoists.
Supporters rally for Nepal's king
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7175119.stm
Hundreds of supporters of King Gyanendra of Nepal have staged a protest in Kathmandu against plans to abolish the monarchy.
Correspondents say it was the first public show of support for the king since he was forced to give up his absolute powers in 2006.
Nepal is due to be declared a republic after elections scheduled for April.
Gyanendra's dynasty dates back to 1769, but he lost popular support when he sacked the government in 2005.
"Save the nation! We love our king!" shouted about 1,500 protesters as they paraded through the centre of Kathmandu, blocking traffic for hours.
Police kept a close watch over the demonstrators but there were no reports of violence.
The protesters congregated outside the prime minister's office where they waved flags of the monarchist National Democratic Party of Nepal (NDPN), which organised the rally.
They were angry over the decision last month by seven of the country's main political parties to turn Nepal from a monarchy into a republic after the April elections.
The vote in parliament was part of a peace deal with former Maoist rebels who left the government in September, vowing not to return unless the monarchy was scrapped.
They rejoined the coalition government last week.
Overwhelming majority
"We were quiet and patient for a long time, but we have been compelled to come out in the open to save our nation," demonstrator Kamal Thapa of the NDPN told the AP news agency.
"How can these so-called main political parties decide for the entire nation to remove a 240-year-old monarchy from the country?" he asked.
A spokesman for Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's Nepali Congress party said the protesters had the right to demonstrate, but that it would not save the monarchy.
"In a democracy every individual or organisation has the right to express their views in a peaceful matter... But the decision we reached in removing the monarchy is what the people want. If they (the monarchists) don't like it, they can challenge it by taking part in the election," he said.
The decision last month to make Nepal a "federal democratic republican state" was taken by an overwhelming majority - 270 MPs out of 371 voted to abolish the monarchy, with only three against.
The king has now been stripped him of his powers, his command over the army, his immunity from prosecution - and is soon likely to lose his title.
Hundreds of supporters of King Gyanendra of Nepal have staged a protest in Kathmandu against plans to abolish the monarchy.
Correspondents say it was the first public show of support for the king since he was forced to give up his absolute powers in 2006.
Nepal is due to be declared a republic after elections scheduled for April.
Gyanendra's dynasty dates back to 1769, but he lost popular support when he sacked the government in 2005.
"Save the nation! We love our king!" shouted about 1,500 protesters as they paraded through the centre of Kathmandu, blocking traffic for hours.
Police kept a close watch over the demonstrators but there were no reports of violence.
The protesters congregated outside the prime minister's office where they waved flags of the monarchist National Democratic Party of Nepal (NDPN), which organised the rally.
They were angry over the decision last month by seven of the country's main political parties to turn Nepal from a monarchy into a republic after the April elections.
The vote in parliament was part of a peace deal with former Maoist rebels who left the government in September, vowing not to return unless the monarchy was scrapped.
They rejoined the coalition government last week.
Overwhelming majority
"We were quiet and patient for a long time, but we have been compelled to come out in the open to save our nation," demonstrator Kamal Thapa of the NDPN told the AP news agency.
"How can these so-called main political parties decide for the entire nation to remove a 240-year-old monarchy from the country?" he asked.
A spokesman for Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's Nepali Congress party said the protesters had the right to demonstrate, but that it would not save the monarchy.
"In a democracy every individual or organisation has the right to express their views in a peaceful matter... But the decision we reached in removing the monarchy is what the people want. If they (the monarchists) don't like it, they can challenge it by taking part in the election," he said.
The decision last month to make Nepal a "federal democratic republican state" was taken by an overwhelming majority - 270 MPs out of 371 voted to abolish the monarchy, with only three against.
The king has now been stripped him of his powers, his command over the army, his immunity from prosecution - and is soon likely to lose his title.
Hundreds protest at abolition of Nepal monarchy
http://uk.reuters.com/article/homepageCrisis/idUKDEL88157._CH_.242020080107
KATHMANDU, Jan 7 (Reuters) - About 1,500 supporters of Nepal's humbled King Gyanendra protested on Monday against a decision by parliament to abolish the monarchy to push forward a peace deal with Maoist former rebels.
The Himalayan nation's provisional parliament last month approved a motion to end the nearly 240-year-old monarchy and turn the country into a republic after constituent assembly elections expected to be held in April.
Supporters of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal, a pro-king group, carried placards and chanted "down with the republic" and "long live constitutional monarchy", as they took part in a rally in the capital, Kathmandu.
Nepal's once-revered monarchy saw its popularity slump after King Gyanendra took over absolute powers in 2005, only to hand power back to a new government a year later following street protests.
The government has since stripped the king of all powers.
The humbling of the king saw the government and Maoists, who began fighting the monarchy in 1996, sign a peace pact in 2006 and agree to hold elections for the assembly that will prepare a constitution.
Originally the elected assembly was supposed to decide whether to retain the monarchy or turn Nepal into a republic. But last month's parliamentary vote decided to abolish the monarchy -- a step the panel will be obliged to formalise.
The decision was part of a deal to resolve a political deadlock with the Maoists, who had been demanding immediate abolition of the monarchy.
But the royalists reject the move.
The parliament's decision to abolish the monarchy has "snatched the right of the people to decide whether to change to a republic or retain the monarchy", Kamal Thapa, a former member of King Gyanendra's royalist cabinet, told a protest meeting. (Reporting by Gopal Sharma; Editing by Krittivas Mukherjee and Alex Richardson)
KATHMANDU, Jan 7 (Reuters) - About 1,500 supporters of Nepal's humbled King Gyanendra protested on Monday against a decision by parliament to abolish the monarchy to push forward a peace deal with Maoist former rebels.
The Himalayan nation's provisional parliament last month approved a motion to end the nearly 240-year-old monarchy and turn the country into a republic after constituent assembly elections expected to be held in April.
Supporters of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal, a pro-king group, carried placards and chanted "down with the republic" and "long live constitutional monarchy", as they took part in a rally in the capital, Kathmandu.
Nepal's once-revered monarchy saw its popularity slump after King Gyanendra took over absolute powers in 2005, only to hand power back to a new government a year later following street protests.
The government has since stripped the king of all powers.
The humbling of the king saw the government and Maoists, who began fighting the monarchy in 1996, sign a peace pact in 2006 and agree to hold elections for the assembly that will prepare a constitution.
Originally the elected assembly was supposed to decide whether to retain the monarchy or turn Nepal into a republic. But last month's parliamentary vote decided to abolish the monarchy -- a step the panel will be obliged to formalise.
The decision was part of a deal to resolve a political deadlock with the Maoists, who had been demanding immediate abolition of the monarchy.
But the royalists reject the move.
The parliament's decision to abolish the monarchy has "snatched the right of the people to decide whether to change to a republic or retain the monarchy", Kamal Thapa, a former member of King Gyanendra's royalist cabinet, told a protest meeting. (Reporting by Gopal Sharma; Editing by Krittivas Mukherjee and Alex Richardson)
Supporters of Nepal's king protest moves to abolish the monarchy
Published: January 7, 2008
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/07/news/Nepal-Monarchy.php
Hundreds of supporters of King Gyanendra waved flags and chanted slogans in Nepal's capital Monday to protest plans to abolish the Himalayan nation's centuries-old monarchy.
It was the first such public demonstration in support of the largely unpopular king since 2006 when he was forced to give up his authoritarian rule and restore democracy, and was stripped of his powers.
"Save the nation! We love our king!" chanted about 1,500 protesters who marched through central Katmandu, blocking traffic for hours. They gathered outside the prime minister's office and waved the green, yellow and white flag of the monarchist National Democratic Party (Nepal), which organized the rally.
They were protesting the decision last month by Nepal's seven main political parties — including communist former guerrillas — to turn the kingdom into a republic after elections expected no later than mid-April.
"We were quiet and patient for a long time, but we have been compelled to come out in the open to save our nation. How can these so-called main political parties decide for the entire nation to remove a 240-year-old monarchy from the country?" said Kamal Thapa of the National Democratic Party (Nepal).
Hundreds of riot police kept a close watch on the protesters but there was no violence.
Gyanendra, previously a constitutional monarch with mostly ceremonial powers, seized control of the country in February 2005, claiming the government had failed to quell a decade-long communist insurgency. The move was met by widespread protests against his authoritarian rule, and he was forced to step down and relinquish most of his powers in April 2006.
In December, the political parties agreed to make Nepal a republic as soon as a Constituent Assembly — charged with rewriting the constitution and shaping Nepal's political future — was elected. Polls were to take place no later than Nepalese New Year in the second week of April.
Calls to the office of the king's press secretary went unanswered Monday. The king's press office has refused to comment to the media since April 2006.
Arjun Narsingh, a spokesman for Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's Nepali Congress party, said the protesters have the right to demonstrate, but that it would not change anything.
"In a democracy every individual or organization has the right to express their views in a peaceful matter. ... But the decision we reached in removing the monarchy is what the people want. If they (the monarchists) don't like it, they can challenge it by taking part in the election," Narsingh said.
The National Democratic Party (Nepal) has yet to register for the upcoming poll.
The communist rebels gave up their armed revolt last year and joined a peace process, after more than 13,000 people died in the fighting.
They entered parliament in January 2007 and joined the government three months later, but withdrew in September demanding electoral reform and the immediate removal of the king. Since then Nepal has faced a deepening political crisis.
The Maoists rejoined the coalition government last week.
For centuries, Nepal's monarchy held absolute sway over the country. Gyanendra's ancestors have been traditionally considered reincarnations of the Hindu god Vishnu, to be venerated by their subjects.
However, that wasn't the case for Gyanendra. His tumultuous reign began in 2001 after a palace massacre, in which the crown prince was accused of gunning down King Birendra and much of the royal family, before killing himself.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/07/news/Nepal-Monarchy.php
Hundreds of supporters of King Gyanendra waved flags and chanted slogans in Nepal's capital Monday to protest plans to abolish the Himalayan nation's centuries-old monarchy.
It was the first such public demonstration in support of the largely unpopular king since 2006 when he was forced to give up his authoritarian rule and restore democracy, and was stripped of his powers.
"Save the nation! We love our king!" chanted about 1,500 protesters who marched through central Katmandu, blocking traffic for hours. They gathered outside the prime minister's office and waved the green, yellow and white flag of the monarchist National Democratic Party (Nepal), which organized the rally.
They were protesting the decision last month by Nepal's seven main political parties — including communist former guerrillas — to turn the kingdom into a republic after elections expected no later than mid-April.
"We were quiet and patient for a long time, but we have been compelled to come out in the open to save our nation. How can these so-called main political parties decide for the entire nation to remove a 240-year-old monarchy from the country?" said Kamal Thapa of the National Democratic Party (Nepal).
Hundreds of riot police kept a close watch on the protesters but there was no violence.
Gyanendra, previously a constitutional monarch with mostly ceremonial powers, seized control of the country in February 2005, claiming the government had failed to quell a decade-long communist insurgency. The move was met by widespread protests against his authoritarian rule, and he was forced to step down and relinquish most of his powers in April 2006.
In December, the political parties agreed to make Nepal a republic as soon as a Constituent Assembly — charged with rewriting the constitution and shaping Nepal's political future — was elected. Polls were to take place no later than Nepalese New Year in the second week of April.
Calls to the office of the king's press secretary went unanswered Monday. The king's press office has refused to comment to the media since April 2006.
Arjun Narsingh, a spokesman for Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala's Nepali Congress party, said the protesters have the right to demonstrate, but that it would not change anything.
