May 29, 2008 04:56pm Article from: Agence France-Presse
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23778317-1702,00.html
NEPAL'S army, long seen as a bastion of support for the royal family, says it will respect a historic vote by a constitutional assembly abolishing the Himalayan nation's monarchy.
"How we feel does not matter, how the country feels is what matters,'' said Brigadier General Ramindra Chhetri, army director of public relations.
"The decision has been taken by the constituent assembly and it must be abided by by all stakeholders,'' he told AFP.
Nepal's King Gyanendra became the last in his line today when a constitutional assembly elected in April voted overwhelmingly to declare Nepal a republic. The vote capped a peace accord between Maoists and mainstream parties that ended a decade-long civil war.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
RPP-Nepal becomes the only party against republic; some lawyers question procedures adopted by CA
http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/may/may29/news01.php
The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP-Nepal) has become the only party that voted against the proposal of implementing the declaration of republic.
When the proposal was put forth for voting, of the 564 members of CA present at the meeting, 560 voted in its favour while four members of RPP-N voted against it.
Although the chairman of the assembly Kul Bahadur Gurung did not allow the RPP-N members to make their case before the voting, its member Chandra Bahadur Gurung later submitted note of dissent expressing dissatisfaction over the republic declaration.
“Though we are aware of the culture of functioning like a robot through remote-control, we have decided to register our note of dissent for the record for the posterity,” said Gurung.
Gurung could not complete reading his party’s statement as the assembly chair barred him from speaking after the allotted two minutes.
Speaking at the post-voting discussion, chief of Rastriya Jana Morcha, Chitra Bahadur KC, expressed dissatisfaction over the move to turn Nepal into federal state.
Meanwhile, some lawyers have pointed at the flaws in the procedures adopted by the CA during its first meeting.
According to a constitutional lawyer Bipin Adhikari, the procedures followed by the Constituent Assembly had three serious flaws.
“First, the House started its proceedings without the 26 nominated members, who should have been present in the House to fulfil the membership requirement of the Assembly under Article 63(3) of the Constitution. The President of the House ignored this requirement, because the Prime Minister was not able to nominate them in consultation with the parties before the meeting kicked off,” said Adhikari, who added that this flaw would make the proceedings of an incomplete House open to challenge.
“Secondly, the motion to abolish monarchy and operationalize Article 159 was not subjected to discussion before the voting on it according to the recognized parliamentary practice. The chair ignored the repeated requests by the opposition group of the RPP-Nepal, the only monarchist voice in the entire Assembly, to allow discussion on the motion, so that they could register their opposition before the voting,” he said, adding, “Thirdly, and lastly, the implementation of the 'republicanisation plan' was done without any statutory basis, and certainly without giving any opportunity to the King to explain his case before the sovereign House." nepalnews.com sd May 29 08
The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP-Nepal) has become the only party that voted against the proposal of implementing the declaration of republic.
When the proposal was put forth for voting, of the 564 members of CA present at the meeting, 560 voted in its favour while four members of RPP-N voted against it.
Although the chairman of the assembly Kul Bahadur Gurung did not allow the RPP-N members to make their case before the voting, its member Chandra Bahadur Gurung later submitted note of dissent expressing dissatisfaction over the republic declaration.
“Though we are aware of the culture of functioning like a robot through remote-control, we have decided to register our note of dissent for the record for the posterity,” said Gurung.
Gurung could not complete reading his party’s statement as the assembly chair barred him from speaking after the allotted two minutes.
Speaking at the post-voting discussion, chief of Rastriya Jana Morcha, Chitra Bahadur KC, expressed dissatisfaction over the move to turn Nepal into federal state.
Meanwhile, some lawyers have pointed at the flaws in the procedures adopted by the CA during its first meeting.
According to a constitutional lawyer Bipin Adhikari, the procedures followed by the Constituent Assembly had three serious flaws.
“First, the House started its proceedings without the 26 nominated members, who should have been present in the House to fulfil the membership requirement of the Assembly under Article 63(3) of the Constitution. The President of the House ignored this requirement, because the Prime Minister was not able to nominate them in consultation with the parties before the meeting kicked off,” said Adhikari, who added that this flaw would make the proceedings of an incomplete House open to challenge.
“Secondly, the motion to abolish monarchy and operationalize Article 159 was not subjected to discussion before the voting on it according to the recognized parliamentary practice. The chair ignored the repeated requests by the opposition group of the RPP-Nepal, the only monarchist voice in the entire Assembly, to allow discussion on the motion, so that they could register their opposition before the voting,” he said, adding, “Thirdly, and lastly, the implementation of the 'republicanisation plan' was done without any statutory basis, and certainly without giving any opportunity to the King to explain his case before the sovereign House." nepalnews.com sd May 29 08
Nepal: New republic on the roof of the world
KATHMANDU: Nepal, which celebrated its first day as a republic on Thursday after abolishing the monarchy, is an impoverished Himalayan nation sandwiched between India and China.
Key facts: GEOGRAPHY: At 147,181 square kilometres (56,826 square miles), Nepal is slightly larger than the US state of New York, and half the size of Italy. It borders the Chinese autonomous region of Tibet, with which it shares the world's highest peak, Mount Everest. POPULATION: 28.3 million. (World Bank, 2007). CAPITAL: Kathmandu (pop 1.5 million). LANGUAGE: Nepali. English is widely used in government and business. RELIGION: Hindus account for nearly 90 percent of the population. Small Buddhist and Muslim communities.
RECENT HISTORY : Nepal became a British protectorate in 1816 and won independence in 1923. The hereditary monarch, traditionally worshipped as a living god, set up a system of modern cabinet rule in 1951. Multi-party democracy and a constitutional monarchy came in 1990 after a popular uprising left hundreds of people dead. Maoists launched an insurgency to overthrow the monarchy in 1996 after boycotting elections and denouncing corruption.
The world's last Hindu king, Gyanendra, came to the throne in June 2001, after a palace massacre in which the crown prince killed most of the royal family and himself. Gyanendra fired the government and seized direct control of the country in February 2005, saying successive governments had failed to end the war with the Maoists. Fourteen months on, he was forced to reinstate parliament after violent pro-democracy protests.
A peace deal was signed in November 2006 which saw the Maoists enter parliament. The ex-insurgents swept April 2008 elections to a Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution. The assembly voted late Wednesday to set up a republic and abolish the monarchy. Gyanendra was given 15 days to vacate his palace in Kathmandu amid street celebrations.
ECONOMY: Nepal is one of the world's poorest countries. About three quarters of citizens work in farming, which accounts for 38 percent of GDP. Industrial activity is mainly processing farm products such as jute, sugar cane, tobacco and grain. Per capita GDP: 331 dollars (World Bank, 2007). Foreign debt: 5.3 billion dollars (2005).
Key facts: GEOGRAPHY: At 147,181 square kilometres (56,826 square miles), Nepal is slightly larger than the US state of New York, and half the size of Italy. It borders the Chinese autonomous region of Tibet, with which it shares the world's highest peak, Mount Everest. POPULATION: 28.3 million. (World Bank, 2007). CAPITAL: Kathmandu (pop 1.5 million). LANGUAGE: Nepali. English is widely used in government and business. RELIGION: Hindus account for nearly 90 percent of the population. Small Buddhist and Muslim communities.
RECENT HISTORY : Nepal became a British protectorate in 1816 and won independence in 1923. The hereditary monarch, traditionally worshipped as a living god, set up a system of modern cabinet rule in 1951. Multi-party democracy and a constitutional monarchy came in 1990 after a popular uprising left hundreds of people dead. Maoists launched an insurgency to overthrow the monarchy in 1996 after boycotting elections and denouncing corruption.
The world's last Hindu king, Gyanendra, came to the throne in June 2001, after a palace massacre in which the crown prince killed most of the royal family and himself. Gyanendra fired the government and seized direct control of the country in February 2005, saying successive governments had failed to end the war with the Maoists. Fourteen months on, he was forced to reinstate parliament after violent pro-democracy protests.
A peace deal was signed in November 2006 which saw the Maoists enter parliament. The ex-insurgents swept April 2008 elections to a Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution. The assembly voted late Wednesday to set up a republic and abolish the monarchy. Gyanendra was given 15 days to vacate his palace in Kathmandu amid street celebrations.
ECONOMY: Nepal is one of the world's poorest countries. About three quarters of citizens work in farming, which accounts for 38 percent of GDP. Industrial activity is mainly processing farm products such as jute, sugar cane, tobacco and grain. Per capita GDP: 331 dollars (World Bank, 2007). Foreign debt: 5.3 billion dollars (2005).
Nepal's monarchy abolished, republic declared
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j0nzhteKhYl6g3K2y7bJ06h7sinQ
KATHMANDU (AFP) — Political leaders in Nepal on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly to abolish the Himalayan nation's 240-year-old Hindu monarchy and declare a republic.
In an historic vote that caps a peace deal between Maoist rebels and mainstream parties, a new constitutional assembly ordered unpopular King Gyanendra to quit his palace within 15 days so it can be turned into a museum.
"The sacrifice of thousands of Nepalese has been honoured today by us getting rid of the monarchy," Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara told AFP.
The abolition is a triumph for the ultra-leftists and marks a fresh start for one of the world's poorest countries, still reeling from a civil war that left at least 13,000 people dead.
"The Nepalese people have been freed from centuries of feudal tradition, and the doors have now opened for a radical social and economic transformation," Mahara said.
Nepal's fiercely-republican Maoists, who fought for 10 years to remove the monarchy and create a secular republic, won the largest single bloc of seats in the assembly in elections last month.
A senior member of the 601-member Constituent Assembly, Kul Bahadur Gurung, said only four lawmakers opposed the move.
The republican declaration states that Nepal will become "an independent, indivisible, sovereign, secular and an inclusive democratic republic."
"All the privileges enjoyed by the king and royal family will automatically come to an end," it says, noting that May 29 will henceforth be celebrated as "Republic Day."
Gyanendra, who ascended the throne after a drunken prince killed most of the royal family in 2001, was given 15 days to pack up and vacate his Kathmandu palace.
"This assembly asks the government to make the necessary arrangements to vacate the Narayanhiti Royal palace," Gurung told the late-night gathering, prompting huge cheers and applause.
"The meeting also directs the government to take necessary actions to turn the palace into a national museum."
Outside the venue, a crowd of about 1,000 people -- who had been waiting impatiently for the vote -- cheered wildly as the decision was announced, an AFP reporter at the scene said.
"I am overjoyed. This is the most important day of my life," said Rajesh Subedi, a 21-year-old student and Maoist supporter.
The former rebels have told Gyanendra and his son and heir, Crown Prince Paras -- loathed for his reported playboy lifestyle -- to bow out gracefully and adapt to life as a "common citizen" or else face "strong punishment."
Nepal's peace minister, Ram Chandra Poudel, told reporters the monarch "should understand and leave the palace by himself, that would be the best thing."
Gyanendra, seen by loyalists as the reincarnation of a Hindu god, was vaulted to the throne after the 2001 massacre of his popular brother Birendra and most of the royal family by a drink-and-drug-fuelled crown prince who later killed himself.
But the dour-faced monarch never managed to win much support from the public, with many Nepalese suspecting he was in some way involved in the palace killings -- even though officials and experts have dismissed such a conspiracy theory.
His ill-fated decision to seize absolute power to fight the Maoist rebellion further damaged his status.
He still enjoys some support from Hindu hardliners and powerful elements in the armed forces and ruling elite, who argue the royals are a crucial symbol of the neutrality of a country wedged between Asian giants India and China.
"No one now has a political basis to try and revive him," said analyst and commentator Prashant Jha.
Many had feared Nepal's radical transformation would give way to more violence, but this week suspected pro-royals only managed to carry out minor bomb attacks that caused a small number of light injuries.
The Maoists are set to lead Nepal's new government, although many are still sceptical of the movement -- whose loyalists are regularly accused of using violence and intimidation.
The United States also continues to list the former rebels as a foreign "terrorist" organisation.
KATHMANDU (AFP) — Political leaders in Nepal on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly to abolish the Himalayan nation's 240-year-old Hindu monarchy and declare a republic.
In an historic vote that caps a peace deal between Maoist rebels and mainstream parties, a new constitutional assembly ordered unpopular King Gyanendra to quit his palace within 15 days so it can be turned into a museum.
"The sacrifice of thousands of Nepalese has been honoured today by us getting rid of the monarchy," Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara told AFP.
The abolition is a triumph for the ultra-leftists and marks a fresh start for one of the world's poorest countries, still reeling from a civil war that left at least 13,000 people dead.
"The Nepalese people have been freed from centuries of feudal tradition, and the doors have now opened for a radical social and economic transformation," Mahara said.
Nepal's fiercely-republican Maoists, who fought for 10 years to remove the monarchy and create a secular republic, won the largest single bloc of seats in the assembly in elections last month.
A senior member of the 601-member Constituent Assembly, Kul Bahadur Gurung, said only four lawmakers opposed the move.
The republican declaration states that Nepal will become "an independent, indivisible, sovereign, secular and an inclusive democratic republic."
"All the privileges enjoyed by the king and royal family will automatically come to an end," it says, noting that May 29 will henceforth be celebrated as "Republic Day."
Gyanendra, who ascended the throne after a drunken prince killed most of the royal family in 2001, was given 15 days to pack up and vacate his Kathmandu palace.
"This assembly asks the government to make the necessary arrangements to vacate the Narayanhiti Royal palace," Gurung told the late-night gathering, prompting huge cheers and applause.
"The meeting also directs the government to take necessary actions to turn the palace into a national museum."
Outside the venue, a crowd of about 1,000 people -- who had been waiting impatiently for the vote -- cheered wildly as the decision was announced, an AFP reporter at the scene said.
"I am overjoyed. This is the most important day of my life," said Rajesh Subedi, a 21-year-old student and Maoist supporter.
The former rebels have told Gyanendra and his son and heir, Crown Prince Paras -- loathed for his reported playboy lifestyle -- to bow out gracefully and adapt to life as a "common citizen" or else face "strong punishment."
Nepal's peace minister, Ram Chandra Poudel, told reporters the monarch "should understand and leave the palace by himself, that would be the best thing."
Gyanendra, seen by loyalists as the reincarnation of a Hindu god, was vaulted to the throne after the 2001 massacre of his popular brother Birendra and most of the royal family by a drink-and-drug-fuelled crown prince who later killed himself.