"In a democracy every individual or organization has the right to express their views in a peaceful matter. ... But the decision we reached in removing the monarchy is what the people want. If they (the monarchists) don't like it, they can challenge it by taking part in the election," Narsingh said.
The National Democratic Party (Nepal) has yet to register for the upcoming poll.
The communist rebels gave up their armed revolt last year and joined a peace process, after more than 13,000 people died in the fighting.
They entered parliament in January 2007 and joined the government three months later, but withdrew in September demanding electoral reform and the immediate removal of the king. Since then Nepal has faced a deepening political crisis.
The Maoists rejoined the coalition government last week.
For centuries, Nepal's monarchy held absolute sway over the country. Gyanendra's ancestors have been traditionally considered reincarnations of the Hindu god Vishnu, to be venerated by their subjects.
However, that wasn't the case for Gyanendra. His tumultuous reign began in 2001 after a palace massacre, in which the crown prince was accused of gunning down King Birendra and much of the royal family, before killing himself.
Monday, January 7, 2008
आसन्न खतराका अनिष्ट सूचक - भरत दाहाल
http://www.kantipuronline.com/Nepal/bislesan.php
संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले कार्यान्वयन गर्ने बा“की-बक्यौताको सिद्धान्तका आधारमा पुस १३ गते संसद्बाट नेपाललाई 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' घोषणा गर्ने निर्ण्र्ााभएपछि उपहास, र्समर्थन र विरोधका चर्चाहरू सुरु भएका छन् । तीनैथरी चर्चाको सारतत्त्व, यस निर्ण्र्ााे देशको राजनीतिक भविष्य कस्तो होला भन्ने कुरामा केन्द्रित नरहेर सात दलका शर्ीष्ा नेताहरूको प्रवृत्ति के हो भन्ने कुरामै केन्द्रित छ ।
निर्ण्र्ााा 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को घोषणा तर संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकसम्म राजतन्त्र कायम रहेको स्वीकारोक्ति, गणतन्त्रको कार्यान्वयन संविधानसभा निर्वाचनपछिको पहिलो बैठकले गर्ने हो कि नया“ संविधान निर्माणपछिको पहिलो बैठकले गर्ने हो भन्ने कुराको अस्पष्टता, संविधानसभा चुनावपछिको बैठकले गर्नसक्ने कार्यान्वयन अहिलेको संसद्ले किन गर्न सक्दैन भन्ने प्रश्नप्रतिको मौनता र देशको भौगोलिक अखण्डताविरुद्ध गम्भीर षड्यन्त्र भइरहेको देख्दादेख्दै यसबारे छलफल गर्न ठूला दलहरूले देखाएको अनिच्छाजस्ता विरोधाभासहरू यसबीच छताछुल्ल भइसकेका छन् । त्यसैले संसद्को यस खिचडीलाई 'महाकाली सन्धि' का पक्ष्ँमा पारति गरएिको सङ्कल्प प्रस्तावभन्दा बढी राजनीतिक महत्त्व दिन पनि उचित देखि“दैन ।
सन् १९७९ मा इरानका राजा रेजा पहलवीको पतनपछि विश्व राजनीतिक रङ्गमञ्चमा संसद्ले गरेको 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को घोषणा निश्चय नै चानचुने विषय होइन । नेपालमा गणतन्त्रको स्थापनाले विश्व राजनीतिको शक्ति सन्तुलनमा हलचलपर्ूण्ा परविर्तन ल्याउ“छ भन्ने वास्तविकतामा पनि कुनै शङ्का छैन । तर, यत्रो महत्त्वको विषयको निर्ण्र्ाा्रति न देशभित्र कुनै उत्साहजनक जनप्रतिक्रिया देखियो, न त अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय क्ष्ँेत्रमा यसले सामान्य समाचारभन्दा बढी महत्त्व पायो । कारण प्रस्ट छ, यो 'सोम शर्माको सातु' हो । गणतन्त्रलाई दल धान्ने टेको बनाएकाहरूलाई पेट भरएिको अभिनय गर्ने बाटो चैतसम्मका लागि सहज भएको मात्रै हो ।
घटना एक, व्याख्या अनेक
प्रचण्डका लागि संसद्को निर्ण्र्ाा'युगान्तकारी महत्त्व' को घटना हो । गिरजिाप्रसाद कोइराला यसलाई 'ऐतिहासिक निर्ण्र्ाा भन्न रुचाउ“छन् । माधवकुमार नेपाल अब गणतन्त्रको स्थापनालाई 'कसैले रोक्न नसक्ने' व्याख्या गर्छन् । विदेशीहरूले नेपालीहरूको आफ्नो विषयका रूपमा सङ्केत गर्दै त्यस निर्ण्र्ाााई 'संसद्को मत' का रूपमा लिएका छन् भने नेपाली जनताले निर्ण्र्ााो भाषालाई दलका नेताहरूको लाचारीका रूपमा बुझेका छन् ।
'चुनबाङ बैठक' पछिको कार्यदिशालाई संविधानसभामार्फ संस्थागत गरेर आफ्नो भविष्य सुरक्ष्ँित गर्न पार्टर्ीीङ्क्तिलाई आफ्नो नेतृत्वमा गडबढी हुनुभन्दा पहिल्यै संविधानसभामा धकेल्ने प्रचण्डको विशेष उद्देश्य हो । एमालेको नीति आए आ“प, गए झटारोजस्तो चुनाव भए पनि नभए पनि दोस्रो दर्जामै रहने हो । बा“की दलहरूका नीति, ठूला दलहरूको सहमतिबाट केही न केही भइहालेमा अहोभाग्यजस्तो छ । ठूला दलहरूको विवाद र एजेन्डाभन्दा बाहिर तिनको कुनै अस्तित्व छैन ।
यी विविध स्वार्थका कारण २३ बु“दे सहमति हुन पुगेको छ । त्यस अनुसार भएको संविधान संशोधनमा गणतन्त्र र समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्वसम्बन्धी तिनै बु“दाहरू सामेल गरएिका छन्, जसलाई कारण देखाएर क्रमशः काङ्ग्रेस र माओवादीले मङ्सिर ६ गतेको चुनाव बिथोलेका थिए । अहिलेको सहमति प्रत्यक्ष र समानुपातिक निर्वाचनसम्बन्धी भारतको ४० र ६० प्रतिशतको पुरानै प्रस्तावलाई दर्ुइ प्रतिशत तलमाथि पारेर गरएिको छ । त्यो पनि 'र' का प्रमुख अशोक चतर्ुवेदीको नेपाल भ्रमण र सबैस“ग उठबसपछि मात्र ।
संविधान संशोधन भएकै दिन ठूला दलहरूलाई 'पहाडे पार्टर्ीीभन्दै तर्राई-मधेस नामको सङ्गठन खुलेको छ । माओवादीभित्र लगाम रहेको मुख्य पङ्क्ति राष्ट्रियता खतरामा परेको भन्दै देशव्यापी अभियानमा जुटेको छ । र, त्यसको नेतृत्व पङ्क्तिबाटै समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्व र सेना समायोजनसम्बन्धी सहमतिविरुद्ध आक्रोशपर्ूण्ा अभिव्यक्ति पनि आइरहेको छ । राष्ट्रिय स्वाधीनताको सुनिश्चिताका अभावमा लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्रले पर्ूण्ाता नपाउने निष्कर्षहित जनमोर्चालगायत विभिन्न शक्ति, संस्था र व्यक्तिहरू वैदेशिक हस्तक्ष्ँेपविरुद्ध केन्द्रित हु“दैछन् ।
देशको सङ्कट समाधानका लागि आमसहमतिका साथ गर्न लागिएको भनिएको संविधानसभा चुनावअगाडिको वास्तविक तस्बिर यही हो । यसले चुनावका लागि आमसहमतिको झलक दिन्छ कि दि“दैन वा यस प्रकारको आमविमतिबीच चुनावको विन्दु प्रस्टस“ग देखिन्छ कि देखि“दैन भन्ने कुरा २३ बु“दामा सहमति गर्नेहरूले नै व्याख्या गरून् । तर, घटना प्रक्रियाले दिएको निष्कर्षयही हो कि न पुरानै सहमतिहरूमा पुनः हस्ताक्ष्ँर गर्दैमा ती कार्यान्वयन हुने सम्भावना छ, न त 'राष्ट्रियता', 'मधेस' र 'स्वशासन' को आवाज मत्थर हुने सम्भावना छ । न यहा“ कुनै विदेशी र दरबारले सरकारको नियन्त्रणमा काम गर्नेछन्, न त हत्या, हिंसा र डकैतीका घटनाहरूको मानसिक त्रास कम भएर जाने लक्षण छ ।
सहमतिमा चुनाव हुनका लागि न्यायपर्ूण्ा माग गर्नेहरू सबैको चित्त बुझ्नर्ुपर्छ । वर्तमान परविेशमा 'चित्त' कसैको बुझेको छैन । कतिसम्म भने २३ बु“दामा हस्तँक्षर गर्नेहरूले समेत 'चैतभित्रमा चुनाव भएन भने...' भन्दै र आफ्नो अशान्त चित्त पर््रदर्शन गर्दै चुनावको ग्यारेन्टी दिइरहेका छन् । यस्तो अवस्थामा चैतभित्र संविधानसभाको चुनाव गर्ने सहमति भनेको र्सवप्रथम, दलका शर्ीष्ा नेताहरूको असक्षमता ढाकछोप गर्नका लागि≤ दोस्रो, नहुने चुनावका लागि अडान कायम राखेर चुनाव भा“डेको अपजस नबोक्नका लागि≤ र तेस्रो, सत्तामा रहेको भारी-भरकम उपस्थितिलाई निरन्तरता दिनका लागि भएको हो भन्न सकिन्छ ।
सम्भावित तीन प्रभाव
कुनै पनि निर्ण्र्ााो औचित्य त्यसको प्रभाव र परण्िााममा खोजिन्छ । संसद्को पुस १३ गतेको निर्ण्र्ााो पहिलो प्रभाव तर्राईमा देखिएको छ । 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को घोषणा भएकै दिन तर्राई-मधेस लोकतान्त्रिक पार्टर्ीीठन भएको छ । यो प्रभाव यसकारण नकारात्मक छ कि मधेसका नाममा राजनीति गर्नेहरूले संसद्को निर्ण्र्ाााई पहाडे-मधेसीबीचको विवादका रूपमा व्याख्या गर्न खोजेका छन् र उत्पीडित पहाडेहरूको अधिकारस“ग आफ्नो कुनै सम्बन्ध नरहेको प्रभाव छोड्न खोज्दैछन् । यद्यपि, मधेस राजनीतिको अगुवा बनाइएकाहरू कुनै पनि प्रकारको उत्पीडित तप्काभित्र पर्दैनन् । तिनीहरू पञ्चायतकाल, बहुदलकाल र अहिलेको सङ्क्रमणकाल सबै चरणमा राज्यभित्र हालीमुहाली गरअिाएका तथा मधेसीहरूको शोषण गरेर मोटाएका व्यक्तिहरू हुन् । तैपनि, पर्ूण्ा समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्वप्रति दलका नेताहरूको उपेक्षाभावले त्यस्ता तत्त्वहरूलाई दर्ीघकालसम्म अस्थिरता फैलाउने आधार मजबुत बनाइदिएको छ ।
संसद्को निर्ण्र्ााो अर्को घातक प्रभाव हिमालदेखि तर्राईसम्मका आदिवासी, जनजाति र दलितहरूमाथि परेको छ । निर्ण्र्ााो लिखतमा उल्लिखित 'सङ्घीयता' र 'गणतन्त्र' दुवै शब्द उत्पीडित समुदायको हित र अधिकार प्रतिकूल छन् । उत्पीडित तप्काले उठाउ“दै आएको सङ्घीयता भनेको स्वायत्त अधिकारसहितको सङ्घीयता हो । जसको मुख्य आधारका रूपमा उत्पीडित जाति, भाषा र क्ष्ँेत्रको पहिचान रहेको छ । जबकि अन्तरमि संविधानमा सामेल गरएिको सङ्घीयता एकातर्फस्वायत्त अधिकारमा आधारति छैन भने अर्कोतर्फयो धरातलीय सम्प्रदायमा आधारति र साम्प्रदायिक प्रवृत्तिलाई उत्प्रेरति गर्ने खालको छ । आदिवासी, जनजाति र दलितहरूको उत्पीडनको मुख्य आधारका रूपमा रहेका राजतन्त्र र बहुमतीय चुनाव प्रणालीको जबरजस्त अस्तित्व अहिले पनि कायम छ । यर्सथ, संसद्को निर्ण्र्ााे यस पङ्क्तिलाई विरोधी कित्तामै सुदृढ हुन मद्दत गर्छ ।
विभिन्न दलभित्र र बाहिर पनि वैचारकि-राजनीतिक ध्रुवीकरण संसदीय निर्ण्र्ााो तेस्रो प्रभावका रूपमा प्रकट हुने देखिन्छ । यस्तो ध्रुवीकरण मूलतः राष्ट्रिय स्वाधीनताको प्रश्नवरपिर िकेन्द्रित रहनेछ । देशव्यापी माग र विरोधका बाबजुद सात दलको छलफल र सहमतिमा जब राष्ट्रियताको मुद्दाले ठाउ“ नै पाएन, त्यसले सात दलको शर्ीष्ा नेतृत्व राष्ट्रियताप्रति संवेदनशील छ भनेर विश्वास गर्न सकिने आधार समाप्त पार्दैछ ।
तर, राष्ट्रियताको विषय जबरजस्त रूपमा उठ्ने निर्विवाद छ । आदिवासी, जनजाति र दलित समुदायका प्रमुख मुद्दाहरू र राष्ट्रियताको मुद्दा एउटै सिक्काका दर्ुइ पाटा हुन् । एउटा आन्तरकि औपनिवेशीकरणविरुद्ध छ भने अर्को बाह्य औपनिवेशिकताविरुद्ध । दुवैको सारतत्त्व उपनिवेशवादको विरोध हो । अतः भोलिको ध्रुवीकरणमा यी दुवै पङ्क्तिबीच मोर्चाबन्दी हुने भरपर्दो आधार देखिन्छ । यसले अहिलेको राजनीतिक शक्ति सन्तुलन र दलीय संरचनाहरूमा गुणात्मक रूपमै फेरबदल ल्याउन सक्छ । संसद्को निर्ण्र्ाागत्तै मधेसका नाममा र 'वाईसीएल' का तर्फाट राष्ट्रियताको पक्षमा चर्कंदै आएका स्वरहरूले सम्भावित ध्रुवीकरण र समीकरणलाई बुझ्न सजिलो पार्नेछन् ।
महत्त्व ः सकारात्मक-नकारात्मक
कुनै पनि घटना भइसकेपछि कुनै न कुनै रूपमा त्यसको महत्त्व त स्थापित हुन्छ नै । त्यसैले संसद्को निर्ण्र्ााो महत्त्व छैन भन्ने कोणबाट त्यसको चर्चा गर्नु गलत हुन्छ । चर्चाको ठीक कोण यो हो कि उक्त निर्ण्र्ााो सकारात्मक र नकारात्मक महत्त्वको अन्तर कहा“नेर छ - यस अन्तरलाई मात्रा र गुणको प्रभावका रूपमा विभाजन गर्दा समग्र राजनीतिको परण्िााम कस्तो हुनसक्ला भन्ने अनुमान पनि गर्न सकिन्छ ।
२३ बु“दे सहमतिको सकारात्मक प्रभाव मात्रात्मक देखिन्छ । यो सहमतिले गणतन्त्र स्थापना गरेको छैन । तापनि, त्यस दिशातर्फो लिखित प्रतिबद्धता र उक्त प्रतिबद्धताविरुद्ध दरबारबाट तत्काल कुनै प्रतिक्रिया आउन नसक्नुले त्यो कमजोर बन्दै, निकै पछाडि हटेको प्रभाव आमजनमानसमा पर्नु स्वाभाविक छ । यस प्रभावले राजतन्त्रलाई केन्द्रविन्दुमा राखेर आफ्नो नित्यकर्म गर्ने राजनीतिज्ञहरू, धार्मिक एवम् सांस्कृतिक समूहहरू तथा आर्थिक एकाइहरू कमजोर बन्दै जानेछन् र राजतन्त्रप्रतिको मोहभङ्ग हुन गई त्यसको जग प्रतिरोध गर्न नसक्ने गरी कमजोर हुने वातावरण बन्न सजिलो हुनेछ ।
राजतन्त्रलाई राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक मानेर हि“ड्ने विचारधारा पहिलेकै रूपबाट क्रियाशील हुन नसक्ने र कुनै न कुनै रूपमा निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्रस“ग जोडिएका शक्तिहरू लोकतन्त्रीकरणको प्रक्रियामा इच्छा वा अनिच्छापर्ूवक जानैपर्ने परविेश निर्माण गर्नु संसदीय निर्ण्र्ााो अर्को सकारात्मक प्रभाव हो ।
संसद्को पुनःस्थापना हु“दै २३ बु“दे सहमतिसम्म आइपुग्दा राजतन्त्रको जग अकल्पनीय रूपमा खोक्रो भएको छ । आफ्नो शक्तिका भरमा त्यसले केही गर्न सक्ने स्थिति रहेको छैन । यदि भोलिका दिनहरूमा राजाबाट कुनै राजनीतिक कदम चालियो भने त्यो कुनै विदेशी शक्तिराष्ट्रको नाङ्गो सहयोगबाट मात्र सम्भव छ । यस अवस्थामा राजतन्त्र पुरानै सारमा र्फकने छैन, बरु त्यो भुटानभन्दा निम्नस्तरको कठपुतली हुनेछ ।
पहिलो संशोधनमा थपिएको सङ्घीयतालाई गणतन्त्रस“ग जोड्दै संविधानको तेस्रो संशोधनलाई जुन रूपमा सैद्धान्तिक परमिार्जन गर्न खोजिएको छ, त्यसले एकात्मक राज्यप्रणालीका पक्षधरहरूको वैचारकि वर्चस्वको अन्त्य गरेको छ । देश अब निर्विवाद रूपमा एकात्मक संरचनाबाट अगाडि बढ्न नसक्ने धरातल परपिक्व भएको छ । सङ्घीयताको स्वायत्त संरचना बन्न मुस्किल भए पनि भोलिका दिनहरूमा स्थानीय निकायहरूको अधिकारको दायरा र राज्यमा उत्पीडित समुदायको सहभागिताको प्रतिशत नबर्ढाई कसैको नेतृत्वमा राज्य चल्न सक्ने देखि“दैन ।
उपर्युक्त लक्षणहरू तत्कालै निर्ण्ाायक रूपमा प्रभावकारी छैनन् । तिनले नेपाली समाजभित्र क्रमशः आफ्नो महत्त्व स्थापित गर्दै जाने मात्र देखिन्छ । तर, अहिल्यै माग भएको राज्यको अग्रगामी पुनःसंरचनाको आवश्यकता पूरा हु“दैन । त्यसैले २३ बु“दे सहमति र अन्तरमि संविधानको तेस्रो संशोधनबाट पर्न जाने नकारात्मक प्रभावको महत्त्व मात्रात्मक होइन, गुणात्मक प्रकारकै देखिन्छ ।
'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को अद्वितीय युगान्तकारी महत्त्व राख्नुपर्ने निर्ण्र्ाााई आमजनमानसले जुन उदासीनता र उपेक्ष्ँाभावका साथ लिएको देखियो, यो नेताहरूप्रतिको चरम अविश्वास हो । देशव्यापी उत्सवका रूपमा लिइनुपर्ने उक्त निर्ण्र्ााजनताका लागि सात दलका नेताहरूको रकमी भाषा मात्र बन्यो । यसको प्रस्ट सङ्केत यो हो, दलहरूको निर्ण्र्ााप्रक्रियाप्रति जनताको लगाव घट्दै गएको छ ।
वास्तवमा २३ बु“दे सहमतिमा जुन खिचडी पकाइएको छ, त्यो कुनै राजनीतिक दिशा नै होइन । स्पष्ट दिशा र लक्ष्यको अभावमा संविधानसभाको चुनाव नहुने सम्भावनातिरै इङ्गित गर्छ । आउ“दो चैतमा चुनाव नहुनुको परण्िााम दलहरूको पतन र बाह्य शक्तिराष्ट्रहरूको सहयोगमा राजतन्त्रको परमिार्जित पुनःजन्मका रूपमा पनि आउन सक्छ ।
राजतन्त्र खोक्रिइसकेको र संविधानसभा पनि अनिश्चित रहेको अवस्था छ अहिले । यस्तो संवेदनशील मोडमा विदेशीहरूको दबाब र हस्तक्ष्ँेपबारे सात दलको नेतृत्वमा कुनै छलफल र सहमति बन्दैन । यसको स्वाभाविक परण्िााम यो हुनेछ कि शक्तिको प्रमुख केन्द्रका रूपमा रहेको नेपाली सेनामाथि अब सबै विदेशी शक्तिहरूको आ“खा केन्द्रित हुनेछ । नेपाली सेना अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय शक्तिसङ्र्घष्ाको केन्द्रविन्दु बन्नेछ । देशभित्र सेनाको लगाम लिने शक्तिको अभावमा त्यो पर्ूण्ातः विदेशी नियन्त्रणमा जाने खतरा बढेको छ । यदि यस खतराले पर्ूण्ाता पायो भने नेपाल कुनै खाले उपनिवेश वा अन्तहीन युद्धको नया“ चरणमा प्रवेश गर्न सक्छ । त्यस अवस्थामा राज्यको परम्परागत शक्ति दरबारबाट विदेशमा स्थानान्तरण हुनेछ ।
संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले कार्यान्वयन गर्ने बा“की-बक्यौताको सिद्धान्तका आधारमा पुस १३ गते संसद्बाट नेपाललाई 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' घोषणा गर्ने निर्ण्र्ााभएपछि उपहास, र्समर्थन र विरोधका चर्चाहरू सुरु भएका छन् । तीनैथरी चर्चाको सारतत्त्व, यस निर्ण्र्ााे देशको राजनीतिक भविष्य कस्तो होला भन्ने कुरामा केन्द्रित नरहेर सात दलका शर्ीष्ा नेताहरूको प्रवृत्ति के हो भन्ने कुरामै केन्द्रित छ ।
निर्ण्र्ााा 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को घोषणा तर संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकसम्म राजतन्त्र कायम रहेको स्वीकारोक्ति, गणतन्त्रको कार्यान्वयन संविधानसभा निर्वाचनपछिको पहिलो बैठकले गर्ने हो कि नया“ संविधान निर्माणपछिको पहिलो बैठकले गर्ने हो भन्ने कुराको अस्पष्टता, संविधानसभा चुनावपछिको बैठकले गर्नसक्ने कार्यान्वयन अहिलेको संसद्ले किन गर्न सक्दैन भन्ने प्रश्नप्रतिको मौनता र देशको भौगोलिक अखण्डताविरुद्ध गम्भीर षड्यन्त्र भइरहेको देख्दादेख्दै यसबारे छलफल गर्न ठूला दलहरूले देखाएको अनिच्छाजस्ता विरोधाभासहरू यसबीच छताछुल्ल भइसकेका छन् । त्यसैले संसद्को यस खिचडीलाई 'महाकाली सन्धि' का पक्ष्ँमा पारति गरएिको सङ्कल्प प्रस्तावभन्दा बढी राजनीतिक महत्त्व दिन पनि उचित देखि“दैन ।
सन् १९७९ मा इरानका राजा रेजा पहलवीको पतनपछि विश्व राजनीतिक रङ्गमञ्चमा संसद्ले गरेको 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को घोषणा निश्चय नै चानचुने विषय होइन । नेपालमा गणतन्त्रको स्थापनाले विश्व राजनीतिको शक्ति सन्तुलनमा हलचलपर्ूण्ा परविर्तन ल्याउ“छ भन्ने वास्तविकतामा पनि कुनै शङ्का छैन । तर, यत्रो महत्त्वको विषयको निर्ण्र्ाा्रति न देशभित्र कुनै उत्साहजनक जनप्रतिक्रिया देखियो, न त अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय क्ष्ँेत्रमा यसले सामान्य समाचारभन्दा बढी महत्त्व पायो । कारण प्रस्ट छ, यो 'सोम शर्माको सातु' हो । गणतन्त्रलाई दल धान्ने टेको बनाएकाहरूलाई पेट भरएिको अभिनय गर्ने बाटो चैतसम्मका लागि सहज भएको मात्रै हो ।
घटना एक, व्याख्या अनेक
प्रचण्डका लागि संसद्को निर्ण्र्ाा'युगान्तकारी महत्त्व' को घटना हो । गिरजिाप्रसाद कोइराला यसलाई 'ऐतिहासिक निर्ण्र्ाा भन्न रुचाउ“छन् । माधवकुमार नेपाल अब गणतन्त्रको स्थापनालाई 'कसैले रोक्न नसक्ने' व्याख्या गर्छन् । विदेशीहरूले नेपालीहरूको आफ्नो विषयका रूपमा सङ्केत गर्दै त्यस निर्ण्र्ाााई 'संसद्को मत' का रूपमा लिएका छन् भने नेपाली जनताले निर्ण्र्ााो भाषालाई दलका नेताहरूको लाचारीका रूपमा बुझेका छन् ।
'चुनबाङ बैठक' पछिको कार्यदिशालाई संविधानसभामार्फ संस्थागत गरेर आफ्नो भविष्य सुरक्ष्ँित गर्न पार्टर्ीीङ्क्तिलाई आफ्नो नेतृत्वमा गडबढी हुनुभन्दा पहिल्यै संविधानसभामा धकेल्ने प्रचण्डको विशेष उद्देश्य हो । एमालेको नीति आए आ“प, गए झटारोजस्तो चुनाव भए पनि नभए पनि दोस्रो दर्जामै रहने हो । बा“की दलहरूका नीति, ठूला दलहरूको सहमतिबाट केही न केही भइहालेमा अहोभाग्यजस्तो छ । ठूला दलहरूको विवाद र एजेन्डाभन्दा बाहिर तिनको कुनै अस्तित्व छैन ।
यी विविध स्वार्थका कारण २३ बु“दे सहमति हुन पुगेको छ । त्यस अनुसार भएको संविधान संशोधनमा गणतन्त्र र समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्वसम्बन्धी तिनै बु“दाहरू सामेल गरएिका छन्, जसलाई कारण देखाएर क्रमशः काङ्ग्रेस र माओवादीले मङ्सिर ६ गतेको चुनाव बिथोलेका थिए । अहिलेको सहमति प्रत्यक्ष र समानुपातिक निर्वाचनसम्बन्धी भारतको ४० र ६० प्रतिशतको पुरानै प्रस्तावलाई दर्ुइ प्रतिशत तलमाथि पारेर गरएिको छ । त्यो पनि 'र' का प्रमुख अशोक चतर्ुवेदीको नेपाल भ्रमण र सबैस“ग उठबसपछि मात्र ।
संविधान संशोधन भएकै दिन ठूला दलहरूलाई 'पहाडे पार्टर्ीीभन्दै तर्राई-मधेस नामको सङ्गठन खुलेको छ । माओवादीभित्र लगाम रहेको मुख्य पङ्क्ति राष्ट्रियता खतरामा परेको भन्दै देशव्यापी अभियानमा जुटेको छ । र, त्यसको नेतृत्व पङ्क्तिबाटै समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्व र सेना समायोजनसम्बन्धी सहमतिविरुद्ध आक्रोशपर्ूण्ा अभिव्यक्ति पनि आइरहेको छ । राष्ट्रिय स्वाधीनताको सुनिश्चिताका अभावमा लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्रले पर्ूण्ाता नपाउने निष्कर्षहित जनमोर्चालगायत विभिन्न शक्ति, संस्था र व्यक्तिहरू वैदेशिक हस्तक्ष्ँेपविरुद्ध केन्द्रित हु“दैछन् ।
देशको सङ्कट समाधानका लागि आमसहमतिका साथ गर्न लागिएको भनिएको संविधानसभा चुनावअगाडिको वास्तविक तस्बिर यही हो । यसले चुनावका लागि आमसहमतिको झलक दिन्छ कि दि“दैन वा यस प्रकारको आमविमतिबीच चुनावको विन्दु प्रस्टस“ग देखिन्छ कि देखि“दैन भन्ने कुरा २३ बु“दामा सहमति गर्नेहरूले नै व्याख्या गरून् । तर, घटना प्रक्रियाले दिएको निष्कर्षयही हो कि न पुरानै सहमतिहरूमा पुनः हस्ताक्ष्ँर गर्दैमा ती कार्यान्वयन हुने सम्भावना छ, न त 'राष्ट्रियता', 'मधेस' र 'स्वशासन' को आवाज मत्थर हुने सम्भावना छ । न यहा“ कुनै विदेशी र दरबारले सरकारको नियन्त्रणमा काम गर्नेछन्, न त हत्या, हिंसा र डकैतीका घटनाहरूको मानसिक त्रास कम भएर जाने लक्षण छ ।
सहमतिमा चुनाव हुनका लागि न्यायपर्ूण्ा माग गर्नेहरू सबैको चित्त बुझ्नर्ुपर्छ । वर्तमान परविेशमा 'चित्त' कसैको बुझेको छैन । कतिसम्म भने २३ बु“दामा हस्तँक्षर गर्नेहरूले समेत 'चैतभित्रमा चुनाव भएन भने...' भन्दै र आफ्नो अशान्त चित्त पर््रदर्शन गर्दै चुनावको ग्यारेन्टी दिइरहेका छन् । यस्तो अवस्थामा चैतभित्र संविधानसभाको चुनाव गर्ने सहमति भनेको र्सवप्रथम, दलका शर्ीष्ा नेताहरूको असक्षमता ढाकछोप गर्नका लागि≤ दोस्रो, नहुने चुनावका लागि अडान कायम राखेर चुनाव भा“डेको अपजस नबोक्नका लागि≤ र तेस्रो, सत्तामा रहेको भारी-भरकम उपस्थितिलाई निरन्तरता दिनका लागि भएको हो भन्न सकिन्छ ।
सम्भावित तीन प्रभाव
कुनै पनि निर्ण्र्ााो औचित्य त्यसको प्रभाव र परण्िााममा खोजिन्छ । संसद्को पुस १३ गतेको निर्ण्र्ााो पहिलो प्रभाव तर्राईमा देखिएको छ । 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को घोषणा भएकै दिन तर्राई-मधेस लोकतान्त्रिक पार्टर्ीीठन भएको छ । यो प्रभाव यसकारण नकारात्मक छ कि मधेसका नाममा राजनीति गर्नेहरूले संसद्को निर्ण्र्ाााई पहाडे-मधेसीबीचको विवादका रूपमा व्याख्या गर्न खोजेका छन् र उत्पीडित पहाडेहरूको अधिकारस“ग आफ्नो कुनै सम्बन्ध नरहेको प्रभाव छोड्न खोज्दैछन् । यद्यपि, मधेस राजनीतिको अगुवा बनाइएकाहरू कुनै पनि प्रकारको उत्पीडित तप्काभित्र पर्दैनन् । तिनीहरू पञ्चायतकाल, बहुदलकाल र अहिलेको सङ्क्रमणकाल सबै चरणमा राज्यभित्र हालीमुहाली गरअिाएका तथा मधेसीहरूको शोषण गरेर मोटाएका व्यक्तिहरू हुन् । तैपनि, पर्ूण्ा समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्वप्रति दलका नेताहरूको उपेक्षाभावले त्यस्ता तत्त्वहरूलाई दर्ीघकालसम्म अस्थिरता फैलाउने आधार मजबुत बनाइदिएको छ ।
संसद्को निर्ण्र्ााो अर्को घातक प्रभाव हिमालदेखि तर्राईसम्मका आदिवासी, जनजाति र दलितहरूमाथि परेको छ । निर्ण्र्ााो लिखतमा उल्लिखित 'सङ्घीयता' र 'गणतन्त्र' दुवै शब्द उत्पीडित समुदायको हित र अधिकार प्रतिकूल छन् । उत्पीडित तप्काले उठाउ“दै आएको सङ्घीयता भनेको स्वायत्त अधिकारसहितको सङ्घीयता हो । जसको मुख्य आधारका रूपमा उत्पीडित जाति, भाषा र क्ष्ँेत्रको पहिचान रहेको छ । जबकि अन्तरमि संविधानमा सामेल गरएिको सङ्घीयता एकातर्फस्वायत्त अधिकारमा आधारति छैन भने अर्कोतर्फयो धरातलीय सम्प्रदायमा आधारति र साम्प्रदायिक प्रवृत्तिलाई उत्प्रेरति गर्ने खालको छ । आदिवासी, जनजाति र दलितहरूको उत्पीडनको मुख्य आधारका रूपमा रहेका राजतन्त्र र बहुमतीय चुनाव प्रणालीको जबरजस्त अस्तित्व अहिले पनि कायम छ । यर्सथ, संसद्को निर्ण्र्ााे यस पङ्क्तिलाई विरोधी कित्तामै सुदृढ हुन मद्दत गर्छ ।
विभिन्न दलभित्र र बाहिर पनि वैचारकि-राजनीतिक ध्रुवीकरण संसदीय निर्ण्र्ााो तेस्रो प्रभावका रूपमा प्रकट हुने देखिन्छ । यस्तो ध्रुवीकरण मूलतः राष्ट्रिय स्वाधीनताको प्रश्नवरपिर िकेन्द्रित रहनेछ । देशव्यापी माग र विरोधका बाबजुद सात दलको छलफल र सहमतिमा जब राष्ट्रियताको मुद्दाले ठाउ“ नै पाएन, त्यसले सात दलको शर्ीष्ा नेतृत्व राष्ट्रियताप्रति संवेदनशील छ भनेर विश्वास गर्न सकिने आधार समाप्त पार्दैछ ।
तर, राष्ट्रियताको विषय जबरजस्त रूपमा उठ्ने निर्विवाद छ । आदिवासी, जनजाति र दलित समुदायका प्रमुख मुद्दाहरू र राष्ट्रियताको मुद्दा एउटै सिक्काका दर्ुइ पाटा हुन् । एउटा आन्तरकि औपनिवेशीकरणविरुद्ध छ भने अर्को बाह्य औपनिवेशिकताविरुद्ध । दुवैको सारतत्त्व उपनिवेशवादको विरोध हो । अतः भोलिको ध्रुवीकरणमा यी दुवै पङ्क्तिबीच मोर्चाबन्दी हुने भरपर्दो आधार देखिन्छ । यसले अहिलेको राजनीतिक शक्ति सन्तुलन र दलीय संरचनाहरूमा गुणात्मक रूपमै फेरबदल ल्याउन सक्छ । संसद्को निर्ण्र्ाागत्तै मधेसका नाममा र 'वाईसीएल' का तर्फाट राष्ट्रियताको पक्षमा चर्कंदै आएका स्वरहरूले सम्भावित ध्रुवीकरण र समीकरणलाई बुझ्न सजिलो पार्नेछन् ।
महत्त्व ः सकारात्मक-नकारात्मक
कुनै पनि घटना भइसकेपछि कुनै न कुनै रूपमा त्यसको महत्त्व त स्थापित हुन्छ नै । त्यसैले संसद्को निर्ण्र्ााो महत्त्व छैन भन्ने कोणबाट त्यसको चर्चा गर्नु गलत हुन्छ । चर्चाको ठीक कोण यो हो कि उक्त निर्ण्र्ााो सकारात्मक र नकारात्मक महत्त्वको अन्तर कहा“नेर छ - यस अन्तरलाई मात्रा र गुणको प्रभावका रूपमा विभाजन गर्दा समग्र राजनीतिको परण्िााम कस्तो हुनसक्ला भन्ने अनुमान पनि गर्न सकिन्छ ।
२३ बु“दे सहमतिको सकारात्मक प्रभाव मात्रात्मक देखिन्छ । यो सहमतिले गणतन्त्र स्थापना गरेको छैन । तापनि, त्यस दिशातर्फो लिखित प्रतिबद्धता र उक्त प्रतिबद्धताविरुद्ध दरबारबाट तत्काल कुनै प्रतिक्रिया आउन नसक्नुले त्यो कमजोर बन्दै, निकै पछाडि हटेको प्रभाव आमजनमानसमा पर्नु स्वाभाविक छ । यस प्रभावले राजतन्त्रलाई केन्द्रविन्दुमा राखेर आफ्नो नित्यकर्म गर्ने राजनीतिज्ञहरू, धार्मिक एवम् सांस्कृतिक समूहहरू तथा आर्थिक एकाइहरू कमजोर बन्दै जानेछन् र राजतन्त्रप्रतिको मोहभङ्ग हुन गई त्यसको जग प्रतिरोध गर्न नसक्ने गरी कमजोर हुने वातावरण बन्न सजिलो हुनेछ ।
राजतन्त्रलाई राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक मानेर हि“ड्ने विचारधारा पहिलेकै रूपबाट क्रियाशील हुन नसक्ने र कुनै न कुनै रूपमा निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्रस“ग जोडिएका शक्तिहरू लोकतन्त्रीकरणको प्रक्रियामा इच्छा वा अनिच्छापर्ूवक जानैपर्ने परविेश निर्माण गर्नु संसदीय निर्ण्र्ााो अर्को सकारात्मक प्रभाव हो ।
संसद्को पुनःस्थापना हु“दै २३ बु“दे सहमतिसम्म आइपुग्दा राजतन्त्रको जग अकल्पनीय रूपमा खोक्रो भएको छ । आफ्नो शक्तिका भरमा त्यसले केही गर्न सक्ने स्थिति रहेको छैन । यदि भोलिका दिनहरूमा राजाबाट कुनै राजनीतिक कदम चालियो भने त्यो कुनै विदेशी शक्तिराष्ट्रको नाङ्गो सहयोगबाट मात्र सम्भव छ । यस अवस्थामा राजतन्त्र पुरानै सारमा र्फकने छैन, बरु त्यो भुटानभन्दा निम्नस्तरको कठपुतली हुनेछ ।
पहिलो संशोधनमा थपिएको सङ्घीयतालाई गणतन्त्रस“ग जोड्दै संविधानको तेस्रो संशोधनलाई जुन रूपमा सैद्धान्तिक परमिार्जन गर्न खोजिएको छ, त्यसले एकात्मक राज्यप्रणालीका पक्षधरहरूको वैचारकि वर्चस्वको अन्त्य गरेको छ । देश अब निर्विवाद रूपमा एकात्मक संरचनाबाट अगाडि बढ्न नसक्ने धरातल परपिक्व भएको छ । सङ्घीयताको स्वायत्त संरचना बन्न मुस्किल भए पनि भोलिका दिनहरूमा स्थानीय निकायहरूको अधिकारको दायरा र राज्यमा उत्पीडित समुदायको सहभागिताको प्रतिशत नबर्ढाई कसैको नेतृत्वमा राज्य चल्न सक्ने देखि“दैन ।
उपर्युक्त लक्षणहरू तत्कालै निर्ण्ाायक रूपमा प्रभावकारी छैनन् । तिनले नेपाली समाजभित्र क्रमशः आफ्नो महत्त्व स्थापित गर्दै जाने मात्र देखिन्छ । तर, अहिल्यै माग भएको राज्यको अग्रगामी पुनःसंरचनाको आवश्यकता पूरा हु“दैन । त्यसैले २३ बु“दे सहमति र अन्तरमि संविधानको तेस्रो संशोधनबाट पर्न जाने नकारात्मक प्रभावको महत्त्व मात्रात्मक होइन, गुणात्मक प्रकारकै देखिन्छ ।
'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' को अद्वितीय युगान्तकारी महत्त्व राख्नुपर्ने निर्ण्र्ाााई आमजनमानसले जुन उदासीनता र उपेक्ष्ँाभावका साथ लिएको देखियो, यो नेताहरूप्रतिको चरम अविश्वास हो । देशव्यापी उत्सवका रूपमा लिइनुपर्ने उक्त निर्ण्र्ााजनताका लागि सात दलका नेताहरूको रकमी भाषा मात्र बन्यो । यसको प्रस्ट सङ्केत यो हो, दलहरूको निर्ण्र्ााप्रक्रियाप्रति जनताको लगाव घट्दै गएको छ ।
वास्तवमा २३ बु“दे सहमतिमा जुन खिचडी पकाइएको छ, त्यो कुनै राजनीतिक दिशा नै होइन । स्पष्ट दिशा र लक्ष्यको अभावमा संविधानसभाको चुनाव नहुने सम्भावनातिरै इङ्गित गर्छ । आउ“दो चैतमा चुनाव नहुनुको परण्िााम दलहरूको पतन र बाह्य शक्तिराष्ट्रहरूको सहयोगमा राजतन्त्रको परमिार्जित पुनःजन्मका रूपमा पनि आउन सक्छ ।
राजतन्त्र खोक्रिइसकेको र संविधानसभा पनि अनिश्चित रहेको अवस्था छ अहिले । यस्तो संवेदनशील मोडमा विदेशीहरूको दबाब र हस्तक्ष्ँेपबारे सात दलको नेतृत्वमा कुनै छलफल र सहमति बन्दैन । यसको स्वाभाविक परण्िााम यो हुनेछ कि शक्तिको प्रमुख केन्द्रका रूपमा रहेको नेपाली सेनामाथि अब सबै विदेशी शक्तिहरूको आ“खा केन्द्रित हुनेछ । नेपाली सेना अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय शक्तिसङ्र्घष्ाको केन्द्रविन्दु बन्नेछ । देशभित्र सेनाको लगाम लिने शक्तिको अभावमा त्यो पर्ूण्ातः विदेशी नियन्त्रणमा जाने खतरा बढेको छ । यदि यस खतराले पर्ूण्ाता पायो भने नेपाल कुनै खाले उपनिवेश वा अन्तहीन युद्धको नया“ चरणमा प्रवेश गर्न सक्छ । त्यस अवस्थामा राज्यको परम्परागत शक्ति दरबारबाट विदेशमा स्थानान्तरण हुनेछ ।
कहा“ गए सङ्ग्रौला र दीक्षितहरु - मनुज चौधरी
http://www.kantipuronline.com/Nepal/haminepali.php
कुरा केही साता पुरानो हो, जतिबेला माओवादी अध्यक्ष्ँ प्रचण्ड र प्रधानमन्त्री कोइराला आप\mना निकटस्थहरूलाई महन्थ ठाकुरलगायतका नेताहरूले मधेसी राजनीतिका नाममा गरेका आ-आफ्ना पार्टर्ीीहिर्गमन भारतीय चालको परण्िााम भएको सन्देश दि“दै थिए । अरू धेरै नेताहरूलगायत प्रचण्ड र कोइराला दुवै जना वर्तमान नेपाली राजनीतिमा भारतको भूमिकाबारे अत्यन्त सशङ्कित छन् । किनभने, भारतले हाम्रा नेताहरूलाई र्सार्वजनिक रूपमा ओढाइदिने गरेको लुङ्गीको दोसल्लाभित्र लुकेर नेपालमा अस्थिरता सिर्जना गर्दै आएको छ भन्ने कुरा अब कसैबाट छिपेको छैन । त्यति बुझ्दाबुझ्दै पनि हाम्रा नेताहरू, खासगरी माओवादीहरू, आफ्ना मागका कारण उत्पन्न गतिरोध मिलेर अन्त्य गर्न सकिरहेका थिएनन् ।
अनि त्यसैबेला भयो, पाकिस्तान टुक्र्याएर बङ्गलादेश निर्माण गर्न, सिक्किमलाई गणतन्त्र बनाएर भारतमा विलीन गराउन र श्रीलङ्काको गृहयुद्ध चर्काउनमा प्रामाणिक रूपमै प्रमुख भूमिका निर्वाह गरेको भारतीय गुप्तचर संस्था 'र' का प्रमुख अशोक चतर्ुवेदीको नेपाल भ्रमण । 'र' का प्रमुख संसद्प्रति जवाफदेही हु“दैनन् र तिनले सीधै प्रधानमन्त्रीस“गको समन्वयमा काम गर्छन् । नेपालविज्ञ मानिने चतर्ुवेदीले भ्रमणका क्रममा प्रधानमन्त्री कोइराला, माओवादी अध्यक्ष प्रचण्डलगायतका नेताहरू तथा सेनाप्रमुख रुक्माङ्गद कटवालस“ग पनि भेटेको बताइएको छ । सबैलाई भेटेर दिनुपर्ने सन्देश दिएर उनी पुस ७ गते स्वदेश फर्किए । अनि, भोलिपल्ट दलहरू महिनौ“देखि पुग्न नसकिरहेको सहमतिमा पुगे ।
सहमतिअगाडि संसद्बाटै गणतन्त्र घोषणा र पर्ूण्ा समानुपातिक निर्वाचन प्रणालीबारेको अडानमा डेग चल्न नमानिरहेका प्रचण्ड चतर्ुवेदीले हानेको कूटनीतिक चड्कनपछि दुवै अडानमा सम्झौता गर्न राजी भए । गणतन्त्र घोषणाबारे उनी काङ्ग्रेस र एमालेकै पुरानो प्रस्ताव अर्थात् संसद्बाट गणतन्त्र घोषणा गरेर संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले त्यसलाई अनुमोदन गर्ने र्सतमा सहमत भए र निर्वाचन प्रणालीका हकमा पर्ूण्ा समानुपातिकको माग त्यागेर ५८ प्रतिशत समानुपातिक हुने कुरामा राजी भए । दलहरूले पछिल्लो सहमति आफ्नै क्ष्ँमताको कमाल हो भनेर जतिसुकै डम्फू बजाए पनि त्यसमा 'र' का प्रमुखको भूमिकाबारे अब कुनै अन्योल रहेन । आफ्नो सक्रियतामा दिल्लीमा भएको १२ बु“दे सहमतिलाई निर्ण्ाायक विन्दुमा पुर्याउन नसके त्यो आफ्नो नेपाल नीतिको विफलता ठानिने कुराबाट भारत चिन्तित छ । त्यसै भएर चतर्ुवेदी स्वयम् नेपाल भित्रिएका हुन् ।
हाम्रँ नेताहरूले भारतले उनीहरूलाई वेश्यासरह व्यवहार गररिहेको छ भन्ने नबुझेका होइनन् । तैपनि, छोराछोरीहरूलाई भारतीय दूतावासबाट प्राप्त हुने छात्रवृत्तिदेखि भारतको निगाह भएमा मात्र सत्ता प्राप्त हुनसक्छ भन्ने आशा र लालसामा उनीहरू नराम्ररी गा“जिएका छन् । यद्यपि, तिनलाई दिल्लीद्वारा सञ्चालित राजनीतिक वेश्यालयबाट कसैले उद्धार गर्न सक्छ भने त्यो सम्भवतः हाम्रै तथाकथित नागरकि समाजले मात्र सक्छ । सकारात्मक होस् या नकारात्मक, वर्तमान राजनीति र नेपाली समाजको प्रकृतिमा हाम्रँे नागरकि समाजका सदस्यहरूले ठूलो प्रभाव पारेका छन् । तिनले लेखेका र बोलेका कुराहरूले जनमत र नेताहरूको दृष्टिकोण निर्माणमा महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा भूमिका निर्वाह गरेको देखिन्छ ।
तर, दुःखको कुरा के भने यस देशले बेहोररिहेको दर्ुगन्धको एउटा प्रमुख स्रँेत दिल्लीले सञ्चालन गरेको राजनीतिक वेश्यालय हो भन्ने बुझ्दाबुझ्दै पनि हाम्रा नागरकि समाजका सदस्यहरू त्यसका विरुद्ध खरो रूपमा उत्रिन सकिरहेका छैनन् । किन ती नेताहरूलाई दिल्लीको दास नबन्न दबाब दिन सक्दैनन् - किन ती नेपालले गत ५० वर्षा बेहोरेको अस्थिर राजनीतिको पीडा ठूलो हदसम्म हाम्रँ नेताहरूको दिल्ली दासताको नतिजा हो भन्ने बुझ्न सक्दैनन् - किन ती दिल्लीको आचरणका विरुद्ध जमेर लेख्न र बोल्न सक्दैनन् -
यी प्रश्नहरू गर्दा नागरकि समाजका मेरा श्रद्धेय अग्रजहरूले भन्नेछन्- त्यसबारे हामीले लेखेकै/बोलेकै छौ“, तिमीजस्ता छद्मभेषी हुतिहाराले हामीलाई सिकाउनुपर्दैन । तर, 'ज्ञानेन्द्र शाहा' का विरुद्ध हरेकपल्ट राइफल पड्केजस्तो पड्किने, सबै विसङ्गतिका विरुद्ध तीखो वाण प्रहार गर्नसक्ने खगेन्द्र सङ्ग्रौला चतर्ुवेदी-प्रवृत्त दिल्लीको चाल र त्यसैमा नाच्ने हाम्रा नेताका तालबारे किन बोल्दैनन् - शाहीकालमा 'ज्ञानेन्द्र राजा' का शक्तिशाली जनरलहरूलाई समेत ठाडो चुनौती दिन नडराउने कनकमणि दीक्षित किन हाम्रो राजनीतिक समस्याको एउटा मूल पाटोमा प्रवेश नै गर्न चाह“दैनन् - कहा“ गए सीके लाल, कुन्द दीक्षित - कहा“ गए नारायण वाग्ले, प्रतीक प्रधान, युवराज घिमिरे, कृष्ण ज्वालाहरू - एकाध व्यक्तिको प्रयासले मात्र केही हुनेवाला छैन ।
गणतान्त्रिक नेपालमा देशको सारा समस्याको समाधान देख्ने गगन थापा, नरहर िआचार्य, कृष्ण पहाडी, देवेन्द्रराज पाण्डेहरूले के देशमा गणतन्त्र आएपछि चतर्ुवेदीजस्ता 'र' का खेलाडीहरूले आफूले सञ्चालन गररिहेको वेश्यालय बन्द गर्लान् भन्ने सोचेका छन् - नियमित लेखनी र भाषणका क्रममा लेखिएका र बोलिएका एकाध प्रसङ्गहरूलाई उल्लेख नगरौ“ यहा“ । यो नेपालका लागि अचेल नेताहरूले हरेक दिन घोटेर पिलाउन खोजेको 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' भन्दा धेरै गुणा बढी महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा विषय हो ।
हामीले बुझ्नुपर्यो, र्सार्वजनिक रूपमा हामीलाई दोसल्ला ओडाए पनि त्यसको आवरणभित्र बसेर दिल्लीका बुज्रुकहरूले हाम्रँ राजादेखि नेतासम्म सबैलाई बारम्बार राजनीतिक करणी गरेका छन् । स्वार्थसिद्ध हुने आशामा ती सबैले करणीलाई बाध्यताको परण्िााम भन्दै निर्लज्ज स्वीकारेका छन् । बाध्यताका नाममा तिनले पीडा पचाइसके, लज्जा गुमाइसके । त्यसैले, राजदूतको दर्शन गर्न दूतावास धाउ“दा होस् वा छोराछोरीलाई छात्रवृत्तिका लागि बिन्तीभाउ गर्दा होस्, तिनको स्वाभिमान गिर्दैन । तर पनि, ती हाम्रा नेता हुन्, नेपाली हुन् । तिनलाई ठीक बाटोमा ल्याउने जिम्मा हामी नेपालीकै हो ।
जसरी हाम्रो नागरकि समाजले निरन्तरको दबाबद्वारा राजा ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई जनतामाथि राजनीतिक करणी गर्नबाट रोक्नमा महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा भूमिका निर्वाह गर्यो, त्यसैगरी त्यही नागरकि समाजले हाम्रँ नेताहरूलाई दिल्लीले गररिहेको राजनीतिक करणीबाट बचाउन निरन्तर प्रयास नगर्ने हो भने नया“ नेपालको हाम्रँे सपना कहिल्यै साकार हुने छैन । हामीले बुझ्नुपर्यो, नारायणहिटी दरबारभन्दा दिल्ली दरबार नेपालको भविष्यका लागि सधै“ बढी घातक हुनेछ । तर, अफसोच † हामी नारायणहिटी दरबार भत्काएर त्यसका ठाउ“मा दिल्ली दरबार निर्माण गररिहेका छा“ै ।