But the dour-faced monarch never managed to win much support from the public, with many Nepalese suspecting he was in some way involved in the palace killings -- even though officials and experts have dismissed such a conspiracy theory.
His ill-fated decision to seize absolute power to fight the Maoist rebellion further damaged his status.
He still enjoys some support from Hindu hardliners and powerful elements in the armed forces and ruling elite, who argue the royals are a crucial symbol of the neutrality of a country wedged between Asian giants India and China.
"No one now has a political basis to try and revive him," said analyst and commentator Prashant Jha.
Many had feared Nepal's radical transformation would give way to more violence, but this week suspected pro-royals only managed to carry out minor bomb attacks that caused a small number of light injuries.
The Maoists are set to lead Nepal's new government, although many are still sceptical of the movement -- whose loyalists are regularly accused of using violence and intimidation.
The United States also continues to list the former rebels as a foreign "terrorist" organisation.
Secular Republic of Nepal is born - Indian Express
Yubaraj Ghimire
Posted online: Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 0036 hrs
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/315943.html
Kathmandu, May 28: Half an hour before the stroke of midnight today, Nepal became a Republic. The transition to “a secular, federal, democratic, republic nation” was formalised with a resolution moved by Home Minister K P Sitaula and right away passed by 560 votes against four by the newly-sworn in Constituent Assembly.
Minutes later, the Royal Standard flying atop the Narayanhiti palace — home to five kings so far — was brought down by palace officials.
The transition to a democracy means abolition of the monarchy and dethronement of King Gyanendra, with all the privileges of the royal family taken away with immediate effect. He will have no rights in social, political, cultural or religious fields more than what any Nepali citizen is entitled to.
However, constitutional experts raised some concern about the speed with which the resolution was passed, without members being allowed to record their objections. “It is unheard of, unacceptable and unconstitutional that such an important resolution was passed in such a shabby manner,” constitutional lawyer Bipin Adhikari told The Indian Express.
Earlier, the meeting of the Constituent Assembly, at the Birendra International Convention Centre, was postponed twice due to late-minute political wrangling. Scheduled to begin at 11 am local time, it began after 9 pm as the ruling parties and Maoists argued over who should be the President of the new Republic.
Ultimately, a consensus was reached that the monarchy would be abolished with immediate effect, and the roles and jurisdiction of the president would be decided later. The resolution was finally moved by the Assembly around 9.45 pm. In a brief speech read out by his Cabinet colleague Ram Chandra Poudel, Prime Minister G P Koirala said Nepal’s new challenges were peace, stability and economic development.
The resolution said that May 28 will be celebrated as the Republic Day of Nepal every year. There will be president who will be the head of the state while the Prime Minister will be the executive head.
Gathered on the streets of Kathmandu, singing and dancing in anticipation of the historic change, the crowds outside the Birendra International Convention Centre grew restive as the wait for the meeting dragged on into the night. Inside, diplomats and representatives of international communities also spent the entire day waiting.
A couple of explosions outside the venue injected further fear and uncertainty. Police said at least one person had been arrested and was being interrogated.
All through the day, top leaders of the Maoists, Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist shuttled between the centre and the Prime Minister’s residence to sort out last-minute differences.
While the Congress and UML were in favour of a president with emergency powers who would also be the supreme commander of the army, the Maoists preferred the current system in which the Prime Minister also acts as the caretaker president.
When the meeting finally began, pro-tem Speaker K B Gurung of the Congress refused to entertain objections from members over curtailing of members’ right to record their opinion on such an important matter. He said the members would be given a chance to do so after the voting.
• Constituent Assembly votes 560-4, makes history
• King now a commoner, Royal flag brought down
• Concerns over manner in which motion passed
Posted online: Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 0036 hrs
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/315943.html
Kathmandu, May 28: Half an hour before the stroke of midnight today, Nepal became a Republic. The transition to “a secular, federal, democratic, republic nation” was formalised with a resolution moved by Home Minister K P Sitaula and right away passed by 560 votes against four by the newly-sworn in Constituent Assembly.
Minutes later, the Royal Standard flying atop the Narayanhiti palace — home to five kings so far — was brought down by palace officials.
The transition to a democracy means abolition of the monarchy and dethronement of King Gyanendra, with all the privileges of the royal family taken away with immediate effect. He will have no rights in social, political, cultural or religious fields more than what any Nepali citizen is entitled to.
However, constitutional experts raised some concern about the speed with which the resolution was passed, without members being allowed to record their objections. “It is unheard of, unacceptable and unconstitutional that such an important resolution was passed in such a shabby manner,” constitutional lawyer Bipin Adhikari told The Indian Express.
Earlier, the meeting of the Constituent Assembly, at the Birendra International Convention Centre, was postponed twice due to late-minute political wrangling. Scheduled to begin at 11 am local time, it began after 9 pm as the ruling parties and Maoists argued over who should be the President of the new Republic.
Ultimately, a consensus was reached that the monarchy would be abolished with immediate effect, and the roles and jurisdiction of the president would be decided later. The resolution was finally moved by the Assembly around 9.45 pm. In a brief speech read out by his Cabinet colleague Ram Chandra Poudel, Prime Minister G P Koirala said Nepal’s new challenges were peace, stability and economic development.
The resolution said that May 28 will be celebrated as the Republic Day of Nepal every year. There will be president who will be the head of the state while the Prime Minister will be the executive head.
Gathered on the streets of Kathmandu, singing and dancing in anticipation of the historic change, the crowds outside the Birendra International Convention Centre grew restive as the wait for the meeting dragged on into the night. Inside, diplomats and representatives of international communities also spent the entire day waiting.
A couple of explosions outside the venue injected further fear and uncertainty. Police said at least one person had been arrested and was being interrogated.
All through the day, top leaders of the Maoists, Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist shuttled between the centre and the Prime Minister’s residence to sort out last-minute differences.
While the Congress and UML were in favour of a president with emergency powers who would also be the supreme commander of the army, the Maoists preferred the current system in which the Prime Minister also acts as the caretaker president.
When the meeting finally began, pro-tem Speaker K B Gurung of the Congress refused to entertain objections from members over curtailing of members’ right to record their opinion on such an important matter. He said the members would be given a chance to do so after the voting.
• Constituent Assembly votes 560-4, makes history
• King now a commoner, Royal flag brought down
• Concerns over manner in which motion passed
Nepal declares itself a democratic republic
28 May 2008, 2317 hrs IST , PTI
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Rest_of_World/Nepal_declares_itself_a_democratic_republic/articleshow/msid-3081177,curpg-2.cms
KATHMANDU: Nepal on Wednesday scripted a new chapter in its turbulent history as the new constituent assembly abolished the 240-year-old monarchy and declared the country a "secular, federal democratic republic". ( Watch )
The 601-member assembly met at the Birendra International Convention Centre on Wednesday evening where a motion was passed to declare the country the world's newest republic. After a series of meetings, the Seven Party Alliance agreed to table the motion of republic in the first meeting of the constituent assembly, dominated by Maoists.
Out of 601 members of the constituent assembly, 572 were present during Wednesday's meeting. The motion to declare the country a republic was moved by Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitola on behalf of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. The motion was passed by 560 votes in favour while four members opposed it.
The motion said that Nepal will be secular, federal, democratic republic nation and King Gyanendra will be reduced to a common citizen. The king will lose all the cultural, administrative and political powers. The king and the royal family members will enjoy the rights that are meant for any common man, the motion said. It said the May 28 will be celebrated as the Republic Day of the nation every year. There will be president who will be the head of the state while the prime minister will be the executive head. The four members who opposed the motion are members of the pro-king Rashtriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, constituent assembly chairman Kulbahadur Gurung announced after the voting. The country was declared republic as per Article 159 of the interim constitution, he said.
The ruling alliance had earlier agreed to give 15 days time to the king to leave the Narayanhiti palace, which will be converted into a museum. The then king in Nepal, Mahendra had dismissed the elected government in 1960 when B P Koirala, the brother of Prime Minister G P koirala, was heading it. The cabinet is yet to nominate 26 members and three were absent. Earlier on Wednesday, the CA meeting was postponed in the morning as more time was needed for the political parties to arrive at consensus regarding the issue of making separate provision of president. Besides lawmakers, a large number of diplomats, senior government officials, journalists and civil society members were present at the CA meeting venue.
The political parties have already agreed to create a post of president, armed with the powers of imposing emergency and carrying the title of the supreme commander of the Nepal army, according to Nepali Congress sources.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Rest_of_World/Nepal_declares_itself_a_democratic_republic/articleshow/msid-3081177,curpg-2.cms
KATHMANDU: Nepal on Wednesday scripted a new chapter in its turbulent history as the new constituent assembly abolished the 240-year-old monarchy and declared the country a "secular, federal democratic republic". ( Watch )
The 601-member assembly met at the Birendra International Convention Centre on Wednesday evening where a motion was passed to declare the country the world's newest republic. After a series of meetings, the Seven Party Alliance agreed to table the motion of republic in the first meeting of the constituent assembly, dominated by Maoists.
Out of 601 members of the constituent assembly, 572 were present during Wednesday's meeting. The motion to declare the country a republic was moved by Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitola on behalf of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. The motion was passed by 560 votes in favour while four members opposed it.
The motion said that Nepal will be secular, federal, democratic republic nation and King Gyanendra will be reduced to a common citizen. The king will lose all the cultural, administrative and political powers. The king and the royal family members will enjoy the rights that are meant for any common man, the motion said. It said the May 28 will be celebrated as the Republic Day of the nation every year. There will be president who will be the head of the state while the prime minister will be the executive head. The four members who opposed the motion are members of the pro-king Rashtriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, constituent assembly chairman Kulbahadur Gurung announced after the voting. The country was declared republic as per Article 159 of the interim constitution, he said.
The ruling alliance had earlier agreed to give 15 days time to the king to leave the Narayanhiti palace, which will be converted into a museum. The then king in Nepal, Mahendra had dismissed the elected government in 1960 when B P Koirala, the brother of Prime Minister G P koirala, was heading it. The cabinet is yet to nominate 26 members and three were absent. Earlier on Wednesday, the CA meeting was postponed in the morning as more time was needed for the political parties to arrive at consensus regarding the issue of making separate provision of president. Besides lawmakers, a large number of diplomats, senior government officials, journalists and civil society members were present at the CA meeting venue.
The political parties have already agreed to create a post of president, armed with the powers of imposing emergency and carrying the title of the supreme commander of the Nepal army, according to Nepali Congress sources.
Republic Nepal: A day’s timeline of celebrations
http://www.gorkhapatra.org.np/detail.php?article_id=1001&cat_id=4
Kathmandu, May 28
The 28th of May, Wednesday will be written with golden letters in the political history of Nepal with the Constituent Assembly deciding to abolish the 240 year monarchial rule and the heralding of a new era of federal republican democracy.
The Rising Nepal recorded the day long celebrations that took place in different parts of the capital city. The events have been presented as observed from early morning till late evening. Gongabu at 10 AM: This is a spot known for the mightiest mass movement in the 2006 April movement. Despite the call of different parties for people to come to the street to welcome the glorious day, few had gathered there for a rally.
Moreover, the big board in which photos of all 22 martyrs were kept for display for the last two years was removed. How long has it been removed, few days back the board was there. Later on at 12 it was reported that CPN-Maoist took out a big rally from the place.New Baneshower at 11 AM: This scribe reached the spot through Maharajgunj and Chabahil where people were gathering for a rally. They were carrying flags of the communist party.
New Baneshwore is the place where the international Convention Centre is located and it is the centre for the meetings of the CA. The first meeting of the CA was taking place there today to declare the country a republic. The time for the meet was set for 11 but reaching there the time was postponed by 4 hours to settle differences of the major parties. The place was fill of people carrying the flags of different political parties and craving for a political change for decades.
Most of them had written ‘long live republic Nepal’ on their forehead and cheeks. Ratnapark at 2:00 PM: A big rally of CPN-Maoist was moving. They had come to the spot from ten different spots of the Ring Road of the Valley. A group of national and international journalists had gathered near the main gate of the Royal palace. A TV journalist said that he had covered live three times. Some people were taking photographs keeping the palace at the background. A motorbike moved towards east from the south road furling the communist flag while three Royal policemen were parading inside the palace and the TV cameramen caught the rare scene.Baluwatar at 3:00 PM: Journalists were waiting for the leaders to emerge with a concrete decision from the meeting inside the official residence of Prime Minister. Most of them were tired. They had been waiting since 9:30 from the time when the leaders had been in the meeting.
At 5:15 the news about use of teargas at Baneshore was reported. Journalists were heard saying, ‘now the leaders will decide soon as the people are turning violent to pressure them.’ At 5:40 famous singers JB Tuhure and Nanda Krishna Joshi reached the spot and talk with the journalists, “After a rally from Martyrs stage, we went to Baneshwore, sang for republic, addressed the mass but they were fed up with the unnecessary postponement of declaration. We also got fed up staying there and came here to know what was going on.
See our leaders who work at the eleventh hour and make the situation tense. People can go violent if they delay any longer.”At six, vehicles of the leaders of the Maoist party were driven out and we understood that the meeting had ended. After 15 minutes CPN-UML general secretary Jhala Nath Khanal came out and talked with the media persons waiting for almost nine hours. He said the country would be declared republic today, constitutional president will be elected later on. A journalist asked about the new decision after meeting for tedious and long hours!New Baneshwore at 8:00 PM: People were chanting slogans against monarchy.
During the day they were singing and dancing. Compared to their number in the afternoon, they were fewer. Suddenly, a big noise of explosion was heard. The noise had come from the north, this scribe was at the west side, little further away from the main gate. All the journalists moved to the place of the noise, so did I. It was under a small tree near the big Peepal Chautari, almost opposite the main gate. It’s not a big one, of course improvised, a policeman said. They also got a pamphlet of Ranavir Sena at the explosion spot. Within 5 to 6 minutes, another explosion was heard and this time it was at south-west of the Convention Centre, on the road that leads to Maitighar. All moved to that side hurriedly. People were frantically moving here and there. In both explosions nobody was hurt. The police had started cordoning the prohibited area. Throughout the day, people were allowed to pass through the side of the road. What a security!