कुरा केही साता पुरानो हो, जतिबेला माओवादी अध्यक्ष्ँ प्रचण्ड र प्रधानमन्त्री कोइराला आप\mना निकटस्थहरूलाई महन्थ ठाकुरलगायतका नेताहरूले मधेसी राजनीतिका नाममा गरेका आ-आफ्ना पार्टर्ीीहिर्गमन भारतीय चालको परण्िााम भएको सन्देश दि“दै थिए । अरू धेरै नेताहरूलगायत प्रचण्ड र कोइराला दुवै जना वर्तमान नेपाली राजनीतिमा भारतको भूमिकाबारे अत्यन्त सशङ्कित छन् । किनभने, भारतले हाम्रा नेताहरूलाई र्सार्वजनिक रूपमा ओढाइदिने गरेको लुङ्गीको दोसल्लाभित्र लुकेर नेपालमा अस्थिरता सिर्जना गर्दै आएको छ भन्ने कुरा अब कसैबाट छिपेको छैन । त्यति बुझ्दाबुझ्दै पनि हाम्रा नेताहरू, खासगरी माओवादीहरू, आफ्ना मागका कारण उत्पन्न गतिरोध मिलेर अन्त्य गर्न सकिरहेका थिएनन् ।
अनि त्यसैबेला भयो, पाकिस्तान टुक्र्याएर बङ्गलादेश निर्माण गर्न, सिक्किमलाई गणतन्त्र बनाएर भारतमा विलीन गराउन र श्रीलङ्काको गृहयुद्ध चर्काउनमा प्रामाणिक रूपमै प्रमुख भूमिका निर्वाह गरेको भारतीय गुप्तचर संस्था 'र' का प्रमुख अशोक चतर्ुवेदीको नेपाल भ्रमण । 'र' का प्रमुख संसद्प्रति जवाफदेही हु“दैनन् र तिनले सीधै प्रधानमन्त्रीस“गको समन्वयमा काम गर्छन् । नेपालविज्ञ मानिने चतर्ुवेदीले भ्रमणका क्रममा प्रधानमन्त्री कोइराला, माओवादी अध्यक्ष प्रचण्डलगायतका नेताहरू तथा सेनाप्रमुख रुक्माङ्गद कटवालस“ग पनि भेटेको बताइएको छ । सबैलाई भेटेर दिनुपर्ने सन्देश दिएर उनी पुस ७ गते स्वदेश फर्किए । अनि, भोलिपल्ट दलहरू महिनौ“देखि पुग्न नसकिरहेको सहमतिमा पुगे ।
सहमतिअगाडि संसद्बाटै गणतन्त्र घोषणा र पर्ूण्ा समानुपातिक निर्वाचन प्रणालीबारेको अडानमा डेग चल्न नमानिरहेका प्रचण्ड चतर्ुवेदीले हानेको कूटनीतिक चड्कनपछि दुवै अडानमा सम्झौता गर्न राजी भए । गणतन्त्र घोषणाबारे उनी काङ्ग्रेस र एमालेकै पुरानो प्रस्ताव अर्थात् संसद्बाट गणतन्त्र घोषणा गरेर संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले त्यसलाई अनुमोदन गर्ने र्सतमा सहमत भए र निर्वाचन प्रणालीका हकमा पर्ूण्ा समानुपातिकको माग त्यागेर ५८ प्रतिशत समानुपातिक हुने कुरामा राजी भए । दलहरूले पछिल्लो सहमति आफ्नै क्ष्ँमताको कमाल हो भनेर जतिसुकै डम्फू बजाए पनि त्यसमा 'र' का प्रमुखको भूमिकाबारे अब कुनै अन्योल रहेन । आफ्नो सक्रियतामा दिल्लीमा भएको १२ बु“दे सहमतिलाई निर्ण्ाायक विन्दुमा पुर्याउन नसके त्यो आफ्नो नेपाल नीतिको विफलता ठानिने कुराबाट भारत चिन्तित छ । त्यसै भएर चतर्ुवेदी स्वयम् नेपाल भित्रिएका हुन् ।
हाम्रँ नेताहरूले भारतले उनीहरूलाई वेश्यासरह व्यवहार गररिहेको छ भन्ने नबुझेका होइनन् । तैपनि, छोराछोरीहरूलाई भारतीय दूतावासबाट प्राप्त हुने छात्रवृत्तिदेखि भारतको निगाह भएमा मात्र सत्ता प्राप्त हुनसक्छ भन्ने आशा र लालसामा उनीहरू नराम्ररी गा“जिएका छन् । यद्यपि, तिनलाई दिल्लीद्वारा सञ्चालित राजनीतिक वेश्यालयबाट कसैले उद्धार गर्न सक्छ भने त्यो सम्भवतः हाम्रै तथाकथित नागरकि समाजले मात्र सक्छ । सकारात्मक होस् या नकारात्मक, वर्तमान राजनीति र नेपाली समाजको प्रकृतिमा हाम्रँे नागरकि समाजका सदस्यहरूले ठूलो प्रभाव पारेका छन् । तिनले लेखेका र बोलेका कुराहरूले जनमत र नेताहरूको दृष्टिकोण निर्माणमा महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा भूमिका निर्वाह गरेको देखिन्छ ।
तर, दुःखको कुरा के भने यस देशले बेहोररिहेको दर्ुगन्धको एउटा प्रमुख स्रँेत दिल्लीले सञ्चालन गरेको राजनीतिक वेश्यालय हो भन्ने बुझ्दाबुझ्दै पनि हाम्रा नागरकि समाजका सदस्यहरू त्यसका विरुद्ध खरो रूपमा उत्रिन सकिरहेका छैनन् । किन ती नेताहरूलाई दिल्लीको दास नबन्न दबाब दिन सक्दैनन् - किन ती नेपालले गत ५० वर्षा बेहोरेको अस्थिर राजनीतिको पीडा ठूलो हदसम्म हाम्रँ नेताहरूको दिल्ली दासताको नतिजा हो भन्ने बुझ्न सक्दैनन् - किन ती दिल्लीको आचरणका विरुद्ध जमेर लेख्न र बोल्न सक्दैनन् -
यी प्रश्नहरू गर्दा नागरकि समाजका मेरा श्रद्धेय अग्रजहरूले भन्नेछन्- त्यसबारे हामीले लेखेकै/बोलेकै छौ“, तिमीजस्ता छद्मभेषी हुतिहाराले हामीलाई सिकाउनुपर्दैन । तर, 'ज्ञानेन्द्र शाहा' का विरुद्ध हरेकपल्ट राइफल पड्केजस्तो पड्किने, सबै विसङ्गतिका विरुद्ध तीखो वाण प्रहार गर्नसक्ने खगेन्द्र सङ्ग्रौला चतर्ुवेदी-प्रवृत्त दिल्लीको चाल र त्यसैमा नाच्ने हाम्रा नेताका तालबारे किन बोल्दैनन् - शाहीकालमा 'ज्ञानेन्द्र राजा' का शक्तिशाली जनरलहरूलाई समेत ठाडो चुनौती दिन नडराउने कनकमणि दीक्षित किन हाम्रो राजनीतिक समस्याको एउटा मूल पाटोमा प्रवेश नै गर्न चाह“दैनन् - कहा“ गए सीके लाल, कुन्द दीक्षित - कहा“ गए नारायण वाग्ले, प्रतीक प्रधान, युवराज घिमिरे, कृष्ण ज्वालाहरू - एकाध व्यक्तिको प्रयासले मात्र केही हुनेवाला छैन ।
गणतान्त्रिक नेपालमा देशको सारा समस्याको समाधान देख्ने गगन थापा, नरहर िआचार्य, कृष्ण पहाडी, देवेन्द्रराज पाण्डेहरूले के देशमा गणतन्त्र आएपछि चतर्ुवेदीजस्ता 'र' का खेलाडीहरूले आफूले सञ्चालन गररिहेको वेश्यालय बन्द गर्लान् भन्ने सोचेका छन् - नियमित लेखनी र भाषणका क्रममा लेखिएका र बोलिएका एकाध प्रसङ्गहरूलाई उल्लेख नगरौ“ यहा“ । यो नेपालका लागि अचेल नेताहरूले हरेक दिन घोटेर पिलाउन खोजेको 'सङ्घीय लोकतान्त्रिक गणतन्त्र' भन्दा धेरै गुणा बढी महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा विषय हो ।
हामीले बुझ्नुपर्यो, र्सार्वजनिक रूपमा हामीलाई दोसल्ला ओडाए पनि त्यसको आवरणभित्र बसेर दिल्लीका बुज्रुकहरूले हाम्रँ राजादेखि नेतासम्म सबैलाई बारम्बार राजनीतिक करणी गरेका छन् । स्वार्थसिद्ध हुने आशामा ती सबैले करणीलाई बाध्यताको परण्िााम भन्दै निर्लज्ज स्वीकारेका छन् । बाध्यताका नाममा तिनले पीडा पचाइसके, लज्जा गुमाइसके । त्यसैले, राजदूतको दर्शन गर्न दूतावास धाउ“दा होस् वा छोराछोरीलाई छात्रवृत्तिका लागि बिन्तीभाउ गर्दा होस्, तिनको स्वाभिमान गिर्दैन । तर पनि, ती हाम्रा नेता हुन्, नेपाली हुन् । तिनलाई ठीक बाटोमा ल्याउने जिम्मा हामी नेपालीकै हो ।
जसरी हाम्रो नागरकि समाजले निरन्तरको दबाबद्वारा राजा ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई जनतामाथि राजनीतिक करणी गर्नबाट रोक्नमा महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा भूमिका निर्वाह गर्यो, त्यसैगरी त्यही नागरकि समाजले हाम्रँ नेताहरूलाई दिल्लीले गररिहेको राजनीतिक करणीबाट बचाउन निरन्तर प्रयास नगर्ने हो भने नया“ नेपालको हाम्रँे सपना कहिल्यै साकार हुने छैन । हामीले बुझ्नुपर्यो, नारायणहिटी दरबारभन्दा दिल्ली दरबार नेपालको भविष्यका लागि सधै“ बढी घातक हुनेछ । तर, अफसोच † हामी नारायणहिटी दरबार भत्काएर त्यसका ठाउ“मा दिल्ली दरबार निर्माण गररिहेका छा“ै ।
Sunday, January 6, 2008
यसकारण आएको छैन गणतन्त्र - इन्जिनियर ज्ञवाली
http://www.kantipuronline.com/Nepal/aabaran.php
गत साता अन्तरमि सरकारले अन्तरमि संसद्मा खासै बहसबिना अन्तरमि संविधान संशोधन प्रस्ताव ल्यायो, जो पारति पनि भयो । तर, यसले जनमानसमा कुनै उत्साहको तरङ्ग ल्याउन सकेन बरु निराशाकै बादल बाक्लि“दै गएको भान हुन्छ । यसरी संशोधन गर्दै जा“दा हरेक संशोधनमा यो अन्तरमि व्यवस्थाले आप\mनो वैधानिकता गुमाउ“दै गएको छ । यो व्यवस्थाको सुरुवात राजाबाट राजालाई दिन नहुने अधिकार दिएर पुनःजीवित गराएको संसद्बाट भयो । सर्वोच्च अदालतले समेत मरेकोलाई ब्यू“ताउन नसकिने भनेको सुझावलाई बेवास्ता गरी विदेशी दबाबसमेतको बलमा पार्टर्ीीलहकै कारण विघटित संसद्लाई राजाबाट पुनःजीवित गराइयो । यसरी मसान जगाउन सक्ने तान्त्रिक शक्ति राजाको अवशिष्ट अधिकारमा थपियो, संसद्को सर्वोच्चता मान्नुपर्ने पार्टर्ीीबाटै । वास्तवमा संसद्लाई पुनःस्थापित गराउन सक्ने अधिकार जनतालाई मात्र हुन्छ, मतमार्फत । तर, जनतालाई त्यस अधिकारबाट वञ्चित गराइएकै कारण पुनःजीवित संसद्को म्यान्डेट अत्यन्तै सीमित भयो, नया“ व्यवस्थाका लागि निर्वाचन गराउनका लागि मात्र ।
राजाबाट संसद् पुनःजीवित गराउ“दा सात पार्टर्ीीे मार्गचित्र अनुसार देशमा अमनचैन कायम गरी जनताको सही मत अभिव्यक्त हुनसक्ने व्यवस्थ्ााका लागि भनिएको थियो । के सात पार्टर्ीीे मार्गचित्र अनुसार काम भएको छ त - मार्गचित्र हो कि भुलभुलैया चित्र हो, छुट्याउनै गाह्रो छ । त्यस्तै मार्गचित्रमा २०४७ सालमा अर्जुनदृष्टि राखेर एक वर्षभत्रमा नया“ संविधान बनाई सफलताका साथ चुनाव सम्पन्न गरेका थिए, तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री कृष्णप्रसाद भट्टर्राईले । त्यतिबेला पनि परििस्थति अप्ठ्यारै थियो । आफू चुनावमा हारेर पनि चुनाव सफलताका साथ गरेका थिए भट्टर्राईले । त्यो काम अहिले किन भइरहेको छैन -
मरेको संसद्लाई ब्यू“ताएर अहिले धेरै काम गर्छ भन्ने आशा गर्नु अतिरञ्जित मात्रै होइन, असम्भव नै थियो । तैपनि, नेताहरू सुध्रिए होलान्, राम्रो काम गर्लान् भन्ने थियो, त्यो पनि भएन । एकपछि अर्को गल्ती थपि“दै गयो । जो जति जोडले करायो, उसले भनेको कुरा दिन थालियो । माओवादीहरू कराए । जबकि उनीहरूलाई उतिखेरै समानुपातिकलगायतका जेजति सुधार गर्ने हो, निर्वाचनपछि जितेको बलको अनुपातमा गर्नु भन्नुपर्थ्याे । तर, बिनाचुनाव संसद्मा स्थान दिइयो । कराएकै भरमा, सडक अवरुद्ध गरेकै भरमा यसरी स्थान पाइ“दोरहेछ भन्ने सन्देश प्रवाहित भयो । अब सब कराउ“दैछन् र नपाउन्जेलसम्म कोलाहल मच्चाउने नै भए ।
संविधानसभा भन्ने कुरा सामान्य अवस्थामा हुने होइन । भइरहेको राज्यमा संविधानसभा हुने पनि होइन । दार्शनिक ढङ्गले हर्ेर्ने हो भने नया“ नेपालको अवधारणा पनि गलत हो, त्यो हुनै सक्दैन । हामीलाई चाहिएको त राम्रो नेपाल हो, नया“ होइन । किनभने, नेपाल दक्षिण एसियाको सबैभन्दा पुरानो मुलुक हो । भारतलगायत अरू मुलुक मात्र ६० वर्षपुराना हुन् । देश अविकसित भए पनि दक्षिण एसियामा हामी सबैभन्दा पुरानो देश हा“ै भनेर शिर ठाडो गरेर हि“ड्न सक्ने स्थिति थियो । तर, नया“ नेपालको परकिल्पना गर्नेहरूले बुझेका छन् कि छैनन्, दलहरू 'मुग्लानी एजेन्डा' मा फसेका छन् । नया“ नेपाल बनाउने हो भने त हामी अब फेर िवामे र्सर्दै हि“ड्नर्ुपर्छ, क्याम्बोडियामा जस्तै । देशलाई शून्यबाट अगाडि बढाउन खोज्नु अत्यन्तै अपरपिक्व राजनीति हो ।
संविधानसभा, समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्व र सङ्घीय संरचना सुन्दा र भन्दा जतिसुकै आकर्ष लागे पनि व्यवहारमा उतार्न अत्यन्तै कठिन छ । संविधानसभाको चुनाव भनेको साधारण चुनाव त हु“दै होइन । यो चुनाव पार्टर्ीी हिसाबले गर्ने चुनाव पनि होइन । यसमा पढेलेखेका-जानेबुझेका मान्छे आउनु अनिवार्य छ । तर, अहिले परििस्थति यस्तो छ कि यसमा पढेलेखेकाहरू आउने सम्भावना कम छ । यही प्रणाली अनुसार पार्टर्ीी 'रबर स्ट्याम्प' हरू मात्र आउनेेछन् । अन्तरमि संसद्लाई नै हर्ेर्ने हो भने त्यहा“ माओवादीका तर्फाट माथिल्लास्तरका नेताहरू कोही गएनन् । यसको मतलब माओवादीलाई नै विश्वास छैन, र्सार्वभौमसत्तासम्पन्न संसद्प्रति ।
संविधानसभामा जानुअगावै कस्ता कुरा प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक राजनीति अर्न्तर्गत पर्ने र कस्ता त्यसबाहिर रहनुपर्ने निक्र्योल भएन भने चुनावपछि पनि अस्थिरता कायम नै रहनेछ । कतिपय विषय पहिल्यै जनमतसङ्ग्रहबाट टुङ्गो नलागेसम्म संविधानका खेस्रामेस्रा कुरा गर्नै मिल्दैन । प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक राजनीतिभन्दा बाहिर रहनुपर्ने कुराहरू हुन् ः परराष्ट्रनीति, सरकारी सेवा, न्याय प्रणाली, रक्षा र राष्ट्राध्यक्ष ।र् धर्मनिरपेक्षता, सङ्घात्मक शासन र अहिले आएर गणतन्त्रको कुरा जनताले छिनोफानो गर्नुपर्ने हो । यी विषयमा जनताको अधिकार अपहरण भएको छ । तर पनि, अपहरण गर्नेले त्यसलाई धान्न सक्दैन । जनतालाई निर्ण्र्ाागर्न दिनुपर्ने कुराहरूमा सात दल आफ“ैले निर्ण्र्ाागरेर जनतामा लाद्ने प्रवृत्ति देखिएको छ । संविधानसभा पहिले निर्ःर्सत गर्ने भनियो तर अहिले आएर र्सर्सत मात्र होइन, संविधानसभाले गर्नुपर्ने सबै निर्ण्र्ाारू अहिले नै गर्न थालियो । यसले भोलिका दिनमा समस्याहरू निम्त्याउ“छ ।
जस्तो, सङ्घात्मक प्रणालीमा जाने भनिएको छ तर त्यसको ढा“चाबारे कसैलाई थाहा छैन । नेपालमा कुनै एउटा त्यस्तो जात छैन, जहा“ प्रान्त बन्नसक्ने क्षेत्रमा उनीहरूको बाहुल्य होस् । भोलि जथाभावी सङ्घीय क्षेत्र बनाइयो भने कपिलवस्तु काण्ड हरेक ठाउ“मा निम्तिन सक्छ । अनि, बहुमत नै अल्पमतमा पर्न सक्छ । वास्तवमा जनताले खोजेको त विकेन्द्रीकरण हो । स्थानीय निकायहरूमा केन्द्रले आफूस“ग राखेको अधिकार पुगोस् भन्ने सबले चाहेका छन् । यो विकासको कुरा हो तर राजनीतिलाई प्रवेश गराइएको छ । चुनावका लागि तीन महिना पनि छैन, कसैले पनि सङ्घीयताको अवधारणा ल्याएको छैन, त्यसका लागि गृहकार्य पनि गरेको छैन । यस्तो स्थितिमा कुन सङ्घीयतालाई अनुमोदन गर्ने -
सङ्घीयता भनेको वास्तवमा विकेन्द्रीकरण हो । अहिले जिल्ला वा भोलि प्रदेश जे नाम दिए पनि विकासको अधिकार भोलि कति दिने भन्ने नै मूल कुरा हो । अहिले त्यसलाई संविधानतः के भन्ने कुनै ठेगान छैन । भोलि कुन संरचनामा जाने भन्ने कुनै पार्टर्ीी गृहकार्य गरेको छैन । नारा त छ तर नारामा पनि विरोधाभास देखिन थालेको छ ।
राजतन्त्र राख्ने/नराख्ने भन्ने कुरा पनि जनताले निर्ण्र्ाागर्नुपर्ने हो । वैधता पाउनका लागि जनमतसङ्ग्रहमा जानुपर्ने हो । आफूलाई जनताका हिमायती भन्नेहरू जनमतसङ्ग्रहमा किन जान सकेनन् - यो खोजको विषय हो । राजाले 'क्याम्पेन' गर्छन् कि भनेर डराएर हो कि - राजा नचाहने जनमत आयो भने राजा फालिन्थ्यो । संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले निर्ण्र्ाागर्ने भन्ने कुरा पनि यस अर्थमा त्रुटिपर्ूण्ा छ कि त्यहा“ं जनताको मत कसरी अभिव्यक्त हुन्छ र पार्टर्ीी्वीपको निर्ण्र्ााके हुन्छ - किनभने, अहिले नै ह्वीप उल्लङ्घन हुन थालिसक्यो । मान्छेहरूलाई चित्त बुझेको छैन यस कुरामा । भोलि संविधानसभाको निष्पक्ष चुनाव भयो भने पनि यो समस्या त आउ“छ नै । त्यसैले लहडमा जसरी काम गरयिो, त्यसले संविधानसभा र सातदलीय गठनबन्धनमाथि नै प्रश्नचिन्ह खडा गरेको छ ।
अन्तरमि संविधानमा गरएिको तेस्रो संशोधनले राजाको भविष्य के हुन्छ भन्न प्रश्न धेरैको मनमा होला । तर, यस संशोधनले राजालाई भन्दा नेपाली काङ्ग्रेसलाई सबैभन्दा बढी घाटा परेको देखिन्छ । वैधता नै नभएको निर्ण्र्ााो कुनै अर्थ नभएकाले राजालाई अहिलेका निर्ण्र्ाारूले केही फरक पार्दैन । तेस्रो संशोधनले नया“ कुरा केही भनेको पनि छैन । संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले कार्यान्वयन गर्ने भनिएको छ । अहिले गणतन्त्रात्मक नेपाल घोषणा गरएि पनि, एकतन्त्रात्मक वा राजतन्त्रात्मक जे घोषणा होस्, त्यसको केही अर्थ छैन, नेपाल छुवाछूतमुक्त देश भनेर घोषणा गरेभै“m ।
फेर िगणतन्त्रको कार्यान्वयन संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले गर्ने भन्ने कुरा आफै“मा मिल्दैन । प्राविधिक रूपले पनि मिल्दैन । कुनै पनि पुस्ताले भोलि आउने पुस्तामाथि आफ्नो निर्ण्र्ाालाद्न सक्दैन । भोलि आउने सभा भनेको त र्सार्वभौमसत्तासम्पन्न संसद् हो । र्सार्वभौमसत्तासम्पन्न संसद्लाई अहिले नचुनिएको अङ्गले भोलि 'यसो गर', 'उसो गर' भन्न कुनै हालतमा मिल्दैन । अहिलेको संसद्ले गरेको निर्ण्र्ााभोलि निर्वाचित भएर आउने संसद्ले मान्नुपर्ने आवश्यकता पनि छैन । त्यो र्सार्वभौमसम्पन्न संसद् हो, त्यसले जे पनि गर्नसक्छ । अहिलेको निर्ण्र्ाााई मान्न पनि सक्छ, नमान्न पनि सक्छ । यसभन्दा चर्को अरू कुनै निर्ण्र्ाापनि गर्नसक्छ । संविधानसभालाई 'डिक्टेट' गर्न, त्यो पनि जनताबाट नचुनिएकाहरू र मरेर ब्यू“ताइएकाहरूलाई अख्तियारी छैन ।
दिल्लीमा भएको १२ बु“दे समझदारी राजालाई ठेगान लगाउने मुग्लानी साहूको 'एजेन्डा' हो । त्यसैको प्रतिफल हो, अहिले देखिएका विकृतिहरू । आफ्नो बलबुता र बुद्घििववेक दल-माओवादी १२ बु“दे समझदारीमा प्रयोग गरएिको छैन । कसैको आवेशलाई कसैले प्रयोग गरििदएर भएको सम्झौता हो यो । यसमा समस्या आउ“थ्यो नै, आइरहेको छ । त्यसैले, अहिले राष्ट्रियताको प्रश्नमा काङ्ग्रेस, एमाले र माओवादीमा विभाजन देखिएको हो । यसको केन्द्रमा राजा र राजसंस्था छ, जसलाई त्यति सजिलै किनारा लगाउन सकि“दैन ।
राजतन्त्र रहनुपर्ने राष्ट्रियताबाहेकको आधार पनि छ । निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्र कसैलाई पनि चाहिएको छैन । यस पङ्क्तिकारले थाहा पाएसम्म जी शाह भन्ने व्यक्तिलाई पनि निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्र चाहिएको छैन । जसले पार्टर्ीीमाथि प्रतिबन्ध लगाउन सक्थ्यो, आप\mनो तथाकथित निरङ्कुश शासनकालमा उसले त्यस्तो केही गरेन । बरु सात दलले नै चुनिएका सांसदहरूलाई संसद्मा प्रवेश गर्न रोक लगाए । जबकि, राजाले चुनाव गर्नका लागि सबै सरकारलाई भन्दै आएको हो ।
नेपालज्ास्तो देशमा पार्टर्ीीट आएको व्यक्ति 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' -राष्ट्राध्यक्ष) बन्यो भने अरू पार्टर्ीी नमान्ने स्थिति हुन्छ, त्यो प्रस्ट छ । किनभने, कुनै पनि व्यवस्थामा 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' नै 'हेड अफ दी आर्मी' -सेना प्रमुख) हुन्छ । उसमै रहेको हुन्छ, संविधानमा लेख्न नभ्याइएका अवशिष्ट शक्ति । यस्तो शक्ति रहेको 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' दलको स्वार्थभन्दा माथि उठेको हुनर्ुपर्छ ।