And, activists of YCL were seen deployed with the police in each corner of the midtown for additional security.Naraynhiti Royal Palace at 9:30 PM: A few journalists were staying some yards away from the main gate of the palace. The Royal flag was fluttering inside. People had expected that the flag would be pulled down during the day and the national flag would be hoisted to mark the republic day. But the king’s flag was still there. Meanwhile, at 11:30 PM the country was declared a republic. The major thoroughfares of the capital city had virtually no movement of vehicles. The market places too wore a deserted look as almost all shops, departmental stores and eateries had downed their shutters.
Kathmandu, May 28
The 28th of May, Wednesday will be written with golden letters in the political history of Nepal with the Constituent Assembly deciding to abolish the 240 year monarchial rule and the heralding of a new era of federal republican democracy.
The Rising Nepal recorded the day long celebrations that took place in different parts of the capital city. The events have been presented as observed from early morning till late evening. Gongabu at 10 AM: This is a spot known for the mightiest mass movement in the 2006 April movement. Despite the call of different parties for people to come to the street to welcome the glorious day, few had gathered there for a rally.
Moreover, the big board in which photos of all 22 martyrs were kept for display for the last two years was removed. How long has it been removed, few days back the board was there. Later on at 12 it was reported that CPN-Maoist took out a big rally from the place.New Baneshower at 11 AM: This scribe reached the spot through Maharajgunj and Chabahil where people were gathering for a rally. They were carrying flags of the communist party.
New Baneshwore is the place where the international Convention Centre is located and it is the centre for the meetings of the CA. The first meeting of the CA was taking place there today to declare the country a republic. The time for the meet was set for 11 but reaching there the time was postponed by 4 hours to settle differences of the major parties. The place was fill of people carrying the flags of different political parties and craving for a political change for decades.
Most of them had written ‘long live republic Nepal’ on their forehead and cheeks. Ratnapark at 2:00 PM: A big rally of CPN-Maoist was moving. They had come to the spot from ten different spots of the Ring Road of the Valley. A group of national and international journalists had gathered near the main gate of the Royal palace. A TV journalist said that he had covered live three times. Some people were taking photographs keeping the palace at the background. A motorbike moved towards east from the south road furling the communist flag while three Royal policemen were parading inside the palace and the TV cameramen caught the rare scene.Baluwatar at 3:00 PM: Journalists were waiting for the leaders to emerge with a concrete decision from the meeting inside the official residence of Prime Minister. Most of them were tired. They had been waiting since 9:30 from the time when the leaders had been in the meeting.
At 5:15 the news about use of teargas at Baneshore was reported. Journalists were heard saying, ‘now the leaders will decide soon as the people are turning violent to pressure them.’ At 5:40 famous singers JB Tuhure and Nanda Krishna Joshi reached the spot and talk with the journalists, “After a rally from Martyrs stage, we went to Baneshwore, sang for republic, addressed the mass but they were fed up with the unnecessary postponement of declaration. We also got fed up staying there and came here to know what was going on.
See our leaders who work at the eleventh hour and make the situation tense. People can go violent if they delay any longer.”At six, vehicles of the leaders of the Maoist party were driven out and we understood that the meeting had ended. After 15 minutes CPN-UML general secretary Jhala Nath Khanal came out and talked with the media persons waiting for almost nine hours. He said the country would be declared republic today, constitutional president will be elected later on. A journalist asked about the new decision after meeting for tedious and long hours!New Baneshwore at 8:00 PM: People were chanting slogans against monarchy.
During the day they were singing and dancing. Compared to their number in the afternoon, they were fewer. Suddenly, a big noise of explosion was heard. The noise had come from the north, this scribe was at the west side, little further away from the main gate. All the journalists moved to the place of the noise, so did I. It was under a small tree near the big Peepal Chautari, almost opposite the main gate. It’s not a big one, of course improvised, a policeman said. They also got a pamphlet of Ranavir Sena at the explosion spot. Within 5 to 6 minutes, another explosion was heard and this time it was at south-west of the Convention Centre, on the road that leads to Maitighar. All moved to that side hurriedly. People were frantically moving here and there. In both explosions nobody was hurt. The police had started cordoning the prohibited area. Throughout the day, people were allowed to pass through the side of the road. What a security!
And, activists of YCL were seen deployed with the police in each corner of the midtown for additional security.Naraynhiti Royal Palace at 9:30 PM: A few journalists were staying some yards away from the main gate of the palace. The Royal flag was fluttering inside. People had expected that the flag would be pulled down during the day and the national flag would be hoisted to mark the republic day. But the king’s flag was still there. Meanwhile, at 11:30 PM the country was declared a republic. The major thoroughfares of the capital city had virtually no movement of vehicles. The market places too wore a deserted look as almost all shops, departmental stores and eateries had downed their shutters.
King Gyanendra in consultations hours before facing a sack
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/archive/2008/may/may28/news10.php
Only hours before the first Constituent Assembly meeting is expected to declare Nepal a republic, the soon to be deposed King Gyanendra, who has acquired a name tag of the Last Shah King, is reportedly holding consultation with his close aides and supporters from yesterday afternoon inside the Narayanhiti royal palace.
Reports quoting palace sources said that the King, who would soon be stripped off his title and become a common citizen of Nepal answerable to the country’s law, is taking advises from officials of Palace secretariat, former Panchas, ministers during the erstwhile royal regime and those close to the palace on his future moves and options as Nepal turns the page on the 239 years of history of monarchy in the country.
Crown Prince Paras, whose playboy image also said to have contributed much to the fall of monarchy, including some members of the royal family are also actively participating in the intense discussion, it is learnt
After consultations King Gyanendra is expected to issue a message in the name of the countrymen in which he is said will try to defend his past actions, explaining that he had not staged the royal coup of February 1 with any bad intentions.
The former Royal Nepal Army has also dispatched a special commando force for the security of the palace. nepalnews.com ag May 28 08
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/archive/2008/may/may28/news10.php
Only hours before the first Constituent Assembly meeting is expected to declare Nepal a republic, the soon to be deposed King Gyanendra, who has acquired a name tag of the Last Shah King, is reportedly holding consultation with his close aides and supporters from yesterday afternoon inside the Narayanhiti royal palace.
Reports quoting palace sources said that the King, who would soon be stripped off his title and become a common citizen of Nepal answerable to the country’s law, is taking advises from officials of Palace secretariat, former Panchas, ministers during the erstwhile royal regime and those close to the palace on his future moves and options as Nepal turns the page on the 239 years of history of monarchy in the country.
Crown Prince Paras, whose playboy image also said to have contributed much to the fall of monarchy, including some members of the royal family are also actively participating in the intense discussion, it is learnt
After consultations King Gyanendra is expected to issue a message in the name of the countrymen in which he is said will try to defend his past actions, explaining that he had not staged the royal coup of February 1 with any bad intentions.
The former Royal Nepal Army has also dispatched a special commando force for the security of the palace. nepalnews.com ag May 28 08
http://www.nepalnews.com.np/archive/2008/may/may28/news10.php
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Exceeding diplomatic limits!
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=3486
Kathmandu: Unfortunate is the nation-state that gives birth to “impotent” and “anti-nationals”.
Cursed is the nation which has leaders like what we have today in the political scene of the country who more often than not exhibit their excessive leaning towards the former British colony in the neighborhood than serving their own nation.
Shame on such leaders who possess no love and honor for their own nation but instead “surrender” to the political dictates of the rulers of the former colony which comes to them through the Viceroy posted in Kathmandu recently.
Unfortunate is this nation that the Indian Ambassador presents his letter of credentials to an India born Nepali Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala.
No diplomatic etiquettes; no diplomatic barriers; the gross violation of the Geneva Convention that regulates the conduct of a foreign diplomat posted in the host country; no diplomatic courtesy; no manner on how to behave with the leaders of the host country; no restriction is imposed on this diplomat by the host country whenever this fake “Lord Mountbatten” “instructs” or even “scolds” the Nepali leaders to do this or to that; is he above the law of this land? Should he be not taken to task by the non-existent foreign ministry officials? Why should not the Nepali leaders, if they possess any regard for their nation had have the guts, pack this “diplomat” in a box and sent back to the country of his origin?
Thanks that former Nepal’s Ambassador to India, Dr. Bhekh Bahadur Thapa had the courage to ventilate his some what shocked feelings while talking to Kantipur Television Monday evening who stated bluntly that “Ambassador Sood who is exceeding his diplomatic limits must be packed in a box and sent back to Delhi”.
Yet another Congress stalwart, Dr. Ram Saran Mahat said the other day that “who the hell this diplomat from India is”? He further said that Ambassador Sood has no right to pronounce even a single word as regards how the Nepali politics should proceed in the days ahead.
Dr. Mahat warned that if this immodest diplomat exceeded his limits and continued in dictating us, we the Nepalese must find a suitable solution on how to “deal with” such “etiquette less” diplomat.
What is surprising is that this diplomat is seen every where. He is with PM Koirala. He could be seen the next second with Prachanda and the moment next talking to Upendra Yadav at Hotel Yak and Yeti.
He concludes that Nepal was the extension of Bihar and hence he possessed every right to pounce upon this country by “seducing” or even “threatening” the leaders of this country to work in the “larger interest” of the former colony ruled mercilessly by the British India Company, if one were to recall.
The present day rulers of the Indian Union have reasons to suffer from highest order of inferiority complex for their ancestors had been ruled brutally by their British Masters for well over a century and thus they prefer to act in the same manner and fashion in the conduct of their relations with its small neighbors, more so with Nepal.
It is only but natural.
Naked interference too has a limit. Unnecessarily poking its nose in the exclusive affairs of a “sovereign country” (but are we now?) too has a border. When this border set by Geneva Convention is crossed by any diplomat whether he is from Europe, or India, the host country has the right to declare such undisciplined diplomat as a Persona Non Grata.
With the real King gone, let’s welcome this most haughty diplomat as our next King from the land of our “traditional neighbor”.
The Indian design is becoming more and more visible with the “dubious” activities being carried out by this stubborn diplomat.
The design is, first, to do away with the King which the Indian establishment has already accomplished.
The second design is to slash the strength of the Nepal Army so that Nepal becomes a pretty weakened state.
Third design is the military intervention in this land under one pretext or the other.
The fourth is to initiate the process of Sikkimisation by maneuvering the Nepalese politics in such a manner that Nepal has a good number of Lendhup Dorjes to work for the Indian designs.
Fifth, the Indian design is to bring in more Indian media in Nepal in order to gag the nationalist press. The process has, fortunately, already begun.
Frankly speaking, the manner and the haste with which the institution of the monarchy has been made to collapse, the process of Sikkimisation presumably has already commenced.
Thanks that some of the sons of this soil are more than what Lendhup Dorje was who later died a most “ignominious death” that was demanded for a traitor like him. Some have already managed free scholarship for their kids and the rest of the Indo-pendent leaders presumably are in the pay-roll. Should this mean that India will have no problem in annexing this country into the former British colony? Keep on guessing.
Time will prove as to which Nepali leaders were supporting this Indian grand design under the cover and at what price?
Now let’s look at what this close to persona non grata diplomat said in Pokhara May 24, Saturday.
He orders the Nepali rulers by stating that “the constitution needed no amendment”.
To recall, the NC, the UML, the Madhesi leaders were of the opinion that the interim constitution be amended prior to the formation of the next government.
Albeit, the Maoists have vociferously been saying that the amendment was not necessary at all. Does not the Ambassador’s saying as regards the amendment in the constitution match with what the Maoists have been talking of late?
This does then mean that Ambassador Sood is a Maoist spokesperson by all means.
But what price the Maoists will have to pay later for having made this diplomat their spokesperson? No free lunch in diplomacy! Mind it Comrades!
Things will become clearer in a matter of months as to how the Maoists when in power are squeezed by the Indian authorities.
This is not all, he further instructs our leaders by saying that “it would be a mistake if one looked back and talked about the need for a constitutional amendment as the newly elected CA body has already the mandate to write a fresh constitution”.
Providing his sermon, he adds, “there should now be one goal which is the drafting of a new constitution….if this goal is forgotten, the country’s peace, development and above all political stability will be in danger”.
(See for this diplomats’ commandments which are some what humiliating and insulting which has been verbatim reported by the Naya Patrika daily dated May 25, Sunday in its second page).
Look how he forwards his own sermons and dictates. This should explain his colonial mindset which is nothing but passed on to him by his ancestors who have had to feel the brunt of the British rule.
The last ray of hope is with Prachanda as regards the preservation of Nepal’s glorious pride and honor. But this last hope too seems to have been recently carried away by the past Indian obligations. No wonder then our fire brand Comrade Prachanda now talks with the CNN-IBN that he would go in for having a “special relationship” with the Indian establishment when in power.
Prachanda favors special relationship with India and his second man Dr. Bhattarai is talked to be the main man behind the drafting of the new constitution in Delhi which is in progress according to the NC leader, Dr. Sashank Koirala.
Bleak future imminent ahead of this wretched country, it appears.
Add to this the fact that Girija Prasad Koirala was born in India and thus to expect some thing “national” from him would be to extract oil from the Rajasthan sand.
All said and done, Nepal’s territorial integrity and sovereignty is definitely under a severe threat of Himalayan dimension.
How the new managers of the republican order will face the India’s hawkish bureaucrats is any body’s guess.
Finally a word of advice to the Nepali leaders: Some one is trying to make you his stooge. Some one is trying to deform your mother. Try to refrain from becoming Lendhup Dorje or else you too will have to bear with the same hatred from your own voters and ultimately die a death of a street dog.
The message should be loud and clear.
By the way, Ambassador Sood would do well if he reads few chapters from the book penned by Hans J. Morgenthau on “Politics Among Nations” and understand correctly his diplomatic limits and act accordingly. A modest advice indeed.
Kathmandu: Unfortunate is the nation-state that gives birth to “impotent” and “anti-nationals”.
Cursed is the nation which has leaders like what we have today in the political scene of the country who more often than not exhibit their excessive leaning towards the former British colony in the neighborhood than serving their own nation.
Shame on such leaders who possess no love and honor for their own nation but instead “surrender” to the political dictates of the rulers of the former colony which comes to them through the Viceroy posted in Kathmandu recently.
Unfortunate is this nation that the Indian Ambassador presents his letter of credentials to an India born Nepali Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala.
No diplomatic etiquettes; no diplomatic barriers; the gross violation of the Geneva Convention that regulates the conduct of a foreign diplomat posted in the host country; no diplomatic courtesy; no manner on how to behave with the leaders of the host country; no restriction is imposed on this diplomat by the host country whenever this fake “Lord Mountbatten” “instructs” or even “scolds” the Nepali leaders to do this or to that; is he above the law of this land? Should he be not taken to task by the non-existent foreign ministry officials? Why should not the Nepali leaders, if they possess any regard for their nation had have the guts, pack this “diplomat” in a box and sent back to the country of his origin?
Thanks that former Nepal’s Ambassador to India, Dr. Bhekh Bahadur Thapa had the courage to ventilate his some what shocked feelings while talking to Kantipur Television Monday evening who stated bluntly that “Ambassador Sood who is exceeding his diplomatic limits must be packed in a box and sent back to Delhi”.
Yet another Congress stalwart, Dr. Ram Saran Mahat said the other day that “who the hell this diplomat from India is”? He further said that Ambassador Sood has no right to pronounce even a single word as regards how the Nepali politics should proceed in the days ahead.
Dr. Mahat warned that if this immodest diplomat exceeded his limits and continued in dictating us, we the Nepalese must find a suitable solution on how to “deal with” such “etiquette less” diplomat.
What is surprising is that this diplomat is seen every where. He is with PM Koirala. He could be seen the next second with Prachanda and the moment next talking to Upendra Yadav at Hotel Yak and Yeti.
He concludes that Nepal was the extension of Bihar and hence he possessed every right to pounce upon this country by “seducing” or even “threatening” the leaders of this country to work in the “larger interest” of the former colony ruled mercilessly by the British India Company, if one were to recall.
The present day rulers of the Indian Union have reasons to suffer from highest order of inferiority complex for their ancestors had been ruled brutally by their British Masters for well over a century and thus they prefer to act in the same manner and fashion in the conduct of their relations with its small neighbors, more so with Nepal.
It is only but natural.
Naked interference too has a limit. Unnecessarily poking its nose in the exclusive affairs of a “sovereign country” (but are we now?) too has a border. When this border set by Geneva Convention is crossed by any diplomat whether he is from Europe, or India, the host country has the right to declare such undisciplined diplomat as a Persona Non Grata.
With the real King gone, let’s welcome this most haughty diplomat as our next King from the land of our “traditional neighbor”.
The Indian design is becoming more and more visible with the “dubious” activities being carried out by this stubborn diplomat.
The design is, first, to do away with the King which the Indian establishment has already accomplished.
The second design is to slash the strength of the Nepal Army so that Nepal becomes a pretty weakened state.
Third design is the military intervention in this land under one pretext or the other.
The fourth is to initiate the process of Sikkimisation by maneuvering the Nepalese politics in such a manner that Nepal has a good number of Lendhup Dorjes to work for the Indian designs.
Fifth, the Indian design is to bring in more Indian media in Nepal in order to gag the nationalist press. The process has, fortunately, already begun.
Frankly speaking, the manner and the haste with which the institution of the monarchy has been made to collapse, the process of Sikkimisation presumably has already commenced.
Thanks that some of the sons of this soil are more than what Lendhup Dorje was who later died a most “ignominious death” that was demanded for a traitor like him. Some have already managed free scholarship for their kids and the rest of the Indo-pendent leaders presumably are in the pay-roll. Should this mean that India will have no problem in annexing this country into the former British colony? Keep on guessing.
Time will prove as to which Nepali leaders were supporting this Indian grand design under the cover and at what price?
Now let’s look at what this close to persona non grata diplomat said in Pokhara May 24, Saturday.
He orders the Nepali rulers by stating that “the constitution needed no amendment”.
To recall, the NC, the UML, the Madhesi leaders were of the opinion that the interim constitution be amended prior to the formation of the next government.
Albeit, the Maoists have vociferously been saying that the amendment was not necessary at all. Does not the Ambassador’s saying as regards the amendment in the constitution match with what the Maoists have been talking of late?
This does then mean that Ambassador Sood is a Maoist spokesperson by all means.
But what price the Maoists will have to pay later for having made this diplomat their spokesperson? No free lunch in diplomacy! Mind it Comrades!
Things will become clearer in a matter of months as to how the Maoists when in power are squeezed by the Indian authorities.
This is not all, he further instructs our leaders by saying that “it would be a mistake if one looked back and talked about the need for a constitutional amendment as the newly elected CA body has already the mandate to write a fresh constitution”.
Providing his sermon, he adds, “there should now be one goal which is the drafting of a new constitution….if this goal is forgotten, the country’s peace, development and above all political stability will be in danger”.
(See for this diplomats’ commandments which are some what humiliating and insulting which has been verbatim reported by the Naya Patrika daily dated May 25, Sunday in its second page).
Look how he forwards his own sermons and dictates. This should explain his colonial mindset which is nothing but passed on to him by his ancestors who have had to feel the brunt of the British rule.
The last ray of hope is with Prachanda as regards the preservation of Nepal’s glorious pride and honor. But this last hope too seems to have been recently carried away by the past Indian obligations. No wonder then our fire brand Comrade Prachanda now talks with the CNN-IBN that he would go in for having a “special relationship” with the Indian establishment when in power.
Prachanda favors special relationship with India and his second man Dr. Bhattarai is talked to be the main man behind the drafting of the new constitution in Delhi which is in progress according to the NC leader, Dr. Sashank Koirala.
Bleak future imminent ahead of this wretched country, it appears.
Add to this the fact that Girija Prasad Koirala was born in India and thus to expect some thing “national” from him would be to extract oil from the Rajasthan sand.
All said and done, Nepal’s territorial integrity and sovereignty is definitely under a severe threat of Himalayan dimension.
How the new managers of the republican order will face the India’s hawkish bureaucrats is any body’s guess.
Finally a word of advice to the Nepali leaders: Some one is trying to make you his stooge. Some one is trying to deform your mother. Try to refrain from becoming Lendhup Dorje or else you too will have to bear with the same hatred from your own voters and ultimately die a death of a street dog.
The message should be loud and clear.
By the way, Ambassador Sood would do well if he reads few chapters from the book penned by Hans J. Morgenthau on “Politics Among Nations” and understand correctly his diplomatic limits and act accordingly. A modest advice indeed.
Nepal set to abolish monarchy, become republic
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hG2O9QRIRxA9fIqMsotKKx-nvWCA
KATHMANDU (AFP) — The Himalayan kingdom of Nepal was set for historic change on Wednesday with an assembly expected to abolish the country's 240-year-old monarchy, in a key victory for former Maoist rebels.
Security was tight around the venue for the assembly, which is set to dissolve the monarchy and sack the unpopular King Gyanendra when it holds its first session later Wednesday.
Scores of police ringed the conference centre in Kathmandu after a series of bomb blasts in the runup to the meet by suspected "anti-republicans" supporting Gyanendra, who ascended the throne seven years ago after a palace massacre.
A homemade bomb exploded in a Kathmandu park on Tuesday shortly after Constituent Assembly members were sworn in, injuring two people.
The lawmakers, elected in last month's polls to draft a new constitution, were set to begin proceedings at 11:00 am (0545 GMT) at the convention centre.
"This is an epoch-making day," Maoist leader Prachanda, who is expected to head the country's next government, told reporters on Tuesday.
"For the past 50 years people have been fighting for this. The institution of the monarchy will formally come to an end."
The Maoists, who have long vowed to remove the king and create a republic, emerged as surprise winners in the April polls, taking a third of the assembly's 601 seats.
The Maoists signed a landmark peace deal in 2006 that brought them into the political mainstream, ending a decade-long insurgency that killed thousands of people and crippled the already impoverished nation's economy.
Gyanendra was crowned following the 2001 killing of his popular brother Birendra and most of the royal family by a drink-and-drug-fuelled crown prince who later killed himself.
Although seen by loyalists as the reincarnation of a Hindu god, he remained at the centre of conspiracy theories linking him to the killings.
He still enjoys some support from Hindu hardliners and powerful elements in the armed forces and ruling elite, but observers of the royal house said Wednesday's meet appeared to be the end of the Shah dynasty.
"He has been isolated and he has a very slim chance of making a comeback," said Surendra Khatri Chhetri, a history professor at Tribhuvan University.
"The strength of republican sentiment has cornered the king."
Kishore Shrestha, editor of a weekly newspaper that regularly runs scoops from palace staff on the dynnasty said the king appeared to be preparing for life as a commoner.
"Palace sources have told me he has started laying off large numbers of staff, and has been renovating two of his private properties," Shrestha said.
"My sources tell me that he will vacate the main palace very soon."
Gyanendra's whereabouts were unknown late Tuesday, after he was seen leaving Narayanhiti palace, a sprawling complex in the heart of Kathmandu, driving himself and Queen Komal in a Mercedes car and part of a small convoy.
The palace press secretariat said it did not know where the king was going, or if he was leaving for good -- in line with Maoist demands that he vacate his royal home and bow out gracefully.
Last month's vote appeared to vindicate the Maoist demand for a republic, with the former rebels winning more than a third of the new assembly's seats.
But less than a day before the assembly was to begin, the mainstream parties and Maoists were still wrangling Tuesday over the make up of a new government.
Maoists insist they have the right to lead the nation after their win, but the other parties fear the former rebels will now have too much power.
Gyanendra sealed his fate in early 2005, when he dismissed the government and took direct control, galvanising public sentiment against him.
The rebel Maoists and political parties launched mass protests that forced the king to back down a year later.
In the process the once bitter foes drew closer together, forging the 2006 peace agreement, ending a decade of civil war that killed 13,000 people, and completely sidelining the king.
"The doors to a republic were opened by the king himself," said historian Khatri Chhetri. "The palace is no more a central figure of politics."
KATHMANDU (AFP) — The Himalayan kingdom of Nepal was set for historic change on Wednesday with an assembly expected to abolish the country's 240-year-old monarchy, in a key victory for former Maoist rebels.
Security was tight around the venue for the assembly, which is set to dissolve the monarchy and sack the unpopular King Gyanendra when it holds its first session later Wednesday.
Scores of police ringed the conference centre in Kathmandu after a series of bomb blasts in the runup to the meet by suspected "anti-republicans" supporting Gyanendra, who ascended the throne seven years ago after a palace massacre.
A homemade bomb exploded in a Kathmandu park on Tuesday shortly after Constituent Assembly members were sworn in, injuring two people.
The lawmakers, elected in last month's polls to draft a new constitution, were set to begin proceedings at 11:00 am (0545 GMT) at the convention centre.
"This is an epoch-making day," Maoist leader Prachanda, who is expected to head the country's next government, told reporters on Tuesday.
"For the past 50 years people have been fighting for this. The institution of the monarchy will formally come to an end."
The Maoists, who have long vowed to remove the king and create a republic, emerged as surprise winners in the April polls, taking a third of the assembly's 601 seats.
The Maoists signed a landmark peace deal in 2006 that brought them into the political mainstream, ending a decade-long insurgency that killed thousands of people and crippled the already impoverished nation's economy.
Gyanendra was crowned following the 2001 killing of his popular brother Birendra and most of the royal family by a drink-and-drug-fuelled crown prince who later killed himself.
Although seen by loyalists as the reincarnation of a Hindu god, he remained at the centre of conspiracy theories linking him to the killings.
He still enjoys some support from Hindu hardliners and powerful elements in the armed forces and ruling elite, but observers of the royal house said Wednesday's meet appeared to be the end of the Shah dynasty.
"He has been isolated and he has a very slim chance of making a comeback," said Surendra Khatri Chhetri, a history professor at Tribhuvan University.
"The strength of republican sentiment has cornered the king."
Kishore Shrestha, editor of a weekly newspaper that regularly runs scoops from palace staff on the dynnasty said the king appeared to be preparing for life as a commoner.
"Palace sources have told me he has started laying off large numbers of staff, and has been renovating two of his private properties," Shrestha said.
"My sources tell me that he will vacate the main palace very soon."
Gyanendra's whereabouts were unknown late Tuesday, after he was seen leaving Narayanhiti palace, a sprawling complex in the heart of Kathmandu, driving himself and Queen Komal in a Mercedes car and part of a small convoy.
The palace press secretariat said it did not know where the king was going, or if he was leaving for good -- in line with Maoist demands that he vacate his royal home and bow out gracefully.
Last month's vote appeared to vindicate the Maoist demand for a republic, with the former rebels winning more than a third of the new assembly's seats.
But less than a day before the assembly was to begin, the mainstream parties and Maoists were still wrangling Tuesday over the make up of a new government.
Maoists insist they have the right to lead the nation after their win, but the other parties fear the former rebels will now have too much power.
Gyanendra sealed his fate in early 2005, when he dismissed the government and took direct control, galvanising public sentiment against him.
The rebel Maoists and political parties launched mass protests that forced the king to back down a year later.
In the process the once bitter foes drew closer together, forging the 2006 peace agreement, ending a decade of civil war that killed 13,000 people, and completely sidelining the king.
"The doors to a republic were opened by the king himself," said historian Khatri Chhetri. "The palace is no more a central figure of politics."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/item-one-on-the-agenda-for-nepals-new-parliament-evicting-the-king-835207.html
By Andrew Buncombe, Asia CorrespondentWednesday, 28 May 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/item-one-on-the-agenda-for-nepals-new-parliament-evicting-the-king-835207.html
Nepal's last king has been told to leave the palace that his family has occupied for almost 240 years as the Himalayan kingdom last night prepared to become the world's newest republic.
The first matter of business for 575 members of a new parliament who were sworn in yesterday is to formally declare Nepal a republic. After that, the king – the last Hindu monarch in the world – is expected to leave the palace and return to his private home.
"A republic will be declared tomorrow. Once a republic is declared, the king will automatically lose his position and place in the palace," said Baburam Bhattarai, deputy leader of the majority Maoist party. "He has no choice but if he refuses to leave the palace we will use the law to force him out of there."
These are tense times for Nepal. Just last month saw a remarkable election in which former Maoist rebels, who had led a 10-year guerrilla war, won the majority of votes. They are preparing to form a coalition government, which they will head.
But while the Maoists have insisted they are committed to peace and that their armed struggle is over, uncertainty still hangs over the country as it prepares to enter a new era.