अहिलेको परििस्थतिमा 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' भनेर मान्नसक्ने संस्था कुन छ - राजसंस्था नै हो । वैकल्पिक रूपमा कुनै र्सवमान्य संस्था, जो पार्टर्ीीभन्दा माथि रहेको पाउने सम्भावना अहिले झन्झन् कम हु“दै गएको देखिन्छ । एक सय तीन जात र ९३ भाषीले मान्न सक्ने कुन संस्था छ - कोही पनि छैन । यहा“निर राजसंस्थाको आवश्यकता खट्किन्छ । त्यसैले, देश गणतन्त्रमय भइसक्यो भन्ने लाग्दैन । ज्रि्रै फड्कारेर खाएका 'ज्रि्रोजीवी' हरूले मात्र देश गणतन्त्रमय भइसक्यो भनेका हुन् । तथ्यले यो कुरा कतै पनि देखाउ“दैन । अर्कोतर्फ, नेपाली जनताले राजाले सक्रिय शासन गरेको पनि मन पराउ“दा रहेनछन् भन्ने विगतको अनुभवले देखाएको छ । राजाले अहिले त्यसैबाट पाठ सिकेर पार्टर्ीीलाई सबै सुम्पेर बसेको स्थिति छ । तर, राजालाई पार्टर्ीीले 'हामीले चुनाव गर्न सकेनौ“, तिमीले नै गराइदेऊ' भन्ने स्थिति पनि नआउला भन्न नसकिने परििस्थतिले नै देखाउन थालिसक्यो ।
देशको भविष्य कस्तो छ भन्ने ठेगान नभएका बेलामा राजतन्त्रको भविष्य के होला - भन्न गाह्रो छ । राजतन्त्र भनेको देशको एउटा अङ्ग मात्र हो । अहिले नै राजतन्त्रको भविष्य कस्तो होला भन्ने कुराको निर्ण्र्ाागर्नु अपरपिक्व हुन्छ । परििस्थति अनुसार जे-जे होला भन्नुबाहेक अर्को उपाय छैन । भोलि सबैलाई समेटेर निष्पक्ष रूपमा संविधानसभाको निर्वाचन हुन सकेन भने त्यसले अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय वैधता पाउ“दैन । वर्तमान राजास“ग यस पङ्क्तिकारले उनी राजा हुनुभन्दा अघि पनि र राजा भइसके पनि काम गरेको हो । राजालाई केही समययता भेट्दा के पाइएको छ भने उनी यति सब हु“दा पनि निराश छैनन्, न त उनमा कटुता भेटिन्छ । अनौठो लाग्छ, एक-डेढ घन्टा एक्लै कुरा गर्दा कोही नाटक गरेर बस्न सक्दैन । 'दलहरूलाई मार्गचित्र अनुसार हि“ड्नु भनेको हो । उनीहरू त्यस अनुसार हि“डेका छन् कि छैनन्, त्यो जनताले भन्ने कुरा हो । मैले अहिले त्यही कबुलिएको मार्गचित्र हेररिहेको छु, अहिले मैले गर्नैपर्ने केही छैन' भन्ने राजाको भनाइ पाइएको छ । यसैले राजाको भविष्य के होला भन्ने परकिल्पनामा अलमलिनु जरुरी छैन ।
०३३ सालमा बीपी कोइरालाले मेलमिलापको सिद्घान्त अघि सारे, जसले नेपालको राजनीतिमा परविर्तन ल्यायो । मेलमिलापको नीति परम्परागत शक्ति र आधुनिक शक्तिबीच तालमेल हुनर्ुपर्छ भनेर ल्याइएको हो । राजसंस्था र राष्ट्रियताप्रति आस्था राख्ने व्यक्तिहरूस“ग पनि मेलमिलाप गर्नुपर्ने हो, नेपाली काङ्ग्रेसले तर त्यसो भएको छैन । यस वर्षराष्ट्रिय मेलमिलाप दिवसकै दिन अबको मेलमिलाप जनतास“ग मात्र हुन्छ भनेर जुन वक्तव्य आयो काङ्ग्रेसबाट, त्यसको मतलब आजसम्म जनतास“ग मेलमिलाप नगरेको बुझिन्छ । चुनावमा चाहि“ नजाने अनि जनतास“ग कहा“निर मेलमिलाप गर्ने - र, कसरी आफूलाई प्रजातान्त्रिक शक्ति भन्ने -
यदि ०६४ चैतसम्म चुनाव नै हुन सकेन भने के हुन्छ - ०५६ सालमा चुनिएका प्रतिनिधिहरूको क्ष्ँेत्रमा त्यतिखेर १० वर्षा केटाकेटी पनि १८ वर्षभइसके । यस्तो स्थितिमा जनताले हालका सांसदलाई किन मान्नुपर्ने - त्यसरी बालिग भइसकेकाहरूका प्रतिनिधि त होइनन् नि उनीहरू । यस्तोमा कार्यवाहक राष्ट्राध्यक्षको निर्ण्र्ााकसैले मान्ला भन्ने लाग्दैन । जोस“ग हिजो शपथ खाएको त्यही“ गएर 'मार्गचित्र भनेका थियौ“, चलेन' भन्नुपरे के गर्ने - त्यसबेला राजाले के गर्ने हो, थाहा छैन ।
-इन्जिनियर ज्ञवाली ँअसोज १८’ पछि गठित सरकारमा जलस्रोतमन्त्री थिए ।)
गत साता अन्तरमि सरकारले अन्तरमि संसद्मा खासै बहसबिना अन्तरमि संविधान संशोधन प्रस्ताव ल्यायो, जो पारति पनि भयो । तर, यसले जनमानसमा कुनै उत्साहको तरङ्ग ल्याउन सकेन बरु निराशाकै बादल बाक्लि“दै गएको भान हुन्छ । यसरी संशोधन गर्दै जा“दा हरेक संशोधनमा यो अन्तरमि व्यवस्थाले आप\mनो वैधानिकता गुमाउ“दै गएको छ । यो व्यवस्थाको सुरुवात राजाबाट राजालाई दिन नहुने अधिकार दिएर पुनःजीवित गराएको संसद्बाट भयो । सर्वोच्च अदालतले समेत मरेकोलाई ब्यू“ताउन नसकिने भनेको सुझावलाई बेवास्ता गरी विदेशी दबाबसमेतको बलमा पार्टर्ीीलहकै कारण विघटित संसद्लाई राजाबाट पुनःजीवित गराइयो । यसरी मसान जगाउन सक्ने तान्त्रिक शक्ति राजाको अवशिष्ट अधिकारमा थपियो, संसद्को सर्वोच्चता मान्नुपर्ने पार्टर्ीीबाटै । वास्तवमा संसद्लाई पुनःस्थापित गराउन सक्ने अधिकार जनतालाई मात्र हुन्छ, मतमार्फत । तर, जनतालाई त्यस अधिकारबाट वञ्चित गराइएकै कारण पुनःजीवित संसद्को म्यान्डेट अत्यन्तै सीमित भयो, नया“ व्यवस्थाका लागि निर्वाचन गराउनका लागि मात्र ।
राजाबाट संसद् पुनःजीवित गराउ“दा सात पार्टर्ीीे मार्गचित्र अनुसार देशमा अमनचैन कायम गरी जनताको सही मत अभिव्यक्त हुनसक्ने व्यवस्थ्ााका लागि भनिएको थियो । के सात पार्टर्ीीे मार्गचित्र अनुसार काम भएको छ त - मार्गचित्र हो कि भुलभुलैया चित्र हो, छुट्याउनै गाह्रो छ । त्यस्तै मार्गचित्रमा २०४७ सालमा अर्जुनदृष्टि राखेर एक वर्षभत्रमा नया“ संविधान बनाई सफलताका साथ चुनाव सम्पन्न गरेका थिए, तत्कालीन प्रधानमन्त्री कृष्णप्रसाद भट्टर्राईले । त्यतिबेला पनि परििस्थति अप्ठ्यारै थियो । आफू चुनावमा हारेर पनि चुनाव सफलताका साथ गरेका थिए भट्टर्राईले । त्यो काम अहिले किन भइरहेको छैन -
मरेको संसद्लाई ब्यू“ताएर अहिले धेरै काम गर्छ भन्ने आशा गर्नु अतिरञ्जित मात्रै होइन, असम्भव नै थियो । तैपनि, नेताहरू सुध्रिए होलान्, राम्रो काम गर्लान् भन्ने थियो, त्यो पनि भएन । एकपछि अर्को गल्ती थपि“दै गयो । जो जति जोडले करायो, उसले भनेको कुरा दिन थालियो । माओवादीहरू कराए । जबकि उनीहरूलाई उतिखेरै समानुपातिकलगायतका जेजति सुधार गर्ने हो, निर्वाचनपछि जितेको बलको अनुपातमा गर्नु भन्नुपर्थ्याे । तर, बिनाचुनाव संसद्मा स्थान दिइयो । कराएकै भरमा, सडक अवरुद्ध गरेकै भरमा यसरी स्थान पाइ“दोरहेछ भन्ने सन्देश प्रवाहित भयो । अब सब कराउ“दैछन् र नपाउन्जेलसम्म कोलाहल मच्चाउने नै भए ।
संविधानसभा भन्ने कुरा सामान्य अवस्थामा हुने होइन । भइरहेको राज्यमा संविधानसभा हुने पनि होइन । दार्शनिक ढङ्गले हर्ेर्ने हो भने नया“ नेपालको अवधारणा पनि गलत हो, त्यो हुनै सक्दैन । हामीलाई चाहिएको त राम्रो नेपाल हो, नया“ होइन । किनभने, नेपाल दक्षिण एसियाको सबैभन्दा पुरानो मुलुक हो । भारतलगायत अरू मुलुक मात्र ६० वर्षपुराना हुन् । देश अविकसित भए पनि दक्षिण एसियामा हामी सबैभन्दा पुरानो देश हा“ै भनेर शिर ठाडो गरेर हि“ड्न सक्ने स्थिति थियो । तर, नया“ नेपालको परकिल्पना गर्नेहरूले बुझेका छन् कि छैनन्, दलहरू 'मुग्लानी एजेन्डा' मा फसेका छन् । नया“ नेपाल बनाउने हो भने त हामी अब फेर िवामे र्सर्दै हि“ड्नर्ुपर्छ, क्याम्बोडियामा जस्तै । देशलाई शून्यबाट अगाडि बढाउन खोज्नु अत्यन्तै अपरपिक्व राजनीति हो ।
संविधानसभा, समानुपातिक प्रतिनिधित्व र सङ्घीय संरचना सुन्दा र भन्दा जतिसुकै आकर्ष लागे पनि व्यवहारमा उतार्न अत्यन्तै कठिन छ । संविधानसभाको चुनाव भनेको साधारण चुनाव त हु“दै होइन । यो चुनाव पार्टर्ीी हिसाबले गर्ने चुनाव पनि होइन । यसमा पढेलेखेका-जानेबुझेका मान्छे आउनु अनिवार्य छ । तर, अहिले परििस्थति यस्तो छ कि यसमा पढेलेखेकाहरू आउने सम्भावना कम छ । यही प्रणाली अनुसार पार्टर्ीी 'रबर स्ट्याम्प' हरू मात्र आउनेेछन् । अन्तरमि संसद्लाई नै हर्ेर्ने हो भने त्यहा“ माओवादीका तर्फाट माथिल्लास्तरका नेताहरू कोही गएनन् । यसको मतलब माओवादीलाई नै विश्वास छैन, र्सार्वभौमसत्तासम्पन्न संसद्प्रति ।
संविधानसभामा जानुअगावै कस्ता कुरा प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक राजनीति अर्न्तर्गत पर्ने र कस्ता त्यसबाहिर रहनुपर्ने निक्र्योल भएन भने चुनावपछि पनि अस्थिरता कायम नै रहनेछ । कतिपय विषय पहिल्यै जनमतसङ्ग्रहबाट टुङ्गो नलागेसम्म संविधानका खेस्रामेस्रा कुरा गर्नै मिल्दैन । प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक राजनीतिभन्दा बाहिर रहनुपर्ने कुराहरू हुन् ः परराष्ट्रनीति, सरकारी सेवा, न्याय प्रणाली, रक्षा र राष्ट्राध्यक्ष ।र् धर्मनिरपेक्षता, सङ्घात्मक शासन र अहिले आएर गणतन्त्रको कुरा जनताले छिनोफानो गर्नुपर्ने हो । यी विषयमा जनताको अधिकार अपहरण भएको छ । तर पनि, अपहरण गर्नेले त्यसलाई धान्न सक्दैन । जनतालाई निर्ण्र्ाागर्न दिनुपर्ने कुराहरूमा सात दल आफ“ैले निर्ण्र्ाागरेर जनतामा लाद्ने प्रवृत्ति देखिएको छ । संविधानसभा पहिले निर्ःर्सत गर्ने भनियो तर अहिले आएर र्सर्सत मात्र होइन, संविधानसभाले गर्नुपर्ने सबै निर्ण्र्ाारू अहिले नै गर्न थालियो । यसले भोलिका दिनमा समस्याहरू निम्त्याउ“छ ।
जस्तो, सङ्घात्मक प्रणालीमा जाने भनिएको छ तर त्यसको ढा“चाबारे कसैलाई थाहा छैन । नेपालमा कुनै एउटा त्यस्तो जात छैन, जहा“ प्रान्त बन्नसक्ने क्षेत्रमा उनीहरूको बाहुल्य होस् । भोलि जथाभावी सङ्घीय क्षेत्र बनाइयो भने कपिलवस्तु काण्ड हरेक ठाउ“मा निम्तिन सक्छ । अनि, बहुमत नै अल्पमतमा पर्न सक्छ । वास्तवमा जनताले खोजेको त विकेन्द्रीकरण हो । स्थानीय निकायहरूमा केन्द्रले आफूस“ग राखेको अधिकार पुगोस् भन्ने सबले चाहेका छन् । यो विकासको कुरा हो तर राजनीतिलाई प्रवेश गराइएको छ । चुनावका लागि तीन महिना पनि छैन, कसैले पनि सङ्घीयताको अवधारणा ल्याएको छैन, त्यसका लागि गृहकार्य पनि गरेको छैन । यस्तो स्थितिमा कुन सङ्घीयतालाई अनुमोदन गर्ने -
सङ्घीयता भनेको वास्तवमा विकेन्द्रीकरण हो । अहिले जिल्ला वा भोलि प्रदेश जे नाम दिए पनि विकासको अधिकार भोलि कति दिने भन्ने नै मूल कुरा हो । अहिले त्यसलाई संविधानतः के भन्ने कुनै ठेगान छैन । भोलि कुन संरचनामा जाने भन्ने कुनै पार्टर्ीी गृहकार्य गरेको छैन । नारा त छ तर नारामा पनि विरोधाभास देखिन थालेको छ ।
राजतन्त्र राख्ने/नराख्ने भन्ने कुरा पनि जनताले निर्ण्र्ाागर्नुपर्ने हो । वैधता पाउनका लागि जनमतसङ्ग्रहमा जानुपर्ने हो । आफूलाई जनताका हिमायती भन्नेहरू जनमतसङ्ग्रहमा किन जान सकेनन् - यो खोजको विषय हो । राजाले 'क्याम्पेन' गर्छन् कि भनेर डराएर हो कि - राजा नचाहने जनमत आयो भने राजा फालिन्थ्यो । संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले निर्ण्र्ाागर्ने भन्ने कुरा पनि यस अर्थमा त्रुटिपर्ूण्ा छ कि त्यहा“ं जनताको मत कसरी अभिव्यक्त हुन्छ र पार्टर्ीी्वीपको निर्ण्र्ााके हुन्छ - किनभने, अहिले नै ह्वीप उल्लङ्घन हुन थालिसक्यो । मान्छेहरूलाई चित्त बुझेको छैन यस कुरामा । भोलि संविधानसभाको निष्पक्ष चुनाव भयो भने पनि यो समस्या त आउ“छ नै । त्यसैले लहडमा जसरी काम गरयिो, त्यसले संविधानसभा र सातदलीय गठनबन्धनमाथि नै प्रश्नचिन्ह खडा गरेको छ ।
अन्तरमि संविधानमा गरएिको तेस्रो संशोधनले राजाको भविष्य के हुन्छ भन्न प्रश्न धेरैको मनमा होला । तर, यस संशोधनले राजालाई भन्दा नेपाली काङ्ग्रेसलाई सबैभन्दा बढी घाटा परेको देखिन्छ । वैधता नै नभएको निर्ण्र्ााो कुनै अर्थ नभएकाले राजालाई अहिलेका निर्ण्र्ाारूले केही फरक पार्दैन । तेस्रो संशोधनले नया“ कुरा केही भनेको पनि छैन । संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले कार्यान्वयन गर्ने भनिएको छ । अहिले गणतन्त्रात्मक नेपाल घोषणा गरएि पनि, एकतन्त्रात्मक वा राजतन्त्रात्मक जे घोषणा होस्, त्यसको केही अर्थ छैन, नेपाल छुवाछूतमुक्त देश भनेर घोषणा गरेभै“m ।
फेर िगणतन्त्रको कार्यान्वयन संविधानसभाको पहिलो बैठकले गर्ने भन्ने कुरा आफै“मा मिल्दैन । प्राविधिक रूपले पनि मिल्दैन । कुनै पनि पुस्ताले भोलि आउने पुस्तामाथि आफ्नो निर्ण्र्ाालाद्न सक्दैन । भोलि आउने सभा भनेको त र्सार्वभौमसत्तासम्पन्न संसद् हो । र्सार्वभौमसत्तासम्पन्न संसद्लाई अहिले नचुनिएको अङ्गले भोलि 'यसो गर', 'उसो गर' भन्न कुनै हालतमा मिल्दैन । अहिलेको संसद्ले गरेको निर्ण्र्ााभोलि निर्वाचित भएर आउने संसद्ले मान्नुपर्ने आवश्यकता पनि छैन । त्यो र्सार्वभौमसम्पन्न संसद् हो, त्यसले जे पनि गर्नसक्छ । अहिलेको निर्ण्र्ाााई मान्न पनि सक्छ, नमान्न पनि सक्छ । यसभन्दा चर्को अरू कुनै निर्ण्र्ाापनि गर्नसक्छ । संविधानसभालाई 'डिक्टेट' गर्न, त्यो पनि जनताबाट नचुनिएकाहरू र मरेर ब्यू“ताइएकाहरूलाई अख्तियारी छैन ।
दिल्लीमा भएको १२ बु“दे समझदारी राजालाई ठेगान लगाउने मुग्लानी साहूको 'एजेन्डा' हो । त्यसैको प्रतिफल हो, अहिले देखिएका विकृतिहरू । आफ्नो बलबुता र बुद्घििववेक दल-माओवादी १२ बु“दे समझदारीमा प्रयोग गरएिको छैन । कसैको आवेशलाई कसैले प्रयोग गरििदएर भएको सम्झौता हो यो । यसमा समस्या आउ“थ्यो नै, आइरहेको छ । त्यसैले, अहिले राष्ट्रियताको प्रश्नमा काङ्ग्रेस, एमाले र माओवादीमा विभाजन देखिएको हो । यसको केन्द्रमा राजा र राजसंस्था छ, जसलाई त्यति सजिलै किनारा लगाउन सकि“दैन ।
राजतन्त्र रहनुपर्ने राष्ट्रियताबाहेकको आधार पनि छ । निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्र कसैलाई पनि चाहिएको छैन । यस पङ्क्तिकारले थाहा पाएसम्म जी शाह भन्ने व्यक्तिलाई पनि निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्र चाहिएको छैन । जसले पार्टर्ीीमाथि प्रतिबन्ध लगाउन सक्थ्यो, आप\mनो तथाकथित निरङ्कुश शासनकालमा उसले त्यस्तो केही गरेन । बरु सात दलले नै चुनिएका सांसदहरूलाई संसद्मा प्रवेश गर्न रोक लगाए । जबकि, राजाले चुनाव गर्नका लागि सबै सरकारलाई भन्दै आएको हो ।
नेपालज्ास्तो देशमा पार्टर्ीीट आएको व्यक्ति 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' -राष्ट्राध्यक्ष) बन्यो भने अरू पार्टर्ीी नमान्ने स्थिति हुन्छ, त्यो प्रस्ट छ । किनभने, कुनै पनि व्यवस्थामा 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' नै 'हेड अफ दी आर्मी' -सेना प्रमुख) हुन्छ । उसमै रहेको हुन्छ, संविधानमा लेख्न नभ्याइएका अवशिष्ट शक्ति । यस्तो शक्ति रहेको 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' दलको स्वार्थभन्दा माथि उठेको हुनर्ुपर्छ ।
अहिलेको परििस्थतिमा 'हेड अफ दी स्टेट' भनेर मान्नसक्ने संस्था कुन छ - राजसंस्था नै हो । वैकल्पिक रूपमा कुनै र्सवमान्य संस्था, जो पार्टर्ीीभन्दा माथि रहेको पाउने सम्भावना अहिले झन्झन् कम हु“दै गएको देखिन्छ । एक सय तीन जात र ९३ भाषीले मान्न सक्ने कुन संस्था छ - कोही पनि छैन । यहा“निर राजसंस्थाको आवश्यकता खट्किन्छ । त्यसैले, देश गणतन्त्रमय भइसक्यो भन्ने लाग्दैन । ज्रि्रै फड्कारेर खाएका 'ज्रि्रोजीवी' हरूले मात्र देश गणतन्त्रमय भइसक्यो भनेका हुन् । तथ्यले यो कुरा कतै पनि देखाउ“दैन । अर्कोतर्फ, नेपाली जनताले राजाले सक्रिय शासन गरेको पनि मन पराउ“दा रहेनछन् भन्ने विगतको अनुभवले देखाएको छ । राजाले अहिले त्यसैबाट पाठ सिकेर पार्टर्ीीलाई सबै सुम्पेर बसेको स्थिति छ । तर, राजालाई पार्टर्ीीले 'हामीले चुनाव गर्न सकेनौ“, तिमीले नै गराइदेऊ' भन्ने स्थिति पनि नआउला भन्न नसकिने परििस्थतिले नै देखाउन थालिसक्यो ।
देशको भविष्य कस्तो छ भन्ने ठेगान नभएका बेलामा राजतन्त्रको भविष्य के होला - भन्न गाह्रो छ । राजतन्त्र भनेको देशको एउटा अङ्ग मात्र हो । अहिले नै राजतन्त्रको भविष्य कस्तो होला भन्ने कुराको निर्ण्र्ाागर्नु अपरपिक्व हुन्छ । परििस्थति अनुसार जे-जे होला भन्नुबाहेक अर्को उपाय छैन । भोलि सबैलाई समेटेर निष्पक्ष रूपमा संविधानसभाको निर्वाचन हुन सकेन भने त्यसले अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय वैधता पाउ“दैन । वर्तमान राजास“ग यस पङ्क्तिकारले उनी राजा हुनुभन्दा अघि पनि र राजा भइसके पनि काम गरेको हो । राजालाई केही समययता भेट्दा के पाइएको छ भने उनी यति सब हु“दा पनि निराश छैनन्, न त उनमा कटुता भेटिन्छ । अनौठो लाग्छ, एक-डेढ घन्टा एक्लै कुरा गर्दा कोही नाटक गरेर बस्न सक्दैन । 'दलहरूलाई मार्गचित्र अनुसार हि“ड्नु भनेको हो । उनीहरू त्यस अनुसार हि“डेका छन् कि छैनन्, त्यो जनताले भन्ने कुरा हो । मैले अहिले त्यही कबुलिएको मार्गचित्र हेररिहेको छु, अहिले मैले गर्नैपर्ने केही छैन' भन्ने राजाको भनाइ पाइएको छ । यसैले राजाको भविष्य के होला भन्ने परकिल्पनामा अलमलिनु जरुरी छैन ।
०३३ सालमा बीपी कोइरालाले मेलमिलापको सिद्घान्त अघि सारे, जसले नेपालको राजनीतिमा परविर्तन ल्यायो । मेलमिलापको नीति परम्परागत शक्ति र आधुनिक शक्तिबीच तालमेल हुनर्ुपर्छ भनेर ल्याइएको हो । राजसंस्था र राष्ट्रियताप्रति आस्था राख्ने व्यक्तिहरूस“ग पनि मेलमिलाप गर्नुपर्ने हो, नेपाली काङ्ग्रेसले तर त्यसो भएको छैन । यस वर्षराष्ट्रिय मेलमिलाप दिवसकै दिन अबको मेलमिलाप जनतास“ग मात्र हुन्छ भनेर जुन वक्तव्य आयो काङ्ग्रेसबाट, त्यसको मतलब आजसम्म जनतास“ग मेलमिलाप नगरेको बुझिन्छ । चुनावमा चाहि“ नजाने अनि जनतास“ग कहा“निर मेलमिलाप गर्ने - र, कसरी आफूलाई प्रजातान्त्रिक शक्ति भन्ने -
यदि ०६४ चैतसम्म चुनाव नै हुन सकेन भने के हुन्छ - ०५६ सालमा चुनिएका प्रतिनिधिहरूको क्ष्ँेत्रमा त्यतिखेर १० वर्षा केटाकेटी पनि १८ वर्षभइसके । यस्तो स्थितिमा जनताले हालका सांसदलाई किन मान्नुपर्ने - त्यसरी बालिग भइसकेकाहरूका प्रतिनिधि त होइनन् नि उनीहरू । यस्तोमा कार्यवाहक राष्ट्राध्यक्षको निर्ण्र्ााकसैले मान्ला भन्ने लाग्दैन । जोस“ग हिजो शपथ खाएको त्यही“ गएर 'मार्गचित्र भनेका थियौ“, चलेन' भन्नुपरे के गर्ने - त्यसबेला राजाले के गर्ने हो, थाहा छैन ।
-इन्जिनियर ज्ञवाली ँअसोज १८’ पछि गठित सरकारमा जलस्रोतमन्त्री थिए ।)
'CA polls must be held by mid April' - National Reconciliation Day
[ 2008-1-2 ] RSS http://www.gorkhapatra.org.np/content.php?nid=33454
Palpa, Jan. 1: Former prime minister and senior leader of the Nepali Congress Sher Bahadur Deuba firmly stated that constituent assembly(CA) elections will be held within mid April this year.
Leader Deuba arrived Palpa on the occasion of the 33rd National Reconciliation Day, expressed such views while speaking at a press meet organized by the FNJ, Palpa chapter.
Responding to a question, leader Deuba said though the CA polls were demanded only by the CPN-Maoist in the past, it has been common demand of all political parties these days.