Part of that is related to the constant threat of violence. In the past two days, a series of bombs have been detonated in the capital, Kathmandu, wounding two people. Reports have suggested that the bombs targeted pro-republic politicians and activists but that remains unclear, as do the identities of those who carried out the blasts. About 10,000 police have been dispatched around the city to tighten up security.
Ian Martin, head of the UN monitoring mission in Nepal, told reporters yesterday that he hoped the swearing in of the assembly would help usher in new security for the country and that politically motivated killings would stop. However, he admitted he was not overly hopeful.
"This is a time for all political parties to show that they have the political will to bring to justice those responsible for violations of human rights, and not intervene as they are accustomed to do to protect their own supporters while calling for justice when their supporters are the victims," he said.
"I hope that but it is a little hard for me to expect that, because it is now more than three years since I came to Nepal and in all those three years there has not been a single case where the perpetrators of [political killings] ... have been brought to justice before the civilian courts."
Nepal's journey towards becoming a republic has been inextricably linked to the peace process established with the help of the international community to end a 10-year civil war, responsible for the deaths of 13,000 people. In late 2006, the Maoists agreed to re-enter the political mainstream and join an interim government. But their unwavering demand for that co-operation was that the royal family would have to be abolished.
Just five years earlier, the other political parties may have been disinclined to go along with the Maoists' demands. But the monarch, King Gyanendra – catapulted on to the throne by a 2001 massacre at the palace in which his brother, King Birendra, and eight other members of the royal family died – had never been popular with the public.
His unpopularity reached new depths in February 2005 when he suspended parliament and seized power for himself, returning Nepal to a state of affairs not seen since 1990 when absolute rule was ended. His decision resulted in widespread public demonstrations against the king and gave the Maoists ammunition for their argument that the political infrastructure was in need of a wholesale transformation.
In addition to scrapping the monarchy, the Maoists say they want to make Nepal a federal state and improve conditions for its impoverished citizens. The challenges are huge; until the 1950s Nepal was virtually closed to the outside world and parts of the country remain utterly undeveloped. Poverty is widespread.
In preparation for the abolition of the monarchy, King Gyanendra's image has already been taken off Nepal's currency and the title "royal" has been removed from the name of the army and the national airline. All references to the monarch have also been taken out of the national anthem. By the end of today, the monarch should also be gone from the royal palace.
Two centuries of royal rule
The Shah family has ruled Nepal since 1768 when the country first became unified. Once considered "living gods", the family's absolute rule over the country only came to an end in 1990. But for the 2001 palace massacre when Crown Prince Dipendra shot dead eight members of his family before fatally injuring himself, the current political turmoil might not be taking place as the then reigning monarch, King Birendra, was popular. Legislation to abolish the monarchy – the process to be formally taken today by the Constituent Assembly – was tabled by an interim government last December. The current king, Gyanendra, is expected to continue to live in Nepal, despite some reports he might move to India where he has supporters among the Hindu right wing.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/item-one-on-the-agenda-for-nepals-new-parliament-evicting-the-king-835207.html
Nepal's last king has been told to leave the palace that his family has occupied for almost 240 years as the Himalayan kingdom last night prepared to become the world's newest republic.
The first matter of business for 575 members of a new parliament who were sworn in yesterday is to formally declare Nepal a republic. After that, the king – the last Hindu monarch in the world – is expected to leave the palace and return to his private home.
"A republic will be declared tomorrow. Once a republic is declared, the king will automatically lose his position and place in the palace," said Baburam Bhattarai, deputy leader of the majority Maoist party. "He has no choice but if he refuses to leave the palace we will use the law to force him out of there."
These are tense times for Nepal. Just last month saw a remarkable election in which former Maoist rebels, who had led a 10-year guerrilla war, won the majority of votes. They are preparing to form a coalition government, which they will head.
But while the Maoists have insisted they are committed to peace and that their armed struggle is over, uncertainty still hangs over the country as it prepares to enter a new era.
Part of that is related to the constant threat of violence. In the past two days, a series of bombs have been detonated in the capital, Kathmandu, wounding two people. Reports have suggested that the bombs targeted pro-republic politicians and activists but that remains unclear, as do the identities of those who carried out the blasts. About 10,000 police have been dispatched around the city to tighten up security.
Ian Martin, head of the UN monitoring mission in Nepal, told reporters yesterday that he hoped the swearing in of the assembly would help usher in new security for the country and that politically motivated killings would stop. However, he admitted he was not overly hopeful.
"This is a time for all political parties to show that they have the political will to bring to justice those responsible for violations of human rights, and not intervene as they are accustomed to do to protect their own supporters while calling for justice when their supporters are the victims," he said.
"I hope that but it is a little hard for me to expect that, because it is now more than three years since I came to Nepal and in all those three years there has not been a single case where the perpetrators of [political killings] ... have been brought to justice before the civilian courts."
Nepal's journey towards becoming a republic has been inextricably linked to the peace process established with the help of the international community to end a 10-year civil war, responsible for the deaths of 13,000 people. In late 2006, the Maoists agreed to re-enter the political mainstream and join an interim government. But their unwavering demand for that co-operation was that the royal family would have to be abolished.
Just five years earlier, the other political parties may have been disinclined to go along with the Maoists' demands. But the monarch, King Gyanendra – catapulted on to the throne by a 2001 massacre at the palace in which his brother, King Birendra, and eight other members of the royal family died – had never been popular with the public.
His unpopularity reached new depths in February 2005 when he suspended parliament and seized power for himself, returning Nepal to a state of affairs not seen since 1990 when absolute rule was ended. His decision resulted in widespread public demonstrations against the king and gave the Maoists ammunition for their argument that the political infrastructure was in need of a wholesale transformation.
In addition to scrapping the monarchy, the Maoists say they want to make Nepal a federal state and improve conditions for its impoverished citizens. The challenges are huge; until the 1950s Nepal was virtually closed to the outside world and parts of the country remain utterly undeveloped. Poverty is widespread.
In preparation for the abolition of the monarchy, King Gyanendra's image has already been taken off Nepal's currency and the title "royal" has been removed from the name of the army and the national airline. All references to the monarch have also been taken out of the national anthem. By the end of today, the monarch should also be gone from the royal palace.
Two centuries of royal rule
The Shah family has ruled Nepal since 1768 when the country first became unified. Once considered "living gods", the family's absolute rule over the country only came to an end in 1990. But for the 2001 palace massacre when Crown Prince Dipendra shot dead eight members of his family before fatally injuring himself, the current political turmoil might not be taking place as the then reigning monarch, King Birendra, was popular. Legislation to abolish the monarchy – the process to be formally taken today by the Constituent Assembly – was tabled by an interim government last December. The current king, Gyanendra, is expected to continue to live in Nepal, despite some reports he might move to India where he has supporters among the Hindu right wing.
Nepal to End 240-Year Monarchy With Vote for Republic (Update2)
By Michael Heath and Jay Shankar
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aIFlKeO_.L4M&refer=asia
May 28 (Bloomberg) -- Nepal's parliament, meeting for the first time since former rebels won elections in April, will declare the Himalayan country a republic today, ending a 240- year-old monarchy.
The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has told King Gyanendra to quit the palace and become a ``common citizen.'' The king hasn't commented on his plans.
``There will be no problem to pass the resolution abolishing the monarchy,'' Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara said by phone yesterday from the capital, Kathmandu. ``It should go smoothly as most of the parties want it to happen.''
Gyanendra lost most of his powers in 2006 when he was forced to allow the return of a civilian government after facing nationwide strikes to protest his absolute rule. An interim administration said he must pay taxes, placed the army under civilian control and removed his image from the 500-rupee note, replacing it with Mount Everest.
The rebels fought a 10-year insurgency to overthrow the monarchy before disarming under a November 2006 peace accord that provided for elections for an assembly that will draft a new constitution for the Himalayan country of 26.4 million people.
Nepal's three biggest parties, holding 433 seats in the new 601-member parliament, agreed to replace the monarchy with a ceremonial president, with most authority concentrated in the prime minister's office, Nepalnews.com reported.
Presidential Powers
``The president can exercise his powers to resolve any constitutional or political deadlock'' and undertake ceremonial duties, Jhalnath Khanal, general-secretary of the CPN (Unified Marxist-Leninist), said yesterday after three days of talks with the leaders of the Maoist and Nepali Congress parties.
The parties agreed to turn the Narayanhity Royal Palace into a national museum, Nepalnews.com reported. ``A separate residence for the president will have to be found,'' Khanal said. The king will be given as long as 15 days to vacate his palace, Mahara said, according to Agence France-Presse.
Thousands of people opposed to the king packed the streets around the building housing the new Constituent Assembly and were chanting slogans including ``Thief Gyanendra, leave the country,'' AFP said.
The Maoists won 220 seats in the April 10 ballot. Nepali Congress, the nation's oldest political party, won 110 seats, while the CPN (UML) secured 103 and the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, representing the Terai region bordering India, won 52.
Gyanendra became king and began wearing the traditional crown made of yak hair and peacock feathers in June 2001, after his brother Birendra and close relatives were killed by Crown Prince Dipendra, who then shot himself.
U
nified Country
Nepal was unified when King Prithivi Narayan Shah took control of Kathmandu city in 1768 and the Malla rulers were driven from Kathmandu valley. Previously, the territory was divided into small principalities.
Many Nepalese believed Gyanendra's family members were reincarnated Hindu gods, who created the landlocked kingdom between India and China. About 80 percent of Nepalis are Hindu.
Analysts say the traditional respect for the king has waned because of the upheavals in recent years.
The king is no longer seen as ``a symbol of unity and integrity,'' Lok Raj Baral, executive chairman of the independent Nepal Center for Contemporary Studies, said by telephone from Kathmandu yesterday. ``There have been no demonstrations in support of the king.''
Talks With U.S.
The public has accepted the country will become a republic, he said. ``Maoists have the mandate and they are going to form the government and all parties are together.''
Maoist leader Prachanda met with U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Evan Feigenbaum earlier this week, in the first contact between a top State Department official and the former rebels, Nepalnews.com reported. The U.S. lists the Maoists as a terrorist organization.
Prachanda said he told Feigenbaum that, while the Maoists have been ``part of the peace process for a long time,'' the Bush administration ``still doesn't have a positive outlook'' on the former rebels, according to Nepalnews.com.
Feigenbaum, who is responsible for South and Central Asian affairs, arrived in Nepal on May 24 for a 3-day visit, according to a statement from the U.S. embassy in Kathmandu.
To contact the reporters on this story: Michael Heath in Sydney at mheath1@bloomberg.net; Jay Shankar in Bangalore at jshankar1@bloomberg.net.
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aIFlKeO_.L4M&refer=asia
May 28 (Bloomberg) -- Nepal's parliament, meeting for the first time since former rebels won elections in April, will declare the Himalayan country a republic today, ending a 240- year-old monarchy.
The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has told King Gyanendra to quit the palace and become a ``common citizen.'' The king hasn't commented on his plans.
``There will be no problem to pass the resolution abolishing the monarchy,'' Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara said by phone yesterday from the capital, Kathmandu. ``It should go smoothly as most of the parties want it to happen.''
Gyanendra lost most of his powers in 2006 when he was forced to allow the return of a civilian government after facing nationwide strikes to protest his absolute rule. An interim administration said he must pay taxes, placed the army under civilian control and removed his image from the 500-rupee note, replacing it with Mount Everest.
The rebels fought a 10-year insurgency to overthrow the monarchy before disarming under a November 2006 peace accord that provided for elections for an assembly that will draft a new constitution for the Himalayan country of 26.4 million people.
Nepal's three biggest parties, holding 433 seats in the new 601-member parliament, agreed to replace the monarchy with a ceremonial president, with most authority concentrated in the prime minister's office, Nepalnews.com reported.
Presidential Powers
``The president can exercise his powers to resolve any constitutional or political deadlock'' and undertake ceremonial duties, Jhalnath Khanal, general-secretary of the CPN (Unified Marxist-Leninist), said yesterday after three days of talks with the leaders of the Maoist and Nepali Congress parties.
The parties agreed to turn the Narayanhity Royal Palace into a national museum, Nepalnews.com reported. ``A separate residence for the president will have to be found,'' Khanal said. The king will be given as long as 15 days to vacate his palace, Mahara said, according to Agence France-Presse.
Thousands of people opposed to the king packed the streets around the building housing the new Constituent Assembly and were chanting slogans including ``Thief Gyanendra, leave the country,'' AFP said.
The Maoists won 220 seats in the April 10 ballot. Nepali Congress, the nation's oldest political party, won 110 seats, while the CPN (UML) secured 103 and the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, representing the Terai region bordering India, won 52.
Gyanendra became king and began wearing the traditional crown made of yak hair and peacock feathers in June 2001, after his brother Birendra and close relatives were killed by Crown Prince Dipendra, who then shot himself.
U
nified Country
Nepal was unified when King Prithivi Narayan Shah took control of Kathmandu city in 1768 and the Malla rulers were driven from Kathmandu valley. Previously, the territory was divided into small principalities.
Many Nepalese believed Gyanendra's family members were reincarnated Hindu gods, who created the landlocked kingdom between India and China. About 80 percent of Nepalis are Hindu.
Analysts say the traditional respect for the king has waned because of the upheavals in recent years.
The king is no longer seen as ``a symbol of unity and integrity,'' Lok Raj Baral, executive chairman of the independent Nepal Center for Contemporary Studies, said by telephone from Kathmandu yesterday. ``There have been no demonstrations in support of the king.''
Talks With U.S.
The public has accepted the country will become a republic, he said. ``Maoists have the mandate and they are going to form the government and all parties are together.''
Maoist leader Prachanda met with U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Evan Feigenbaum earlier this week, in the first contact between a top State Department official and the former rebels, Nepalnews.com reported. The U.S. lists the Maoists as a terrorist organization.
Prachanda said he told Feigenbaum that, while the Maoists have been ``part of the peace process for a long time,'' the Bush administration ``still doesn't have a positive outlook'' on the former rebels, according to Nepalnews.com.
Feigenbaum, who is responsible for South and Central Asian affairs, arrived in Nepal on May 24 for a 3-day visit, according to a statement from the U.S. embassy in Kathmandu.
To contact the reporters on this story: Michael Heath in Sydney at mheath1@bloomberg.net; Jay Shankar in Bangalore at jshankar1@bloomberg.net.