Moreover, Deuba said the ca election was deferred two times- first, due to the lack of various laws and second, by the mutual disagreement. A 23-point agreement had been reached among us and the election is inevitable, he added.
The programme was presided over by the FNJ Palpa Chairman, Jhapendra Gaire.
In Pokhara, Vice-president of the Nepali Congress Gopal Man Shrestha has said that the country would not become a federal republic before the constituent assembly polls.
Speaking at a programme organised by the party's Kaski unit to mark 32nd National Reconciliation Day here yesterday, Shrestha said a decision on the monarchy should be taken by the representatives elected by the sovereign people.
Shrestha said nobody should blame the PM alone for deferral of polls twice in the past, but the seven parties were equally responsible for it. He said new hopes have been raised after the Maoists rejoined the government and expressed hopes that a new date for CA polls would be fixed soon.
The programme was chaired by Kaski president of the party Yagya Bahadur Thapa.
In Gousala, Minister for Finance, Dr. Ram Sharan Mahat, addressing a function organized today in Jaleshwor by Nepali Congress Mahottari on the occasion of 32nd National Unity and Reconciliation Day, indicated the need to end trends of split, defeat the politics of arms and violence, overcome efforts of splitting forces and strengthen multiparty competitive system.
Minister Dr. Mahat said voices of Madhes should be raised inside the party and stressed that issues of restructuring of the state would be addressed in course of formation of constituent assembly.
Parliamentarian Umakant Choudhari also spoke in the programme.
In Biratnagar, Minister for Peace and Reconstruction, Ram Chandra Poudel has said implementation of 23-point agreement should be begun by CPN (Maoist).
Addressing the Seminar, organized here today by Nepali Congress Morang on the occasion of National Reconciliation Day on 'Constituent Assembly Election, Present Political Context and National Reconciliation', Minister Poudel said many demands that were included in the agreement forged with leaders of Madhes have been fulfilled.
He stressed that National reconciliation is the reconciliation among people's powers.
Central Member of Nepali Congress, Pradeep Giri urged his party workers to reform their methods and cultures according to time and situation to save the country and the party from crises.
Other Central Member Dr. Shekhar Koirala said only the people would be symbol of unity hence.
In Sundarijal, Nepal Congress, Kathmandu District Working Committee organized a program at BP Museum, Sindarijal on the occasion 32nd National Unity and Reconciliation Day.
On the Occasion, General Secretary of Nepali Congress, Kul Bahadur Gurung said he was alleged as supporter of monarchy when he raised voice against excesses of Maoists.
He alleged that Maoists did not abide any agreement that was forged with seven parties.
Central Member Ramkrishna Tamrakar said BP's policy of national reconciliation still holds it significance.
Other Central Member Binayadhwaj Chand said advised party-workers, who think that BP's thoughts are obsolete at present, should deeply study the thoughts.
In Terhathum, Minister for Labour and Transport Management, Ramesh Lekhak has said that the unity among all the democratic parties would be the national solidarity at the moment.
Speaking at a program organized on the occasion of the 32nd national solidarity and reconciliation day here Monday, he said there were possibilities, opportunities as well as challenges before the nation and move ahead in consideration of the possibilities and challenges was the need of the day.
Central Vice-President of Nepal Dalit Association, Min Bahadur Biswakarma, former MP Tejman Tumbahamphe and other speakers shed light on the significance of reconciliation.
Palpa, Jan. 1: Former prime minister and senior leader of the Nepali Congress Sher Bahadur Deuba firmly stated that constituent assembly(CA) elections will be held within mid April this year.
Leader Deuba arrived Palpa on the occasion of the 33rd National Reconciliation Day, expressed such views while speaking at a press meet organized by the FNJ, Palpa chapter.
Responding to a question, leader Deuba said though the CA polls were demanded only by the CPN-Maoist in the past, it has been common demand of all political parties these days.
Moreover, Deuba said the ca election was deferred two times- first, due to the lack of various laws and second, by the mutual disagreement. A 23-point agreement had been reached among us and the election is inevitable, he added.
The programme was presided over by the FNJ Palpa Chairman, Jhapendra Gaire.
In Pokhara, Vice-president of the Nepali Congress Gopal Man Shrestha has said that the country would not become a federal republic before the constituent assembly polls.
Speaking at a programme organised by the party's Kaski unit to mark 32nd National Reconciliation Day here yesterday, Shrestha said a decision on the monarchy should be taken by the representatives elected by the sovereign people.
Shrestha said nobody should blame the PM alone for deferral of polls twice in the past, but the seven parties were equally responsible for it. He said new hopes have been raised after the Maoists rejoined the government and expressed hopes that a new date for CA polls would be fixed soon.
The programme was chaired by Kaski president of the party Yagya Bahadur Thapa.
In Gousala, Minister for Finance, Dr. Ram Sharan Mahat, addressing a function organized today in Jaleshwor by Nepali Congress Mahottari on the occasion of 32nd National Unity and Reconciliation Day, indicated the need to end trends of split, defeat the politics of arms and violence, overcome efforts of splitting forces and strengthen multiparty competitive system.
Minister Dr. Mahat said voices of Madhes should be raised inside the party and stressed that issues of restructuring of the state would be addressed in course of formation of constituent assembly.
Parliamentarian Umakant Choudhari also spoke in the programme.
In Biratnagar, Minister for Peace and Reconstruction, Ram Chandra Poudel has said implementation of 23-point agreement should be begun by CPN (Maoist).
Addressing the Seminar, organized here today by Nepali Congress Morang on the occasion of National Reconciliation Day on 'Constituent Assembly Election, Present Political Context and National Reconciliation', Minister Poudel said many demands that were included in the agreement forged with leaders of Madhes have been fulfilled.
He stressed that National reconciliation is the reconciliation among people's powers.
Central Member of Nepali Congress, Pradeep Giri urged his party workers to reform their methods and cultures according to time and situation to save the country and the party from crises.
Other Central Member Dr. Shekhar Koirala said only the people would be symbol of unity hence.
In Sundarijal, Nepal Congress, Kathmandu District Working Committee organized a program at BP Museum, Sindarijal on the occasion 32nd National Unity and Reconciliation Day.
On the Occasion, General Secretary of Nepali Congress, Kul Bahadur Gurung said he was alleged as supporter of monarchy when he raised voice against excesses of Maoists.
He alleged that Maoists did not abide any agreement that was forged with seven parties.
Central Member Ramkrishna Tamrakar said BP's policy of national reconciliation still holds it significance.
Other Central Member Binayadhwaj Chand said advised party-workers, who think that BP's thoughts are obsolete at present, should deeply study the thoughts.
In Terhathum, Minister for Labour and Transport Management, Ramesh Lekhak has said that the unity among all the democratic parties would be the national solidarity at the moment.
Speaking at a program organized on the occasion of the 32nd national solidarity and reconciliation day here Monday, he said there were possibilities, opportunities as well as challenges before the nation and move ahead in consideration of the possibilities and challenges was the need of the day.
Central Vice-President of Nepal Dalit Association, Min Bahadur Biswakarma, former MP Tejman Tumbahamphe and other speakers shed light on the significance of reconciliation.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Monarchy in Nepal will continue to prevail - Kamal Thapa
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=2641
Kamal Thapa, Leader Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal
Q1. How have you taken the Prachanda’s statement that all the nationalist forces irrespective of their political leanings in the past should unite to preserve the national sovereignty?
Thapa: It can, of course, be deemed as a positive one at a time when the country is passing through a tumultuous phase. Given the fact that the country’s sovereignty and unity is under attack from different quarters, the nation is in dire need of greater unity.
But, it is difficult to believe whether Maoist chairman Prachanda actually made this remark with sincerity or not.
There is a depressing disharmony between what the Maoists say and do.
Sometime back, they said they were ready to collaborate with royalist nationalists. But, they now are making attempts to eradicate the monarchy. This contradictory behavior of the Maoists has left enough space to raise doubt over their political integrity.
Q2. The CPN (Maoist) has been saying that they can well move ahead hand in hand with the nationalists with monarchical inclination after the kingship is completely alleviated.
Thapa: The monarchy is an indispensable part of the country’s independence and existence. It is a manifestation of fallaciousness to think that Nepali nationality can be strengthened by sidelining the institution of monarchy.
Q3. There are so many countries which show that national independence can be maintained well without the continuity of the monarchy. Why do you insist that Nepal will be unable to shield its sovereignty and independence in the absence of the monarchy?
Thapa: If we look into the recent political history of the world, we can find that four countries adopted the republican order by eliminating the monarchial systems over the last four decades. Among them, one country had to lose its independence and the second has been reeling under the civil war for the last 30 years. The third one is grappling with the fundamentalists and the fourth country was compelled to restore the monarchial system. In the context of Nepal, the nationality and the institution of monarchy are seamlessly interconnected. Such being the realities, I think it will be beneficial for Nepal to nurture its democratic set-up along with the institution of monarchy.
Q4. In the changed political climate of the country, on what basis the monarchy can be considered as the symbol of national unity?
Thapa: The country’s history bodes well the fact that the country’s sovereignty and independence had remained unaffected when the institution of monarchy was robust. Now, the monarchy has been sidelined and the country is on the verge of disintegration.
The principles of nationality and sovereignty of any country should be supported by solid bases. The effusive rhetoric alone cannot shield the national dignity.
The world history duly suggests that the national independence can be kept intact only with the preservation of traditional institutions and established norms and values apart from the consolidated unity among people.
What I would like to ask those who are infatuated with a republican order is that on what bases they can sustain the national unity in the political order they are whimsically advocating for.
Nepal’s democracy is in a fragile condition and the political parties are myopically indulging themselves in trivial matters. The leaders are working in tandem with the dictates of foreigners. How can any person in his/her right frame of mind believe these meek leaders will preserve the national dignity?
Q5. Then, do you mean the present separatist movement going on in the southern belt of the country will cease in case the continuity of the monarchy is ensured?
Thapa: The institution of monarchy has long played a pivotal role in keeping all the Nepali people belonging to different castes and communities together.
Now, the cloaked attempts are being made to create a rift between the Nepali people by tearing apart the institution of monarchy.
The main reason behind the prevalent disorder in the Terai can be ascribed to the attempts targeted to severely sabotage the monarchy. It was the institution of monarchy which had brought a harmony between the religiously and culturally diversified people. So, it is but natural to see the outbreak of chaos in the name of communal identity when the very institution is under brazen attacks. And, the significance of the monarchy to ensure the territorial integrity as well as the sovereignty of the country is here to stay.
So, are you confident about the continuation of the monarchy?
Thapa: Of course, the monarchy will continue to prevail. Let there be no doubt on it.
Q6. How do you opine the latest decision of the Seven-Party-Alliance (SPA) to declare the nation a republic?
Thapa: The SPA decision has blatantly mocked the fundamental rights of the sovereign people to decide on crucial issues.
The decision is unconstitutional and, against the Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed by the constituents of the SPA themselves. The decision is aimed at making the people bereft of their basic rights to shape the future of the country.
The decision also smacks off despotic tendencies of the SPA.
It has also nakedly disregarded the fact that the election to Constituent Assembly is mandatory to decide the fate of monarchy. It is also against the national interest.
So, it is spitefully unpalatable to the people of Nepal.
Q7. What are the fundamental bases to ensure that the monarchy will have a space in the future political set-up?
Thapa: The unwavering faith the people have reposed on the institution of monarchy is the prime basis. The second basis that justifies the need to give continuity to the monarchy is Nepal’s geo-political reality. Thirdly, the country’s religious, social and cultural values share intimate relations with the notion of monarchy. Lastly, the monarchy has historically remained the solid foundation for the country’s stability and national unity.
Q8. Since the key players of Nepali politics have clearly gone in favour of alleviating the monarchy, how can the bases you have forwarded will save the monarchy?
Thapa: When the Nepali Congress (NC) and the UML will closely see the true colours of the Maoists, they will voice for retaining the monarchy in order to secure their existence.
Q9. Even your former political partners now associated with the RPP led by the Pashupati Shumsher Rana have already omitted the provision of constitutional monarchy from their party stature. In this light, how can one believe that the institution of monarchy will not be abolished?
Thapa: If some people ridiculously try to declare the day a night by covering the sunlight, how can we believe on such declaration?
All political parties except the CPN (Maoist) were saying that the Nepal always needs the institution of monarchy just one and half years ago.
They must give convincing answer as to what propelled them to completely alter their views.
Their logic could be the mandate of the People’s Movement II.
Thapa: The People’s movement-II was not gravitated towards uprooting the monarchy. If the movement was meant for alleviating the monarchy, why G.P. Koirala accepted the king’s announcement to restore the dissolved parliament and why he took oath of office from the king. He should be considered as the traitor of the movement if the April Uprising was focused towards flushing out the monarchy.
On the other hand, the edifice of the People’s Movement-II was built on the foundation of the 12-point agreement signed in New Delhi, India.
In the agreement, you cannot find a single word about establishing a republican set up in the country by replacing the monarchy. Even if the mandate was for a republican set up, how many more days the SPA needs to fulfill this mandate?
They had promised to hold the election to constituent assembly by mid-June 2006 and they are yet to complete this task. For how long they want to continue their autocratic rule without being endorsed by people?
Q10. In your view, how has King Gyanendra perceived the unfolding political events in the country? Is he worried about the future of monarchy?
Thapa: Although I am not the spokesperson of the palace, I believe that he is observing the current political situation very closely.
If I have to say on the basis of my frequent meetings with King Gyanendra, he is gravely concerned about the pathetic situation of the country. However, he is also optimistic about the bright future of the country.
Q11. It can be safely predicted that most of the candidates belonging to the SPA will dominate the CA poll. In the light of the republican policy of the SPA, how can you claim that the monarchy will continue to prevail?
Thapa: If the CA poll is held in a free, fair and impartial, majority of the people will cast vote in favor of monarchy.
Q12. What efforts are you making for the sake of monarchy as a royalist?
Thapa: The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (Nepal) firmly believes in democracy along with monarchical system. We will approach the people with this agenda.
Q13. Will the fringe party like RPP (N) and other forces, which are inclined towards the monarchy, secure majority in the CA?
Of course, we will secure majority and people will cast vote in favour of retaining monarchy in case the CA poll takes place in an unbiased manner.
Q14. It is alleged that people like you are responsible for paralyzing the monarchy to the extent it is today. This allegation does not seem completely bereft of logic given the fact that you had handled the key ministerial portfolios during the former royal regime. How do you justify yourself?
Thapa: I am unfaltering by committed to my philosophy and will remain so. Those who just wanted to satiate their greed by maintaining proximity with the institution of monarchy are mainly responsible for the present situation of the monarchy.
Q15. Are you aspiring for a ceremonial monarchy or constitutional monarchy?
Thapa: We are in favor of retaining monarchy either in a form of ceremonial or constitutional monarchy. The king must remain as the symbol of national unity but the representatives of people should be entitled to exercise executive powers.
Q16. You claim yourselves as a nationalist. But, we have not seen you raising voices against the continuous encroachment of the Nepali territory by India.
Thapa: The government must be answerable to the people regarding the encroachment of Nepali lands. Our party is raising this issue besides other various issues connected with the nationality of the country. But, we have been barred from carrying out our activities.
Q17. Why have the “nationalists” remained silence over the controversial ‘Citizenship Act’ that have allowed many aliens to obtain Nepali citizenship certificates?
Thapa: There should be no confusion that all the Nepalese should get citizenship certificates with ease. But, the major political parties have acted against the aspirations of People’s Movement-II. These unscrupulous acts include the introduction of Citizenship Act, declaring the nation a secular state as well as a republic.
The key political actors of the present day Nepal are committing inexcusable mistakes by bowing down to the dictates of wicked foreigners.
Q18. What do you think about the possibility of CA poll to be held within mid –April, 2008?
Thapa: Whether the CA polls would be held on the new date basically hinges on three vital issues.
Firstly, if the Maoists are still not sincere to the CA, it will continue to remain a distant dream. Secondly, the inability on the part of the government to efficaciously deal with the problems related to various disgruntled communities will also be detrimental to the conduct of the CA poll on the newly scheduled date. Thirdly, the government must ensure a politically neutral climate to hold the CA poll within the mid-April, 2008.
Courtesy: The Weekly Mirror dated January 4, 08, Exclusive Interview with the chief editor, Ms. Prem Kumari Pant)
2008-01-04 13:47:17
Kamal Thapa, Leader Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal
Q1. How have you taken the Prachanda’s statement that all the nationalist forces irrespective of their political leanings in the past should unite to preserve the national sovereignty?
Thapa: It can, of course, be deemed as a positive one at a time when the country is passing through a tumultuous phase. Given the fact that the country’s sovereignty and unity is under attack from different quarters, the nation is in dire need of greater unity.
But, it is difficult to believe whether Maoist chairman Prachanda actually made this remark with sincerity or not.
There is a depressing disharmony between what the Maoists say and do.
Sometime back, they said they were ready to collaborate with royalist nationalists. But, they now are making attempts to eradicate the monarchy. This contradictory behavior of the Maoists has left enough space to raise doubt over their political integrity.
Q2. The CPN (Maoist) has been saying that they can well move ahead hand in hand with the nationalists with monarchical inclination after the kingship is completely alleviated.
Thapa: The monarchy is an indispensable part of the country’s independence and existence. It is a manifestation of fallaciousness to think that Nepali nationality can be strengthened by sidelining the institution of monarchy.
Q3. There are so many countries which show that national independence can be maintained well without the continuity of the monarchy. Why do you insist that Nepal will be unable to shield its sovereignty and independence in the absence of the monarchy?
Thapa: If we look into the recent political history of the world, we can find that four countries adopted the republican order by eliminating the monarchial systems over the last four decades. Among them, one country had to lose its independence and the second has been reeling under the civil war for the last 30 years. The third one is grappling with the fundamentalists and the fourth country was compelled to restore the monarchial system. In the context of Nepal, the nationality and the institution of monarchy are seamlessly interconnected. Such being the realities, I think it will be beneficial for Nepal to nurture its democratic set-up along with the institution of monarchy.
Q4. In the changed political climate of the country, on what basis the monarchy can be considered as the symbol of national unity?
Thapa: The country’s history bodes well the fact that the country’s sovereignty and independence had remained unaffected when the institution of monarchy was robust. Now, the monarchy has been sidelined and the country is on the verge of disintegration.
The principles of nationality and sovereignty of any country should be supported by solid bases. The effusive rhetoric alone cannot shield the national dignity.
The world history duly suggests that the national independence can be kept intact only with the preservation of traditional institutions and established norms and values apart from the consolidated unity among people.
What I would like to ask those who are infatuated with a republican order is that on what bases they can sustain the national unity in the political order they are whimsically advocating for.
Nepal’s democracy is in a fragile condition and the political parties are myopically indulging themselves in trivial matters. The leaders are working in tandem with the dictates of foreigners. How can any person in his/her right frame of mind believe these meek leaders will preserve the national dignity?
Q5. Then, do you mean the present separatist movement going on in the southern belt of the country will cease in case the continuity of the monarchy is ensured?
Thapa: The institution of monarchy has long played a pivotal role in keeping all the Nepali people belonging to different castes and communities together.
Now, the cloaked attempts are being made to create a rift between the Nepali people by tearing apart the institution of monarchy.
The main reason behind the prevalent disorder in the Terai can be ascribed to the attempts targeted to severely sabotage the monarchy. It was the institution of monarchy which had brought a harmony between the religiously and culturally diversified people. So, it is but natural to see the outbreak of chaos in the name of communal identity when the very institution is under brazen attacks. And, the significance of the monarchy to ensure the territorial integrity as well as the sovereignty of the country is here to stay.
So, are you confident about the continuation of the monarchy?
Thapa: Of course, the monarchy will continue to prevail. Let there be no doubt on it.
Q6. How do you opine the latest decision of the Seven-Party-Alliance (SPA) to declare the nation a republic?
Thapa: The SPA decision has blatantly mocked the fundamental rights of the sovereign people to decide on crucial issues.
The decision is unconstitutional and, against the Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed by the constituents of the SPA themselves. The decision is aimed at making the people bereft of their basic rights to shape the future of the country.
The decision also smacks off despotic tendencies of the SPA.
It has also nakedly disregarded the fact that the election to Constituent Assembly is mandatory to decide the fate of monarchy. It is also against the national interest.
So, it is spitefully unpalatable to the people of Nepal.
Q7. What are the fundamental bases to ensure that the monarchy will have a space in the future political set-up?
Thapa: The unwavering faith the people have reposed on the institution of monarchy is the prime basis. The second basis that justifies the need to give continuity to the monarchy is Nepal’s geo-political reality. Thirdly, the country’s religious, social and cultural values share intimate relations with the notion of monarchy. Lastly, the monarchy has historically remained the solid foundation for the country’s stability and national unity.
Q8. Since the key players of Nepali politics have clearly gone in favour of alleviating the monarchy, how can the bases you have forwarded will save the monarchy?
Thapa: When the Nepali Congress (NC) and the UML will closely see the true colours of the Maoists, they will voice for retaining the monarchy in order to secure their existence.
Q9. Even your former political partners now associated with the RPP led by the Pashupati Shumsher Rana have already omitted the provision of constitutional monarchy from their party stature. In this light, how can one believe that the institution of monarchy will not be abolished?
Thapa: If some people ridiculously try to declare the day a night by covering the sunlight, how can we believe on such declaration?
All political parties except the CPN (Maoist) were saying that the Nepal always needs the institution of monarchy just one and half years ago.
They must give convincing answer as to what propelled them to completely alter their views.
Their logic could be the mandate of the People’s Movement II.
Thapa: The People’s movement-II was not gravitated towards uprooting the monarchy. If the movement was meant for alleviating the monarchy, why G.P. Koirala accepted the king’s announcement to restore the dissolved parliament and why he took oath of office from the king. He should be considered as the traitor of the movement if the April Uprising was focused towards flushing out the monarchy.
On the other hand, the edifice of the People’s Movement-II was built on the foundation of the 12-point agreement signed in New Delhi, India.
In the agreement, you cannot find a single word about establishing a republican set up in the country by replacing the monarchy. Even if the mandate was for a republican set up, how many more days the SPA needs to fulfill this mandate?
They had promised to hold the election to constituent assembly by mid-June 2006 and they are yet to complete this task. For how long they want to continue their autocratic rule without being endorsed by people?
Q10. In your view, how has King Gyanendra perceived the unfolding political events in the country? Is he worried about the future of monarchy?
Thapa: Although I am not the spokesperson of the palace, I believe that he is observing the current political situation very closely.
If I have to say on the basis of my frequent meetings with King Gyanendra, he is gravely concerned about the pathetic situation of the country. However, he is also optimistic about the bright future of the country.
Q11. It can be safely predicted that most of the candidates belonging to the SPA will dominate the CA poll. In the light of the republican policy of the SPA, how can you claim that the monarchy will continue to prevail?
Thapa: If the CA poll is held in a free, fair and impartial, majority of the people will cast vote in favor of monarchy.
Q12. What efforts are you making for the sake of monarchy as a royalist?
Thapa: The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (Nepal) firmly believes in democracy along with monarchical system. We will approach the people with this agenda.
Q13. Will the fringe party like RPP (N) and other forces, which are inclined towards the monarchy, secure majority in the CA?
Of course, we will secure majority and people will cast vote in favour of retaining monarchy in case the CA poll takes place in an unbiased manner.
Q14. It is alleged that people like you are responsible for paralyzing the monarchy to the extent it is today. This allegation does not seem completely bereft of logic given the fact that you had handled the key ministerial portfolios during the former royal regime. How do you justify yourself?
Thapa: I am unfaltering by committed to my philosophy and will remain so. Those who just wanted to satiate their greed by maintaining proximity with the institution of monarchy are mainly responsible for the present situation of the monarchy.
Q15. Are you aspiring for a ceremonial monarchy or constitutional monarchy?
Thapa: We are in favor of retaining monarchy either in a form of ceremonial or constitutional monarchy. The king must remain as the symbol of national unity but the representatives of people should be entitled to exercise executive powers.
Q16. You claim yourselves as a nationalist. But, we have not seen you raising voices against the continuous encroachment of the Nepali territory by India.
Thapa: The government must be answerable to the people regarding the encroachment of Nepali lands. Our party is raising this issue besides other various issues connected with the nationality of the country. But, we have been barred from carrying out our activities.
Q17. Why have the “nationalists” remained silence over the controversial ‘Citizenship Act’ that have allowed many aliens to obtain Nepali citizenship certificates?
Thapa: There should be no confusion that all the Nepalese should get citizenship certificates with ease. But, the major political parties have acted against the aspirations of People’s Movement-II. These unscrupulous acts include the introduction of Citizenship Act, declaring the nation a secular state as well as a republic.
The key political actors of the present day Nepal are committing inexcusable mistakes by bowing down to the dictates of wicked foreigners.
Q18. What do you think about the possibility of CA poll to be held within mid –April, 2008?
Thapa: Whether the CA polls would be held on the new date basically hinges on three vital issues.
Firstly, if the Maoists are still not sincere to the CA, it will continue to remain a distant dream. Secondly, the inability on the part of the government to efficaciously deal with the problems related to various disgruntled communities will also be detrimental to the conduct of the CA poll on the newly scheduled date. Thirdly, the government must ensure a politically neutral climate to hold the CA poll within the mid-April, 2008.
Courtesy: The Weekly Mirror dated January 4, 08, Exclusive Interview with the chief editor, Ms. Prem Kumari Pant)
2008-01-04 13:47:17
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Are Nepal’s royals victims of curse?
Web posted at: 12/31/2007 5:48:57 Source ::: IANS
http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Philippines+%26+South+Asia&month=December2007&file=World_News2007123154857.xml
Kathmandu • One of the blackest prophecies of Nepal has come true with the two-century old dynasty of the Shah kings finally faltering as parliament proclaimed the Himalayan kingdom a federal democratic republic, removing beleaguered King Gyanendra from the constitution.
Ever since King Gyanendra, who loses his crown in April, decided to revert to the absolutist way of his ancestors and seize power with an army-backed coup in 2005, the tale of the curse of Gorakhnath has been revived in Nepal.
Amazed at the audacious step taken by the king on the advice of his clique of hardcore royalists, the Nepalese began recalling the legend of Gorakhnath, the 11th century yogi with supernatural powers who was believed to be the protector of the ancient kingdom of Gorkha, from where King Gyanendra's forefathers came.
According to the legend, Prithvi Narayan Shah, the founder of the kingdom of Nepal, who began the conquest of petty kingdoms and brought them under one rule, once came across the holy man in a forest. The king offered some curd to the yogi, who regurgitated it and asked the king to drink it.
A repulsed Prithvi Narayan rejected the offering, allowing it to fall to the ground. As the curd dribbled on the king's 10 toes, the enraged holy man cursed the royal that his dynasty would be obliterated after 10 generations because of his pride.
In 2001, when popular king Birendra was killed in the royal palace in a midnight massacre along with the rest of the family, Nepal remembered the old tale and the fact that the slain king was the ninth descendant. After the king's murder, his eldest son Dipendra, who was then in coma after having reportedly committed the killings, was crowned king but passed away without recovering.
Since Birendra's entire family was wiped out in the massacre, Gyanendra ascended the throne in 2001 amidst fearful prophecies that Gorakhnath's curse had come true and the new successor would not be able to wield the sceptre for long.
After the king alienated his people by first ruling with an iron hand and then refusing to step down in favour of his baby grandson, he sowed the seeds of destruction of the royal dynasty.
There were other indications that fate was deserting the over-ambitious king. This year, he failed to offer worship as the head of state at the temple of the Kumari, who is regarded as the protector of the royal family.
With parliament making the prime minister the head of state, King Gyanendra went to offer worship as a commoner, an unprecedented incident.
Perhaps the most sombre thing about the reign of the king who was not fated to be king was that he was never officially coronated.
Royal astrologers indicated there were no auspicious dates soon after 2005 and first the period of mourning due to Birendra's death and then the fresh political turmoil stoked by the king's power grab resulted in the government never holding a formal coronation ceremony.
http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Philippines+%26+South+Asia&month=December2007&file=World_News2007123154857.xml
Kathmandu • One of the blackest prophecies of Nepal has come true with the two-century old dynasty of the Shah kings finally faltering as parliament proclaimed the Himalayan kingdom a federal democratic republic, removing beleaguered King Gyanendra from the constitution.
Ever since King Gyanendra, who loses his crown in April, decided to revert to the absolutist way of his ancestors and seize power with an army-backed coup in 2005, the tale of the curse of Gorakhnath has been revived in Nepal.
Amazed at the audacious step taken by the king on the advice of his clique of hardcore royalists, the Nepalese began recalling the legend of Gorakhnath, the 11th century yogi with supernatural powers who was believed to be the protector of the ancient kingdom of Gorkha, from where King Gyanendra's forefathers came.
According to the legend, Prithvi Narayan Shah, the founder of the kingdom of Nepal, who began the conquest of petty kingdoms and brought them under one rule, once came across the holy man in a forest. The king offered some curd to the yogi, who regurgitated it and asked the king to drink it.
A repulsed Prithvi Narayan rejected the offering, allowing it to fall to the ground. As the curd dribbled on the king's 10 toes, the enraged holy man cursed the royal that his dynasty would be obliterated after 10 generations because of his pride.
In 2001, when popular king Birendra was killed in the royal palace in a midnight massacre along with the rest of the family, Nepal remembered the old tale and the fact that the slain king was the ninth descendant. After the king's murder, his eldest son Dipendra, who was then in coma after having reportedly committed the killings, was crowned king but passed away without recovering.
Since Birendra's entire family was wiped out in the massacre, Gyanendra ascended the throne in 2001 amidst fearful prophecies that Gorakhnath's curse had come true and the new successor would not be able to wield the sceptre for long.
After the king alienated his people by first ruling with an iron hand and then refusing to step down in favour of his baby grandson, he sowed the seeds of destruction of the royal dynasty.
There were other indications that fate was deserting the over-ambitious king. This year, he failed to offer worship as the head of state at the temple of the Kumari, who is regarded as the protector of the royal family.
With parliament making the prime minister the head of state, King Gyanendra went to offer worship as a commoner, an unprecedented incident.
Perhaps the most sombre thing about the reign of the king who was not fated to be king was that he was never officially coronated.
Royal astrologers indicated there were no auspicious dates soon after 2005 and first the period of mourning due to Birendra's death and then the fresh political turmoil stoked by the king's power grab resulted in the government never holding a formal coronation ceremony.
Nepal: Better King Gyanendra leaves Royal Palace, Minister Poudel
http://telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=2600
TGW - “The Nepali Congress henceforth will have absolutely no links or whatsoever with the royalists…and those who favored monarchy within the NC camp in the past have now come to their senses after the landmark parliamentary declaration to declare the country a republic”.
The vice president of the Nepal Congress party and the minister for peace and reconstruction Mr. Ram Chandra Poudel made these remarks at a media interaction program organized by the Reporter’s Club, Kathmandu.
“It is natural for those who exploited the people with the backing of monarchy in the past are now advocating for the continuation of monarchy…”, Poudel added.
“My suggestion to King Gyanendra would be that now he should quietly abandon the Royal palace”, Poudel continued.
“Now the country has already become a federal democratic republic…only the formal declaration remains to be accomplished…Gyanendra could however, occupy the palace until CA election is held mid-April next year”, Poudel said.
Poudel also revealed that currently the government is trying to establish links with the Madhesi armed outfits led both by Goit and Jwala Singh to initiate dialogue.
Mr. Poudel added that the NC does not want people like Mahanta Thakur to be in the party who have divided loyalties and that the formation of the new Madhesi party will have no impact on the overall politics of Madhesh.
TGW - “The Nepali Congress henceforth will have absolutely no links or whatsoever with the royalists…and those who favored monarchy within the NC camp in the past have now come to their senses after the landmark parliamentary declaration to declare the country a republic”.
The vice president of the Nepal Congress party and the minister for peace and reconstruction Mr. Ram Chandra Poudel made these remarks at a media interaction program organized by the Reporter’s Club, Kathmandu.
“It is natural for those who exploited the people with the backing of monarchy in the past are now advocating for the continuation of monarchy…”, Poudel added.
“My suggestion to King Gyanendra would be that now he should quietly abandon the Royal palace”, Poudel continued.
“Now the country has already become a federal democratic republic…only the formal declaration remains to be accomplished…Gyanendra could however, occupy the palace until CA election is held mid-April next year”, Poudel said.
Poudel also revealed that currently the government is trying to establish links with the Madhesi armed outfits led both by Goit and Jwala Singh to initiate dialogue.
Mr. Poudel added that the NC does not want people like Mahanta Thakur to be in the party who have divided loyalties and that the formation of the new Madhesi party will have no impact on the overall politics of Madhesh.
Nepal: Vacate the royal palace, King Gyanendra told
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=2627
TGW - Nepal’s minister for local development and a Maoists’ senior leader, Mr. Dev Gurung has said that the government will resort to serious actions if King Gyanendra does not leave the Narayan Hiti Royal Palace immediately.
“If Gyanendra does not leave the palace, the government will force him out”, said Gurung.
“With republic already declared, Gyanendra has no right to make his claim over the royal palace”, he continued.