Head to head: Nepal's monarchy - BBC
Head to head: Nepal's monarchy
As Nepal's newly-elected assembly prepares to declare the country a republic, two Nepalis debate whether the country should abolish the monarchy.
AMAR RAJKARNIKAR
I think that the monarchy in Nepal is more relevant and important than ever today.
I fear that neighbouring countries are interfering in our government and domestic affairs.
At such moments, the nationalist parties should be united. This is not the time to be divided.
The institution of the king has a very long history in Nepal. More than 250 years have passed since the unification of Nepal under the current dynasty - by the forefathers of the current king.
If it hadn't been for this dynasty, we may not have seen our country on the map. So Nepal owes its existence to the monarchy and to this dynasty.
And the monarch has been a force in Nepal for centuries.
I believe the king should stay for the moment - if only to help with drafting the constitution. There is a power void and we need the appropriate power to steer the drafting of this important document - and for this - the monarch should be retained.
Indeed the abolition of our monarchy should be put to a referendum. It should be decided by the people of Nepal.
King Gyanendra has some culpability for the current situation. In the days when he waded into national politics it was purely because of in-fighting between politicians. He had to interfere. But he was working very much as a constitutional monarch.
For the last two years we have seen him very silent.
I think he is a very charismatic king, he is a good writer and he is independent-minded. As a king and as a leader, he is a very good person. We don't have any other good leaders at the moment.
I believe there could be dangers once the monarchy is abolished. So many people in the army still respect the king. I can foresee problems because he commands their loyalty.
The king is considered a symbol of Hindu unity. There is real emotional feeling when we talk about our religion.
The abolition of the monarchy will have a real impact on Nepal's cultural identity. We are the only Hindu kingdom. A large part of our culture is embodied in the king.
DIPENDRA TAMANG,
I support the abolition of the monarch because he is no longer a symbol of unity for Nepal.
A lot has changed in the last few years. Our previous king, Birendra, was liked by a lot of Nepalis. But his sudden death changed a lot.
When King Gyanendra, the current monarch, came to power he was not well-liked. But he did nothing to change the perception people had of him. He took way too much power into his own hands and he was too active in running the country.
Are we objecting to this particular monarch or the idea of monarchy? That is a question asked a lot.
Most political parties prefer the idea of a republic. It is not just prejudice against this particular king. His son and heir is not liked by the people either.
We are going through tremendous changes right now. We have to come up with a new form of identity. We have to find something which really unites us all. Nepal is a really diverse country with over 100 dialects and languages - finding a common uniting factor might be hard, but it's not impossible.
All of us Nepalis will have to work together to formulate a common uniting factor in the coming years.
The king lost the argument with all his political interference. On the other hand the Maoists have been successful in elections and in bringing about change.
This is a chance for them to prove themselves as a mainstream political party and not just an underground army or insurgency movement. The king should just move out. He doesn't have to leave Nepal. He is a big businessman as well. He should be treated just like the rest of us with the rights and responsibilities of a common citizen.
As Nepal's newly-elected assembly prepares to declare the country a republic, two Nepalis debate whether the country should abolish the monarchy.
AMAR RAJKARNIKAR
I think that the monarchy in Nepal is more relevant and important than ever today.
I fear that neighbouring countries are interfering in our government and domestic affairs.
At such moments, the nationalist parties should be united. This is not the time to be divided.
The institution of the king has a very long history in Nepal. More than 250 years have passed since the unification of Nepal under the current dynasty - by the forefathers of the current king.
If it hadn't been for this dynasty, we may not have seen our country on the map. So Nepal owes its existence to the monarchy and to this dynasty.
And the monarch has been a force in Nepal for centuries.
I believe the king should stay for the moment - if only to help with drafting the constitution. There is a power void and we need the appropriate power to steer the drafting of this important document - and for this - the monarch should be retained.
Indeed the abolition of our monarchy should be put to a referendum. It should be decided by the people of Nepal.
King Gyanendra has some culpability for the current situation. In the days when he waded into national politics it was purely because of in-fighting between politicians. He had to interfere. But he was working very much as a constitutional monarch.
For the last two years we have seen him very silent.
I think he is a very charismatic king, he is a good writer and he is independent-minded. As a king and as a leader, he is a very good person. We don't have any other good leaders at the moment.
I believe there could be dangers once the monarchy is abolished. So many people in the army still respect the king. I can foresee problems because he commands their loyalty.
The king is considered a symbol of Hindu unity. There is real emotional feeling when we talk about our religion.
The abolition of the monarchy will have a real impact on Nepal's cultural identity. We are the only Hindu kingdom. A large part of our culture is embodied in the king.
DIPENDRA TAMANG,
I support the abolition of the monarch because he is no longer a symbol of unity for Nepal.
A lot has changed in the last few years. Our previous king, Birendra, was liked by a lot of Nepalis. But his sudden death changed a lot.
When King Gyanendra, the current monarch, came to power he was not well-liked. But he did nothing to change the perception people had of him. He took way too much power into his own hands and he was too active in running the country.
Are we objecting to this particular monarch or the idea of monarchy? That is a question asked a lot.
Most political parties prefer the idea of a republic. It is not just prejudice against this particular king. His son and heir is not liked by the people either.
We are going through tremendous changes right now. We have to come up with a new form of identity. We have to find something which really unites us all. Nepal is a really diverse country with over 100 dialects and languages - finding a common uniting factor might be hard, but it's not impossible.
All of us Nepalis will have to work together to formulate a common uniting factor in the coming years.
The king lost the argument with all his political interference. On the other hand the Maoists have been successful in elections and in bringing about change.
This is a chance for them to prove themselves as a mainstream political party and not just an underground army or insurgency movement. The king should just move out. He doesn't have to leave Nepal. He is a big businessman as well. He should be treated just like the rest of us with the rights and responsibilities of a common citizen.
Nepal bans rallies in Kathmandu
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7419772.stm
By Charles Haviland BBC News, Kathmandu
Authorities in the Nepalese capital, Kathmandu, have banned rallies and mass meetings in strategic areas.
The prohibition comes into force two days before Nepal's newly-elected assembly is expected to meet to declare the country a republic.
Venues covered by the ban include the palace of King Gyanendra, the hall where the assembly will sit, and the residence of the prime minister.
The aim is to frustrate protests planned before the vote.
Widespread dismay
Historic change is approaching in Nepal, but with surprisingly little fanfare.
Very little of the constitutional detail has been worked out; and continuing violence from the biggest elected party, the Maoist former rebels, has created widespread dismay.
The assembly elected last month is instructed under the constitution to implement a republic, spelling the end of the centuries-old monarchy.
But the mechanism has not been determined.
Nor has a new government been formed, which many here say will have to happen before any motion on a republic can be drawn up.
Up to now there is not even any indication of whether King Gyanendra will move out of the
Royal Palace into one of the other residences which - at least for now - are still available to him.
Despite all this there is a general belief that a republic will be declared on Wednesday when the assembly first sits.
Perhaps fearing a confrontation or an attempt to storm the palace, the Kathmandu district government has banned rallies, mass meetings and protest programmes around the Royal Palace, the Crown Prince's house, the hall where the assembly will sit, and the prime minister's residence.
The ban, which the government says is to maintain security, will confound some of the plans by political and civil society activists to march to the assembly venue or the palace on Wednesday.
By Charles Haviland BBC News, Kathmandu
Authorities in the Nepalese capital, Kathmandu, have banned rallies and mass meetings in strategic areas.
The prohibition comes into force two days before Nepal's newly-elected assembly is expected to meet to declare the country a republic.
Venues covered by the ban include the palace of King Gyanendra, the hall where the assembly will sit, and the residence of the prime minister.
The aim is to frustrate protests planned before the vote.
Widespread dismay
Historic change is approaching in Nepal, but with surprisingly little fanfare.
Very little of the constitutional detail has been worked out; and continuing violence from the biggest elected party, the Maoist former rebels, has created widespread dismay.
The assembly elected last month is instructed under the constitution to implement a republic, spelling the end of the centuries-old monarchy.
But the mechanism has not been determined.
Nor has a new government been formed, which many here say will have to happen before any motion on a republic can be drawn up.
Up to now there is not even any indication of whether King Gyanendra will move out of the
Royal Palace into one of the other residences which - at least for now - are still available to him.
Despite all this there is a general belief that a republic will be declared on Wednesday when the assembly first sits.
Perhaps fearing a confrontation or an attempt to storm the palace, the Kathmandu district government has banned rallies, mass meetings and protest programmes around the Royal Palace, the Crown Prince's house, the hall where the assembly will sit, and the prime minister's residence.
The ban, which the government says is to maintain security, will confound some of the plans by political and civil society activists to march to the assembly venue or the palace on Wednesday.
‘Either Maoists or Army will take over'
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=148139
When the whole world is curiously watching how Nepal's 240-year-old Shah dynasty will formally end just two days from now, the Post caught up with Kamal Thapa, a political leader who played a major role during King Gyanendra's direct rule, to discuss the possible repercussions. Outspoken Thapa, who was also the Home Minister in the government formed after the February 1 royal takeover, has been standing by the side of the monarchy since the beginning.
Speaking with Puran P Bista and Kamal Raj Sigdel of the Post, he warns that the impact of the parties' decision to end the monarchy will be devastating. Thapa suggests that the parties implement their decision to establish a republic only after drafting a new constitution if they do not want the Maoists or the Nepal Army to take over.
Excerpts:
Q: How do you assess the current political developments?
Thapa: We are on the verge of a historic change. If we succeeded in properly managing it to move through the transition, we could achieve the objective of peace, stability and prosperity. But if we fail, it will only make matter worse.
Q: What sort of political exercise do you see on the eve of a historic CA meeting?
Thapa: The political parties, instead of dealing with the real issues, are bickering on petty things. They have been hankering after posts and portfolios rather than working on the real issues. This is not the first instance they acted like this. If we look at the trend of their actions in the past two years, whenever they have come across any issue of national interest, they have never held discussions. But important decisions have been taken in haste. Their main attention is always on power-sharing.
The way the political development is unraveling, I mean if this is the indication of the future trend, I see — the writing is on the wall — there will be only two things: Either the extreme left will take over the state power, or there will be another round of confrontation. Except these two, I don’t see a third possibility.
Q: The first meeting of the CA is formally putting an end to the institution of monarchy. What will be the repercussions of such a declaration?
Thapa: They are trying to implement this in haste and in an artificial manner. I don’t think this will yield any positive result because to make Nepal a republic is not only to change a government and a prime minister. It means an end of an era. It is not only the matter of a 240-year old institution; in Nepal’s context, it will be an end of a thousand years’ history. This will bring about a sweeping change in the social, cultural and religious values and norms.
The way the political parties are dealing with such serious issues in haste, and the way they are trying to do it artificially … they are in fact trying to implement that in an artificial environment … this will not yield good results. The decision will create a big void, and that will have a big impact on security organs of the state, in religious, social and cultural contexts, values and norms, administrative mechanisms, and similarly in the foreign policy. In the eventuality of the parties failing to manage it properly, a political disaster is inevitable.
Q: What do you mean by managing it “properly” when the parties enjoy the people’s mandate to declare Nepal a republic?
Thapa: First, the parties have not been able to establish valid reasons to end the institution of monarchy. In fact the efforts to end it began as per the desire of foreign powers and ultra-left Maoists’ strategic objective. Therefore, no reason whatsoever has been established to justify that move.
Second, the way it is being implemented is totally unjust. Even to impeach a head of government, let alone to sack, we need sufficient political and constitutional grounds. Had they held a referendum on the future of monarchy, a constitutional and legitimate process would have been established.
The CA election was not only about republic versus monarchy. In a country like Nepal where the majority of the people are illiterate, they voted mainly on the basis of the parties or political identifications. And the way it is being said, that the first meeting will decide, is very artificial.
There is a provision of two-thirds majority to amend the constitution. But to end the institution of monarchy — which has such a long historical background, which is deeply rooted in our socio-cultural values and norms, and until of late which was regarded as a symbol of national unity — just a simple majority is said to be needed. It is supposed to be decided on the next two-three days, but till today, nothing has been discussed upon — the procedures, the methods for the same.
So everything is being done in haste, and there are not enough reasons established to take such a decision. Therefore, I say this will create a void.
Q: You spoke of basis or enough reasons for declaring Nepal a republic. Aren’t the results of the CA polls the basis?
Thapa: Of course, the political parties came up with a republic agenda, they won a majority, but the parties themselves have not said it clearly what the crime of the monarch is. The monarchy is soon to be a victim of conspiracy of foreign powers, and strategic objective of the extreme left forces of this country. This is very unfortunate.
Those who like to see the monarchy existing in any form are not in a condition to speak openly. Of course, the monarchy might have taken some controversial decisions in the past, but those decisions cannot alone be the reasons for ending an institution that holds a long history. It has made several important contributions too — be it the unification of the country or in establishing democracy in the 1950; be it in heading nationalist movements or establishing Nepal’s independent identity in the world. The parties are ignorant of such contributions while taking political decisions about the institution. What I want to say is, agreed, they have won, but they have not made it clear why the monarchy should be abolished?
Q: Given such “unjust” decisions, how will the political parties be able to implement them? The monarchy cannot be ignored as one of the forces. How will the king react?
Thapa: You see the only force of the monarchy is the people. But the people who want monarchy are disorganized. They are rendered voiceless. They are helpless and confined to their homes. I believe there are still a large number of people who want monarchy. I don’t know how many in number they are. But there is a large section of people that wants monarchy. Today, if any one dares to speak in favor of the monarchy, s/he incurs a great risk of attack on his family. Therefore, they are mute.
And those who had to protect this institution have unfortunately betrayed and in that they have also betrayed the history of Nepal. They should have done it [protected the king].
Q: You spoke of another kind of betrayal. It is also rumored that there was an understanding among the political parties and the monarchy before the end of the April movement and that the parties are now betraying the monarchy.
Thapa: Yes. That is all clear. We know that there has been some sort of understanding between the agitating political parties and the palace. The statement read by the king was virtually drafted by the leaders of the political parties; the king simply read that out. It has been proved by the events that followed the announcement.