“He has committed serious crimes against the Nepali people…I suggest him to live like a normal citizen of this country and face charges accordingly”, Gurung added.
“Gyanendra has committed crimes against the people he cannot even hold the position of a president let alone that of a King”, Gurung told when asked if the Maoists’ were ready to accept him as the contrary’s first president?
"If Gyanendra does not abdicate the crown he may not even be allowed to live in the county”, Gurung told reporters at an interaction program organized by Reporters Club in Kathmandu, 1 January, 08.
When asked whether the last 23-point deal among the SPA was made possible with the maneuverings of the RAW (Indian notorious intelligence Agency) chief, Mr. Gurung told that he had no idea whatsoever over the issue and added that Comrade Prachanda had not yet informed the party over it?
Mr. Gurung however, criticizing the government for making a deal with the Indian establishment recently, regarding the Arun-III and Upper Karnali Hydro power project, said "the government had made such a deal when we were out of the government…it was unfortunate".
2008-01-02 09:55:00
TGW - Nepal’s minister for local development and a Maoists’ senior leader, Mr. Dev Gurung has said that the government will resort to serious actions if King Gyanendra does not leave the Narayan Hiti Royal Palace immediately.
“If Gyanendra does not leave the palace, the government will force him out”, said Gurung.
“With republic already declared, Gyanendra has no right to make his claim over the royal palace”, he continued.
“He has committed serious crimes against the Nepali people…I suggest him to live like a normal citizen of this country and face charges accordingly”, Gurung added.
“Gyanendra has committed crimes against the people he cannot even hold the position of a president let alone that of a King”, Gurung told when asked if the Maoists’ were ready to accept him as the contrary’s first president?
"If Gyanendra does not abdicate the crown he may not even be allowed to live in the county”, Gurung told reporters at an interaction program organized by Reporters Club in Kathmandu, 1 January, 08.
When asked whether the last 23-point deal among the SPA was made possible with the maneuverings of the RAW (Indian notorious intelligence Agency) chief, Mr. Gurung told that he had no idea whatsoever over the issue and added that Comrade Prachanda had not yet informed the party over it?
Mr. Gurung however, criticizing the government for making a deal with the Indian establishment recently, regarding the Arun-III and Upper Karnali Hydro power project, said "the government had made such a deal when we were out of the government…it was unfortunate".
2008-01-02 09:55:00
Call of Conscience - Newsfront Magazine Main Story
http://www.newsfront.com.np/#
Call of conscience - At a time when G P Koirala and the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (CPN-M) are going euphoric about parliament declaring Nepal a 'Republic", records show many members, especially belonging to Nepali Congress and the UML had defied party whips.
Out of 322 members in parliament, about 35 defied party instructions to be present and vote in manner instructed. Most notable of those who defied the whip include Taranath Ranabhat of the Congress and Khadga Oli of the UML. Their absence confirms their displeasure and belief that this parliament has no right to pass a resolution of this magnitude without a fresh mandate from the people.
"Yes, I followed the dictate of my conscience. I will not be a party to any process that undermines the right of the sovereign people to decide the issues of crucial importance for the country", Ranabhat told Newsfront. Former Prime Minsiter Oli was not available for comment. It is not yet known what actions the parties contemplate against them, but the UML seems to be more eager to punish the dissenters than Nepali Congress. The members had been issued whips to be present in the House and vote as per the official line that favoured Nepal being declared republic now and leaving it to the CA to implement it. "It's absurd and unacceptable that a future CA has to work under directive from the present House", said Ranabhat.
Former Prime Minister K P Bhattarai and P L Singh are the only two members who have not attended any session of the revived parliament. "This parliament has outlived its mandate. My conscience does not allow me to participate in its proceedings", Singh told Newsfront. Former Home Minister Purna Bahadur Khadka is away in his home town Surkhet while another Congress member Govinda Bahadur Shah is abroad.
Although more than 50 MPs from the Congress party had warned Koirala not go for the current resolution as that would 'amount to surrender' to the Maoists, they obeyed the party line once the whip was issued. But they have made their reservation known to Koirala. Those who obeyed the whip 'to save the party from a split' include former Ministers Khum Bahadur Khadka ,Govindaraj Joshi, Bijay Gachedar and Arjun Narsingh K C . They had decided to fall in line after Koirala took the position that defiance of whip might invite disciplinary actions like expulsion from the party which will also mean their not being able to contest the CA poll as the party candidate.
A senior leader of the UML said that the party is investigating into the defiance and take stern action once full details are available.
Call of conscience - At a time when G P Koirala and the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (CPN-M) are going euphoric about parliament declaring Nepal a 'Republic", records show many members, especially belonging to Nepali Congress and the UML had defied party whips.
Out of 322 members in parliament, about 35 defied party instructions to be present and vote in manner instructed. Most notable of those who defied the whip include Taranath Ranabhat of the Congress and Khadga Oli of the UML. Their absence confirms their displeasure and belief that this parliament has no right to pass a resolution of this magnitude without a fresh mandate from the people.
"Yes, I followed the dictate of my conscience. I will not be a party to any process that undermines the right of the sovereign people to decide the issues of crucial importance for the country", Ranabhat told Newsfront. Former Prime Minsiter Oli was not available for comment. It is not yet known what actions the parties contemplate against them, but the UML seems to be more eager to punish the dissenters than Nepali Congress. The members had been issued whips to be present in the House and vote as per the official line that favoured Nepal being declared republic now and leaving it to the CA to implement it. "It's absurd and unacceptable that a future CA has to work under directive from the present House", said Ranabhat.
Former Prime Minister K P Bhattarai and P L Singh are the only two members who have not attended any session of the revived parliament. "This parliament has outlived its mandate. My conscience does not allow me to participate in its proceedings", Singh told Newsfront. Former Home Minister Purna Bahadur Khadka is away in his home town Surkhet while another Congress member Govinda Bahadur Shah is abroad.
Although more than 50 MPs from the Congress party had warned Koirala not go for the current resolution as that would 'amount to surrender' to the Maoists, they obeyed the party line once the whip was issued. But they have made their reservation known to Koirala. Those who obeyed the whip 'to save the party from a split' include former Ministers Khum Bahadur Khadka ,Govindaraj Joshi, Bijay Gachedar and Arjun Narsingh K C . They had decided to fall in line after Koirala took the position that defiance of whip might invite disciplinary actions like expulsion from the party which will also mean their not being able to contest the CA poll as the party candidate.
A senior leader of the UML said that the party is investigating into the defiance and take stern action once full details are available.
Buddha, Jung Bahadur and Prachanda - Yubaraj Ghimire
http://www.newsfront.com.np/#
It seems Prachanda is quite fascinated by Lord Buddha. He has invoked Buddha's name several times publicly. The first was when he surfaced at Prime Minister's residence in Baluwatar on June 2006 signaling the end of his more than two-decade long underground political life.
Recently, he predicted the birth of either Buddha or Jung Bahadur to steer the country out of the current crisis. And on December 29, a day after parliament finally succumbed to his party's diktat to declare Nepal a 'Republic state' leaving it to the future constituent assembly to implement it, Prachanda dwelt on the matter in further details.
In an interview given to Shuvshankar Kandel of Sagarmatha Television, the Maoist supremo just stopped short of admitting that he indeed was Jung Bahadur in the offing. Surprisingly, his dream to be the 21st century Jung Bahadur came less than a week after he signed a fresh 23-point pact with the government, with renewed pledge to go to the polls for the constituent assembly by Mid April. But the latest Prachanda utterances go against both the spirit of peace agreement and democracy. Prachanda appears to be conditioning the public that the Maoists prefer to seize power 'peacefully.' But should that option fail, Prachanda will be compelled to exercise plan B --that is to follow what Jung Bahadur did in 1846. But no matter how the Maoists seize power – through peace or violence - democracy and the democratic process will be the casualty.
A parliament led by G P Koirala and chaired by Subhash Nembwang has already proved that Prachanda's bandwagon is gaining momentum by the day. But Prachanda's understanding of Buddha' way and philosophy is not only limited, but distorted as well. For Buddha, his journey and mission began with detachment from everything he had – kingdom, power and privileges. He stood for truth, respect for human life and dignity, love, compassion and crusade against injustice and inequality—all through non-violence. Kindness and forgiveness together constituted his philosophy and way of life.
Prachanda path is just the reverse. He is driven by the lust for everything that does not belong to him legitimately. He has neither forgiven any one, nor even dared to repent for heinous crimes like Madi massacre that his party committed. It seems his understanding of Buddhism only means a convenient way of capturing state powers without bloodshed, and of course, without facing the electorate. Unfortunately, G P Koirala has already lost the moral high ground to question Prachanda's interpretation of Buddhism in the current context. In the past 18 months of the controversial peace process and government, Prachanda has skillfully undercut G P Koirala of his historical standing and political stature which he had attained immediately after janaandolan II. Things have now come to such a sorry pass that how long Koirala hangs on to his position depends on the terms set by Prachanda.
G P dumped his visionary brother B P Koirala's policy of national reconciliation to appease Prachanda and continue in power. He has assumed the power of a dictator with no accountability to parliament--a role that Prachanda hopes to snatch any time now. Koirala has given a mortal blow to the independence of judiciary and reduced the parliament to a rubber stamp. Like any communist state apparatus, the Speaker of the House Subash Nembwang presides over a parliament without an opposition to the government. Worse, Koirala has been (mis)ruling the country on behest of the Maoist masters without facing the polls for the past 18 months.
Prachanda's present calculation is simple. If G P Koirala can rule in this fashion, why can't he ? In fact, he has been successful in creating condition for the birth of Jung Bahadur. Koirala is just a 'dummy' in that exercise. Jung Bahadur massacred all his potential rivals in a coup in 1846—recorded as Kotparva— and established the Rana dynasty that ruled the country for 104 years. Pracahnda is now trying to convince and cajole the other left parties, especially UML's Madhav Kumar Nepal, that it is possible for the communists to rule this country for the next 150 years once all pro-democracy forces are annihilated. The clear message here being that the left should not care much for the election to get into power, there are other more efficient methods available.
Then what is the 23-point agreement all about? The 23-point agreement was authored for two main purposes in mind. First, it dilutes the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). Secondly, it establishes the centrality and indispensability of the Maoists in interim constitution and the current political system. Once the Maoists have become the core part of the new state, it will be much easier for the party to choose the timing of Kotparva, or the revolution from within as in the classic Bolshevik October insurrection. History appears all set to repeat itself in Nepal.
In that historical reenactment, Koirala can only imitate hapless Mathbar Singh Thapa who was a necessary stepping stone to Jung Bahadur's rise. What will happen to Nepal's peace process if things move in the direction that Prachanda has predicted? Nepali citizens have more or less abdicated their democratic duties in allowing a regime of questionable legitimacy to play havoc with the judicial independence, parliamentary supremacy, and constitutional rule.
Such an authoritarian trend is still fraught with other dangerous consequences: a possible revolt and defiance by the organs of the state, and a total non-recognition of the regime by the international community which is already annoyed at the government's failure to hold elections, twice on deadline. These are grave challenges which the current dispensation does not seem to have appreciated.
It seems Prachanda is quite fascinated by Lord Buddha. He has invoked Buddha's name several times publicly. The first was when he surfaced at Prime Minister's residence in Baluwatar on June 2006 signaling the end of his more than two-decade long underground political life.
Recently, he predicted the birth of either Buddha or Jung Bahadur to steer the country out of the current crisis. And on December 29, a day after parliament finally succumbed to his party's diktat to declare Nepal a 'Republic state' leaving it to the future constituent assembly to implement it, Prachanda dwelt on the matter in further details.
In an interview given to Shuvshankar Kandel of Sagarmatha Television, the Maoist supremo just stopped short of admitting that he indeed was Jung Bahadur in the offing. Surprisingly, his dream to be the 21st century Jung Bahadur came less than a week after he signed a fresh 23-point pact with the government, with renewed pledge to go to the polls for the constituent assembly by Mid April. But the latest Prachanda utterances go against both the spirit of peace agreement and democracy. Prachanda appears to be conditioning the public that the Maoists prefer to seize power 'peacefully.' But should that option fail, Prachanda will be compelled to exercise plan B --that is to follow what Jung Bahadur did in 1846. But no matter how the Maoists seize power – through peace or violence - democracy and the democratic process will be the casualty.
A parliament led by G P Koirala and chaired by Subhash Nembwang has already proved that Prachanda's bandwagon is gaining momentum by the day. But Prachanda's understanding of Buddha' way and philosophy is not only limited, but distorted as well. For Buddha, his journey and mission began with detachment from everything he had – kingdom, power and privileges. He stood for truth, respect for human life and dignity, love, compassion and crusade against injustice and inequality—all through non-violence. Kindness and forgiveness together constituted his philosophy and way of life.
Prachanda path is just the reverse. He is driven by the lust for everything that does not belong to him legitimately. He has neither forgiven any one, nor even dared to repent for heinous crimes like Madi massacre that his party committed. It seems his understanding of Buddhism only means a convenient way of capturing state powers without bloodshed, and of course, without facing the electorate. Unfortunately, G P Koirala has already lost the moral high ground to question Prachanda's interpretation of Buddhism in the current context. In the past 18 months of the controversial peace process and government, Prachanda has skillfully undercut G P Koirala of his historical standing and political stature which he had attained immediately after janaandolan II. Things have now come to such a sorry pass that how long Koirala hangs on to his position depends on the terms set by Prachanda.
G P dumped his visionary brother B P Koirala's policy of national reconciliation to appease Prachanda and continue in power. He has assumed the power of a dictator with no accountability to parliament--a role that Prachanda hopes to snatch any time now. Koirala has given a mortal blow to the independence of judiciary and reduced the parliament to a rubber stamp. Like any communist state apparatus, the Speaker of the House Subash Nembwang presides over a parliament without an opposition to the government. Worse, Koirala has been (mis)ruling the country on behest of the Maoist masters without facing the polls for the past 18 months.
Prachanda's present calculation is simple. If G P Koirala can rule in this fashion, why can't he ? In fact, he has been successful in creating condition for the birth of Jung Bahadur. Koirala is just a 'dummy' in that exercise. Jung Bahadur massacred all his potential rivals in a coup in 1846—recorded as Kotparva— and established the Rana dynasty that ruled the country for 104 years. Pracahnda is now trying to convince and cajole the other left parties, especially UML's Madhav Kumar Nepal, that it is possible for the communists to rule this country for the next 150 years once all pro-democracy forces are annihilated. The clear message here being that the left should not care much for the election to get into power, there are other more efficient methods available.
Then what is the 23-point agreement all about? The 23-point agreement was authored for two main purposes in mind. First, it dilutes the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). Secondly, it establishes the centrality and indispensability of the Maoists in interim constitution and the current political system. Once the Maoists have become the core part of the new state, it will be much easier for the party to choose the timing of Kotparva, or the revolution from within as in the classic Bolshevik October insurrection. History appears all set to repeat itself in Nepal.
In that historical reenactment, Koirala can only imitate hapless Mathbar Singh Thapa who was a necessary stepping stone to Jung Bahadur's rise. What will happen to Nepal's peace process if things move in the direction that Prachanda has predicted? Nepali citizens have more or less abdicated their democratic duties in allowing a regime of questionable legitimacy to play havoc with the judicial independence, parliamentary supremacy, and constitutional rule.
Such an authoritarian trend is still fraught with other dangerous consequences: a possible revolt and defiance by the organs of the state, and a total non-recognition of the regime by the international community which is already annoyed at the government's failure to hold elections, twice on deadline. These are grave challenges which the current dispensation does not seem to have appreciated.
Republic in installments - By Indra Adhikari
http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2007/others/feature/dec/news_feature03.php
The seven parties pushed their decision to proclaim Nepal as a federal democratic republic through the interim parliament, on Friday (December 28) despite the opposition from certain quarters. But by inserting a clause stating that this proclamation will be implemented by the first meeting of the elected Constituent Assembly, the parties have opted for republic in installments.
The nation has been proclaimed a republic but there is a clause that says monarchy will be removed before the constituent assembly polls if it puts obstacles in the process, which points at the fact that the parties still accept the existence of monarchy in the country, in one or the other form.
Republic proclamation has drawn mixed reaction from different sections of political forces. Pashupati Shumsher Rana, president of Rastriya Prajantra Party (RPP) - a rightist liberal party - has said the amendment is 'contradictory'. Former Prime Minister and president of Rastriya Janashakti Party (RJP) Surya Bahadur Thapa termed the decision as an autocratic saying that the nominated people were dictating the course for elected assembly.
Maoist leader Prachanda and Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. (File photo)
The amendment says that the king will not have any authority in state affairs. The authorities being exercised by the king as the head of the state, henceforth, have been transferred to the prime minister as the officiating head of the state.
Some months back, while in his hometown Biratnagar, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala had said that there was already 80 percent republic in the country. He had also said it takes time to totally erase the monarchy that has ruled Nepal for nearly two-and-half century.
On Friday, lawmakers endorsed another installment of the republican order. This decision, which was meant to placate the Maoist opposition, received meager opposition. Three votes were cast against the order while two others boycotted.
The seven parties reached this agreement 19 months after King Gyanendra surrendered before the mass movement. On the 19th day of the people's movement, he had lost his hold on power and on the 19th month he lost the institution.
The international community that greatly influences the national politics, particularly in this transitional phase, has remained silent on decision of the seven parties to declare republic. India and China in their statements only appreciated the decision of the parties to hold election by mid-April. Even the representative of United Nations Secretary General to Nepal Ian Martin has refused to comment on this issue but has amply appreciated the parties' decision and commitments for early polls.
A week ago, a royal hardliner Rabindra Nath Sharma had indicated that the king could take some steps in the changing circumstances.
One of the major arguments raised by the opponents of the seven parties' decision is that it has hijacked the sovereign power vested in Nepali people. The decision for republic order has come from the top leaders of the seven parties and a House of nominated persons instead of by the election where sovereign people cast their votes, they say.
Critics say parties have no basis to claim that republican system is the demand of wider Nepali populace unless an election or referendum is held.
RPP, Rastriya Janashakti Party and a few others called for popular mandate while taking decision in such a big issue. Nepali Congress, for sometimes, had taken similar stand but it wilted under the continued pressure from the Maoists and other communist parties.
The parties have reserved the final installment of the republic for the first sitting of the elected constituent assembly. But it all depends on whether they walk their talk by actually holding the election this time.
If they fail to do so, the countrymen will be in big confusion regarding the basic status of their nation. nepalnews.com Dec 30 07
The seven parties pushed their decision to proclaim Nepal as a federal democratic republic through the interim parliament, on Friday (December 28) despite the opposition from certain quarters. But by inserting a clause stating that this proclamation will be implemented by the first meeting of the elected Constituent Assembly, the parties have opted for republic in installments.
The nation has been proclaimed a republic but there is a clause that says monarchy will be removed before the constituent assembly polls if it puts obstacles in the process, which points at the fact that the parties still accept the existence of monarchy in the country, in one or the other form.
Republic proclamation has drawn mixed reaction from different sections of political forces. Pashupati Shumsher Rana, president of Rastriya Prajantra Party (RPP) - a rightist liberal party - has said the amendment is 'contradictory'. Former Prime Minister and president of Rastriya Janashakti Party (RJP) Surya Bahadur Thapa termed the decision as an autocratic saying that the nominated people were dictating the course for elected assembly.
Maoist leader Prachanda and Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. (File photo)
The amendment says that the king will not have any authority in state affairs. The authorities being exercised by the king as the head of the state, henceforth, have been transferred to the prime minister as the officiating head of the state.
Some months back, while in his hometown Biratnagar, Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala had said that there was already 80 percent republic in the country. He had also said it takes time to totally erase the monarchy that has ruled Nepal for nearly two-and-half century.
On Friday, lawmakers endorsed another installment of the republican order. This decision, which was meant to placate the Maoist opposition, received meager opposition. Three votes were cast against the order while two others boycotted.
The seven parties reached this agreement 19 months after King Gyanendra surrendered before the mass movement. On the 19th day of the people's movement, he had lost his hold on power and on the 19th month he lost the institution.
The international community that greatly influences the national politics, particularly in this transitional phase, has remained silent on decision of the seven parties to declare republic. India and China in their statements only appreciated the decision of the parties to hold election by mid-April. Even the representative of United Nations Secretary General to Nepal Ian Martin has refused to comment on this issue but has amply appreciated the parties' decision and commitments for early polls.
A week ago, a royal hardliner Rabindra Nath Sharma had indicated that the king could take some steps in the changing circumstances.
One of the major arguments raised by the opponents of the seven parties' decision is that it has hijacked the sovereign power vested in Nepali people. The decision for republic order has come from the top leaders of the seven parties and a House of nominated persons instead of by the election where sovereign people cast their votes, they say.
Critics say parties have no basis to claim that republican system is the demand of wider Nepali populace unless an election or referendum is held.
RPP, Rastriya Janashakti Party and a few others called for popular mandate while taking decision in such a big issue. Nepali Congress, for sometimes, had taken similar stand but it wilted under the continued pressure from the Maoists and other communist parties.
The parties have reserved the final installment of the republic for the first sitting of the elected constituent assembly. But it all depends on whether they walk their talk by actually holding the election this time.
If they fail to do so, the countrymen will be in big confusion regarding the basic status of their nation. nepalnews.com Dec 30 07
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)