The parliament passed a historical document on May 18, 2006, which the leading media and the political parties termed it as Nepal’s Magna Carta. Where is that document now? Have we forgotten that? If that was a Magna Carta, what is the crime of the institution, particularly in the days after that agreement?
Q: What sort of scenario do you foresee right after the first meeting of the CA?
Thapa: I cannot say what the king will do. Nor can I speak on behalf of the king. As a political activist and an independent observer, what I say is if we look at the tradition of the monarchy, it never wanted to come in confrontation with the people, be it in 2036 BS (1980), 2046 BS (1990) or 2063 BS (2006). So I don’t think that monarchy will enter into a confrontation with the political forces.
But by default, the void created [by the decision of the first CA meeting] will have an immediate impact on the security forces of Nepal, then on the social, cultural and religious fabrics of the society, then on the administration and on the foreign policy. The impact will be so big that I don’t think the current political leadership will be able to manage it. In that situation one of two things that will happen: either a complete takeover by the Maoists or another round of confrontation.
Q: Does that “another round of confrontation” mean the takeover by the army?
Thapa: Yes, that comes as the second option. After confrontation I don’t rule out the possibility of one of the two taking over. But what will happen after the emotional bond between the army and the monarchy abruptly breaks? Nobody has thought about that. What will happen to the morale of the institution which is regarded as the last fortress of the country’ national security? Declaring Nepal a republic is not a big thing but the void created will be devastating.
Q: What sort of void are you talking about?
Thapa: What will be the scenario of Nepal’s national politics after May 28th? Nobody knows. So I have been reiterating that let us not do things in haste. First, we cannot ignore the fact. Whether we like it or not there are major political parties who are in favor of republic. Another established fact is that they have a majority. So, it is not that they cannot decide. They have the capacity. But there should be proper study on the impact of the implementation of their decision. If that is necessary to implement, let’s do it at the end, when we will have a new constitution.
We have not even started the constitution drafting process. But, on the other hand, we are going to take such a major decision. To make a new constitution is not just to prepare a document. There is no political understanding and consensus among the major political parties about the guiding philosophy of the constitution.
First, there should be a common and basic idea, upon which the constitution is written. We have political parties which are polls apart ideologically. Second, there are several sensitive issues — right to self-determination, federalism, army integration, etc— about which there are serious differences among political forces. If we cannot sort them out, writing a new constitution may not be possible. There are examples. So, what I suggest is first let us complete the drafting of the constitution. But at a time when there is uncertainty over whether a constitution will ever be written or not, why are the parties in haste and are hell bent on taking such a major decision?
Have we thought about what will happen after the end of the monarchy … the impact on the security forces … in their morale? When that confrontation occurs, they could be used by any one for someone’s advantage. They can be used as a weapon; that may invite a political disaster.
Q: Do you think the army has been committed to Comprehensive Peace Agreement? Has the army been playing any assertive role?
Thapa: I still don’t want to comment on that. I sill want to give a benefit of doubt to that institution, but the way the events will develop … what will the army decide … the people are watching.
Q: What is Prachanda up to?
Thapa: He has been saying that he has not come to transform himself as the NC and the UML, that they have never accepted parliamentary form of democracy. In a real sense, the Maoists have not renounced violence; they have said that both the peace process and the People’s War are the two sides of the same coin. These are not my words, they are on records. So what the Maoists want can be understood by their own words and deeds.
Maybe we can use the institution of monarchy even in drafting a new constitution; we can do that by consensus. What I say is the king cannot expect the monarchy of the past; the right and authority to govern rests on the representatives of the people. The king also should accept this. And the political parties, too, have a possibility to use the institution for a peaceful transition. So let’s first draft the constitution, and, if the representatives deem it necessary, the decision about the institution of monarchy could be taken during that process.
Posted on: 2008-05-25 20:06:00 (Server Time)
When the whole world is curiously watching how Nepal's 240-year-old Shah dynasty will formally end just two days from now, the Post caught up with Kamal Thapa, a political leader who played a major role during King Gyanendra's direct rule, to discuss the possible repercussions. Outspoken Thapa, who was also the Home Minister in the government formed after the February 1 royal takeover, has been standing by the side of the monarchy since the beginning.
Speaking with Puran P Bista and Kamal Raj Sigdel of the Post, he warns that the impact of the parties' decision to end the monarchy will be devastating. Thapa suggests that the parties implement their decision to establish a republic only after drafting a new constitution if they do not want the Maoists or the Nepal Army to take over.
Excerpts:
Q: How do you assess the current political developments?
Thapa: We are on the verge of a historic change. If we succeeded in properly managing it to move through the transition, we could achieve the objective of peace, stability and prosperity. But if we fail, it will only make matter worse.
Q: What sort of political exercise do you see on the eve of a historic CA meeting?
Thapa: The political parties, instead of dealing with the real issues, are bickering on petty things. They have been hankering after posts and portfolios rather than working on the real issues. This is not the first instance they acted like this. If we look at the trend of their actions in the past two years, whenever they have come across any issue of national interest, they have never held discussions. But important decisions have been taken in haste. Their main attention is always on power-sharing.
The way the political development is unraveling, I mean if this is the indication of the future trend, I see — the writing is on the wall — there will be only two things: Either the extreme left will take over the state power, or there will be another round of confrontation. Except these two, I don’t see a third possibility.
Q: The first meeting of the CA is formally putting an end to the institution of monarchy. What will be the repercussions of such a declaration?
Thapa: They are trying to implement this in haste and in an artificial manner. I don’t think this will yield any positive result because to make Nepal a republic is not only to change a government and a prime minister. It means an end of an era. It is not only the matter of a 240-year old institution; in Nepal’s context, it will be an end of a thousand years’ history. This will bring about a sweeping change in the social, cultural and religious values and norms.
The way the political parties are dealing with such serious issues in haste, and the way they are trying to do it artificially … they are in fact trying to implement that in an artificial environment … this will not yield good results. The decision will create a big void, and that will have a big impact on security organs of the state, in religious, social and cultural contexts, values and norms, administrative mechanisms, and similarly in the foreign policy. In the eventuality of the parties failing to manage it properly, a political disaster is inevitable.
Q: What do you mean by managing it “properly” when the parties enjoy the people’s mandate to declare Nepal a republic?
Thapa: First, the parties have not been able to establish valid reasons to end the institution of monarchy. In fact the efforts to end it began as per the desire of foreign powers and ultra-left Maoists’ strategic objective. Therefore, no reason whatsoever has been established to justify that move.
Second, the way it is being implemented is totally unjust. Even to impeach a head of government, let alone to sack, we need sufficient political and constitutional grounds. Had they held a referendum on the future of monarchy, a constitutional and legitimate process would have been established.
The CA election was not only about republic versus monarchy. In a country like Nepal where the majority of the people are illiterate, they voted mainly on the basis of the parties or political identifications. And the way it is being said, that the first meeting will decide, is very artificial.
There is a provision of two-thirds majority to amend the constitution. But to end the institution of monarchy — which has such a long historical background, which is deeply rooted in our socio-cultural values and norms, and until of late which was regarded as a symbol of national unity — just a simple majority is said to be needed. It is supposed to be decided on the next two-three days, but till today, nothing has been discussed upon — the procedures, the methods for the same.
So everything is being done in haste, and there are not enough reasons established to take such a decision. Therefore, I say this will create a void.
Q: You spoke of basis or enough reasons for declaring Nepal a republic. Aren’t the results of the CA polls the basis?
Thapa: Of course, the political parties came up with a republic agenda, they won a majority, but the parties themselves have not said it clearly what the crime of the monarch is. The monarchy is soon to be a victim of conspiracy of foreign powers, and strategic objective of the extreme left forces of this country. This is very unfortunate.
Those who like to see the monarchy existing in any form are not in a condition to speak openly. Of course, the monarchy might have taken some controversial decisions in the past, but those decisions cannot alone be the reasons for ending an institution that holds a long history. It has made several important contributions too — be it the unification of the country or in establishing democracy in the 1950; be it in heading nationalist movements or establishing Nepal’s independent identity in the world. The parties are ignorant of such contributions while taking political decisions about the institution. What I want to say is, agreed, they have won, but they have not made it clear why the monarchy should be abolished?
Q: Given such “unjust” decisions, how will the political parties be able to implement them? The monarchy cannot be ignored as one of the forces. How will the king react?
Thapa: You see the only force of the monarchy is the people. But the people who want monarchy are disorganized. They are rendered voiceless. They are helpless and confined to their homes. I believe there are still a large number of people who want monarchy. I don’t know how many in number they are. But there is a large section of people that wants monarchy. Today, if any one dares to speak in favor of the monarchy, s/he incurs a great risk of attack on his family. Therefore, they are mute.
And those who had to protect this institution have unfortunately betrayed and in that they have also betrayed the history of Nepal. They should have done it [protected the king].
Q: You spoke of another kind of betrayal. It is also rumored that there was an understanding among the political parties and the monarchy before the end of the April movement and that the parties are now betraying the monarchy.
Thapa: Yes. That is all clear. We know that there has been some sort of understanding between the agitating political parties and the palace. The statement read by the king was virtually drafted by the leaders of the political parties; the king simply read that out. It has been proved by the events that followed the announcement.
The parliament passed a historical document on May 18, 2006, which the leading media and the political parties termed it as Nepal’s Magna Carta. Where is that document now? Have we forgotten that? If that was a Magna Carta, what is the crime of the institution, particularly in the days after that agreement?
Q: What sort of scenario do you foresee right after the first meeting of the CA?
Thapa: I cannot say what the king will do. Nor can I speak on behalf of the king. As a political activist and an independent observer, what I say is if we look at the tradition of the monarchy, it never wanted to come in confrontation with the people, be it in 2036 BS (1980), 2046 BS (1990) or 2063 BS (2006). So I don’t think that monarchy will enter into a confrontation with the political forces.
But by default, the void created [by the decision of the first CA meeting] will have an immediate impact on the security forces of Nepal, then on the social, cultural and religious fabrics of the society, then on the administration and on the foreign policy. The impact will be so big that I don’t think the current political leadership will be able to manage it. In that situation one of two things that will happen: either a complete takeover by the Maoists or another round of confrontation.
Q: Does that “another round of confrontation” mean the takeover by the army?
Thapa: Yes, that comes as the second option. After confrontation I don’t rule out the possibility of one of the two taking over. But what will happen after the emotional bond between the army and the monarchy abruptly breaks? Nobody has thought about that. What will happen to the morale of the institution which is regarded as the last fortress of the country’ national security? Declaring Nepal a republic is not a big thing but the void created will be devastating.
Q: What sort of void are you talking about?
Thapa: What will be the scenario of Nepal’s national politics after May 28th? Nobody knows. So I have been reiterating that let us not do things in haste. First, we cannot ignore the fact. Whether we like it or not there are major political parties who are in favor of republic. Another established fact is that they have a majority. So, it is not that they cannot decide. They have the capacity. But there should be proper study on the impact of the implementation of their decision. If that is necessary to implement, let’s do it at the end, when we will have a new constitution.
We have not even started the constitution drafting process. But, on the other hand, we are going to take such a major decision. To make a new constitution is not just to prepare a document. There is no political understanding and consensus among the major political parties about the guiding philosophy of the constitution.
First, there should be a common and basic idea, upon which the constitution is written. We have political parties which are polls apart ideologically. Second, there are several sensitive issues — right to self-determination, federalism, army integration, etc— about which there are serious differences among political forces. If we cannot sort them out, writing a new constitution may not be possible. There are examples. So, what I suggest is first let us complete the drafting of the constitution. But at a time when there is uncertainty over whether a constitution will ever be written or not, why are the parties in haste and are hell bent on taking such a major decision?
Have we thought about what will happen after the end of the monarchy … the impact on the security forces … in their morale? When that confrontation occurs, they could be used by any one for someone’s advantage. They can be used as a weapon; that may invite a political disaster.
Q: Do you think the army has been committed to Comprehensive Peace Agreement? Has the army been playing any assertive role?
Thapa: I still don’t want to comment on that. I sill want to give a benefit of doubt to that institution, but the way the events will develop … what will the army decide … the people are watching.
Q: What is Prachanda up to?
Thapa: He has been saying that he has not come to transform himself as the NC and the UML, that they have never accepted parliamentary form of democracy. In a real sense, the Maoists have not renounced violence; they have said that both the peace process and the People’s War are the two sides of the same coin. These are not my words, they are on records. So what the Maoists want can be understood by their own words and deeds.
Maybe we can use the institution of monarchy even in drafting a new constitution; we can do that by consensus. What I say is the king cannot expect the monarchy of the past; the right and authority to govern rests on the representatives of the people. The king also should accept this. And the political parties, too, have a possibility to use the institution for a peaceful transition. So let’s first draft the constitution, and, if the representatives deem it necessary, the decision about the institution of monarchy could be taken during that process.
Posted on: 2008-05-25 20:06:00 (Server Time)
Nepal: Winds of change blow king from power
By Colin Freeman in Kathmandu
Last Updated: 9:06AM BST 25/05/2008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/nepal/2022073/Nepal-Winds-of-change-in-blow-king-from-power.html
King Gyanendra, members of whose Shah dynasty have been worshipped as real-life Hindu deities for much of their 240-year rule, is no longer popular with his 28 million subjects, and today Mr Shakiya does not stock so much as a tea towel with his majesty's face on it.
"It's true, artists have not been making statues of the current king," admitted Mr Shakiya, whose only remaining royal merchandise is an elderly pair of statues of the king's late predecessor, Birendra. "Some of the stationery shops might sell a few postcards of him, but I'm not sure."
As of this week, however, such postcards may acquire a new value as collectors' items, when Nepal's newly elected government meets on Wednesday to begin formal proceedings to abolish the monarchy.
King Gyanendra, 60, faces being kicked out of his red‑walled palace in central Kathmandu and reduced to the state of a commoner – a dramatic fall from grace for a man whose family once ruled by divine right.
To add insult to injury, a government committee is investigating how to divide up large shares of
the royal estate, which includes palaces, hotels, and fleets of Mercedes vehicles, among his subjects.
Yet the transformation of the world's last Hindu monarchy into a secular republic is the casualty of a political movement that, elsewhere at least, has itself become a dying creed.
Leading the calls for the king's demise is the country's growing Maoist movement, no longer in fashion in neighbouring China, but thriving in modern Nepal thanks to discontent at the grinding poverty that two centuries of monarchy largely failed to address.
A former guerrilla movement which fought a brutal insurgency costing 15,000 lives in the past decade, the Maoists have used both bullet and ballot to make their way into power, winning more than a third of the seats in last month's elections to become the dominant political bloc in the national assembly.
The movement's leader, a moustachioed former teacher who goes under the nom de guerre of Prachanda, or the Fierce One, claims to be a modern Maoist, saying he believes in multi-party democracy and even "bourgeois capitalism". But his group draws the line at Nepal's royal family, whose wealth has come to symbolise the Himalayan nation's inequality and backwardness.
The only question now is whether the king stays on as an ordinary citizen, heads abroad for comfortable exile or, as some hardline Maoists would like, goes somewhere more uncomfortable.
"The king is a criminal who should go to jail," said Chandra Bahadur Thapa, 32, a former Maoist insurgent who runs the Kathmandu branch of the movement's Young Communist League, where Prachanda's picture is displayed in a gallery of Leftist "heroes" alongside Stalin, Lenin and Marx.
"Nepal is rich in resources, yet we are among the poorest people in the world. I hold the royal family responsible for that."
But in a country where monarchy is shrouded in superstition, there are explanations for the fall of the House of Shah that lie beyond the worldly rationales of Marxist didactics.
Some link it to an ancient curse which declared that their rule would wither after 10 generations, a prediction that acquired horrible prescience in 2001, when the king's Eton-educated brother, Birendra – the 10th Shah – was gunned down along with his wife and 10 other family members.
The culprit was none other than his own son, the drink- and drug-addled crown prince Dipendra, who killed first his family and then himself after a dispute over whom he could marry.
For many, the massacre demonstrated just how dysfunctional the monarchy had become.
Gyanendra, previously a successful businessman, vowed to modernise when he took over, yet in many ways his reign has proved just as self-destructive.
He in effect signed his own abolition decree in 2005, when he dismissed the elected government and temporarily resumed absolute rule in a bid to crush the Maoist threat. The move backfired, delivering the Maoists a propaganda coup.
Even more unpopular is his son and heir, Crown Prince Paras, a playboy who is alleged to have killed a popular Nepalese singer while drunk at the wheel of his vehicle. But will Gyanendra's departure make Nepal a better place?
The nation's other political parties, which have performed with mixed results since absolute rule was formally ended in 1990, have largely backed the Maoist calls for his ousting, although this was partly because it was one of the group's conditions for laying down arms.
Yet the king also has his supporters, who claim that the damaging rumours which circulate in Kathmandu's bazaars – that he has pinched nine tons of gold from state coffers, for example, and that he owes the government £500,000 for the palace utility bills – are almost wholly untrue.
"It's just Leftist propaganda," said Kamal Thapa, 53, the head of the royalist National Democrat Party.
"The king did not impose autocratic rule, it was a response to the strength of the Maoist terrorist campaign. And the incident with Prince Paras was just an accident. But even if he has made mistakes, that is no excuse for removing a 200-year-old institution."
Monarchy may be lofty, he adds, but by rising above Nepal's innumerable different ethnic groups – at least 24 different languages are spoken within its mountain valleys – it has also bound the country together and allowed it to grow independently from its giant neighbours, India and China.
"The monarchy and an independent Nepal are entwined together, and the country could easily disintegrate if it goes."
Such views are not confined to wealthy types like Mr Thapa, whose daughter's wedding last month was attended by the king. Surveys suggest that most ordinary Nepalis back the institution of monarchy – if not the monarch himself.
Many fear it is the thin end of the political wedge for the Maoists, who may prove as dictatorial as any divine ruler.
"The Maoists say they will deliver equality, but nobody really believes them," said Kumari Bhising, 36, a streetside herb seller.
Nepalis also worry about the Maoists' Young Communist League, whose "morality patrols" and unionising activities often seem little more than fronts for racketeering and thuggery.
"Many of them operate like the Mafia, no matter what their leaders say," said Pravin Jung Mayamajhi, 36, a Kathmandu restaurateur. "I don't think you should rip the royal family out like that just because of one bad apple. Look at what happened in Russia when they did that."
But revolution seems inevitable, and on the currency at least, the order of "off with the king's head" is well under way.
Crisp new 1,000-rupee notes are being printed, minus the royal profile, although a faint outline of his face is just visible on the watermark, which the Royal Mint – or, rather, plain old Mint – has deemed too expensive to replace. In time, even that pale image of Gyanendra may disappear forever.
Last Updated: 9:06AM BST 25/05/2008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/nepal/2022073/Nepal-Winds-of-change-in-blow-king-from-power.html
King Gyanendra, members of whose Shah dynasty have been worshipped as real-life Hindu deities for much of their 240-year rule, is no longer popular with his 28 million subjects, and today Mr Shakiya does not stock so much as a tea towel with his majesty's face on it.
"It's true, artists have not been making statues of the current king," admitted Mr Shakiya, whose only remaining royal merchandise is an elderly pair of statues of the king's late predecessor, Birendra. "Some of the stationery shops might sell a few postcards of him, but I'm not sure."
As of this week, however, such postcards may acquire a new value as collectors' items, when Nepal's newly elected government meets on Wednesday to begin formal proceedings to abolish the monarchy.
King Gyanendra, 60, faces being kicked out of his red‑walled palace in central Kathmandu and reduced to the state of a commoner – a dramatic fall from grace for a man whose family once ruled by divine right.
To add insult to injury, a government committee is investigating how to divide up large shares of
the royal estate, which includes palaces, hotels, and fleets of Mercedes vehicles, among his subjects.
Yet the transformation of the world's last Hindu monarchy into a secular republic is the casualty of a political movement that, elsewhere at least, has itself become a dying creed.
Leading the calls for the king's demise is the country's growing Maoist movement, no longer in fashion in neighbouring China, but thriving in modern Nepal thanks to discontent at the grinding poverty that two centuries of monarchy largely failed to address.
A former guerrilla movement which fought a brutal insurgency costing 15,000 lives in the past decade, the Maoists have used both bullet and ballot to make their way into power, winning more than a third of the seats in last month's elections to become the dominant political bloc in the national assembly.
The movement's leader, a moustachioed former teacher who goes under the nom de guerre of Prachanda, or the Fierce One, claims to be a modern Maoist, saying he believes in multi-party democracy and even "bourgeois capitalism". But his group draws the line at Nepal's royal family, whose wealth has come to symbolise the Himalayan nation's inequality and backwardness.
The only question now is whether the king stays on as an ordinary citizen, heads abroad for comfortable exile or, as some hardline Maoists would like, goes somewhere more uncomfortable.
"The king is a criminal who should go to jail," said Chandra Bahadur Thapa, 32, a former Maoist insurgent who runs the Kathmandu branch of the movement's Young Communist League, where Prachanda's picture is displayed in a gallery of Leftist "heroes" alongside Stalin, Lenin and Marx.
"Nepal is rich in resources, yet we are among the poorest people in the world. I hold the royal family responsible for that."
But in a country where monarchy is shrouded in superstition, there are explanations for the fall of the House of Shah that lie beyond the worldly rationales of Marxist didactics.
Some link it to an ancient curse which declared that their rule would wither after 10 generations, a prediction that acquired horrible prescience in 2001, when the king's Eton-educated brother, Birendra – the 10th Shah – was gunned down along with his wife and 10 other family members.
The culprit was none other than his own son, the drink- and drug-addled crown prince Dipendra, who killed first his family and then himself after a dispute over whom he could marry.
For many, the massacre demonstrated just how dysfunctional the monarchy had become.
Gyanendra, previously a successful businessman, vowed to modernise when he took over, yet in many ways his reign has proved just as self-destructive.
He in effect signed his own abolition decree in 2005, when he dismissed the elected government and temporarily resumed absolute rule in a bid to crush the Maoist threat. The move backfired, delivering the Maoists a propaganda coup.
Even more unpopular is his son and heir, Crown Prince Paras, a playboy who is alleged to have killed a popular Nepalese singer while drunk at the wheel of his vehicle. But will Gyanendra's departure make Nepal a better place?
The nation's other political parties, which have performed with mixed results since absolute rule was formally ended in 1990, have largely backed the Maoist calls for his ousting, although this was partly because it was one of the group's conditions for laying down arms.
Yet the king also has his supporters, who claim that the damaging rumours which circulate in Kathmandu's bazaars – that he has pinched nine tons of gold from state coffers, for example, and that he owes the government £500,000 for the palace utility bills – are almost wholly untrue.
"It's just Leftist propaganda," said Kamal Thapa, 53, the head of the royalist National Democrat Party.
"The king did not impose autocratic rule, it was a response to the strength of the Maoist terrorist campaign. And the incident with Prince Paras was just an accident. But even if he has made mistakes, that is no excuse for removing a 200-year-old institution."
Monarchy may be lofty, he adds, but by rising above Nepal's innumerable different ethnic groups – at least 24 different languages are spoken within its mountain valleys – it has also bound the country together and allowed it to grow independently from its giant neighbours, India and China.
"The monarchy and an independent Nepal are entwined together, and the country could easily disintegrate if it goes."
Such views are not confined to wealthy types like Mr Thapa, whose daughter's wedding last month was attended by the king. Surveys suggest that most ordinary Nepalis back the institution of monarchy – if not the monarch himself.
Many fear it is the thin end of the political wedge for the Maoists, who may prove as dictatorial as any divine ruler.
"The Maoists say they will deliver equality, but nobody really believes them," said Kumari Bhising, 36, a streetside herb seller.
Nepalis also worry about the Maoists' Young Communist League, whose "morality patrols" and unionising activities often seem little more than fronts for racketeering and thuggery.
"Many of them operate like the Mafia, no matter what their leaders say," said Pravin Jung Mayamajhi, 36, a Kathmandu restaurateur. "I don't think you should rip the royal family out like that just because of one bad apple. Look at what happened in Russia when they did that."
But revolution seems inevitable, and on the currency at least, the order of "off with the king's head" is well under way.
Crisp new 1,000-rupee notes are being printed, minus the royal profile, although a faint outline of his face is just visible on the watermark, which the Royal Mint – or, rather, plain old Mint – has deemed too expensive to replace. In time, even that pale image of Gyanendra may disappear forever.
Nepal King to address the nation
TGW http://telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=3473
Nepal’s sidelined monarch Gyanendra whose fate the CA first meet is to decide on May 28, 2008 is preparing to forward his conditions to the government of Nepal prior to quitting the Royal Palace of Nepal once and for all.
Latest reports on King Gyanendra who is currently staying at the Nagarjun Palace- some eight kilometers north-west of the capital have it that he is holding serious discussions with his close aides as regards the final proposal to be pushed to the perusal of the government of Nepal, which will mainly focus on the security concerns of his family members after the Royalty vacates the Narayan Hit Royal Palace.
King Gyanendra will return tomorrow May 26, 2008 to the Narayan Hit Palace, say reports adding, that he is scheduled to hold a serious but presumably the last discussion with the Prime Minister of Nepal, Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala on May 27, 2008.
How King Gyanendra will convince the Prime Minister as regards his “security concerns” is yet not known.
“Nevertheless, King Gyanendra will address the nation before quitting the royal palace”, say sources close to the royal palace in Nepal.
Insiders at the Royal Palace presume that the King in his last message to the nation will suggest the new managers of the republican order to safeguard the national sovereignty and territorial integrity in the absence of the “institution of the monarchy”.
2008-05-25 08:30:21
Nepal’s sidelined monarch Gyanendra whose fate the CA first meet is to decide on May 28, 2008 is preparing to forward his conditions to the government of Nepal prior to quitting the Royal Palace of Nepal once and for all.
Latest reports on King Gyanendra who is currently staying at the Nagarjun Palace- some eight kilometers north-west of the capital have it that he is holding serious discussions with his close aides as regards the final proposal to be pushed to the perusal of the government of Nepal, which will mainly focus on the security concerns of his family members after the Royalty vacates the Narayan Hit Royal Palace.
King Gyanendra will return tomorrow May 26, 2008 to the Narayan Hit Palace, say reports adding, that he is scheduled to hold a serious but presumably the last discussion with the Prime Minister of Nepal, Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala on May 27, 2008.
How King Gyanendra will convince the Prime Minister as regards his “security concerns” is yet not known.
“Nevertheless, King Gyanendra will address the nation before quitting the royal palace”, say sources close to the royal palace in Nepal.
Insiders at the Royal Palace presume that the King in his last message to the nation will suggest the new managers of the republican order to safeguard the national sovereignty and territorial integrity in the absence of the “institution of the monarchy”.
2008-05-25 08:30:21
Sunday, May 25, 2008
सङ्कटभित्रको सङ्कट ध्रुवहरि अधिकारी
सन् १९३६ -विसं १९९३/९४) मा बेलायतमाथि 'गद्दी-त्याग' सङ्कट आइपर्यो । अङ्ग्रेजहरू त्यस घटनालाई 'एब्डीकेसन क्राइसिस्'को प्रसङ्गबाट सम्झन्छन् । भएको के थियो भने युवक राजा एर्डवर्ड आठौ“ले एउटी त्यस्ती अमेरकिी नारीसित बिहेको इच्छा गरे, जसले विगतमा दर्ुइपल्ट बिहे गरसिकेकी थिइन् ।
राजाको त्यस प्रस्तावलाई प्रधानमन्त्री स्टान्ली बाल्डवीनको सरकारले अनुमति दिन मानेन । महिनौ“सम्म धार्मिक, राजनीतिक र सामाजिक मान्यताका कुराहरू र्सार्वजनिक बहसमा आए । राजालाई आफ्नो विचार त्याग्न प्रेरति गरयिो । तर, उनले हठ छोडेनन् । सरकारले पनि उनको योजनालाई स्वीकृति दिएन । कि गद्दी त्याग्नुपर्ने भयो, कि मनपरेकी स्त्री छोड्नुपर्ने परििस्थति सिर्जना भयो । अन्ततोगत्वा राजाले गद्दी त्यागकै घोषणा गरे १० डिसेम्बर १९३६ का दिन । खाली राजगद्दीमा राजकुमार अर्ल्बर्टलाई राजा जर्ज छैटौ“का रूपमा आरोहण गराएर सङ्कट सुल्झाइयो । अहिलेकी गद्दीनसिन महारानी एलिजाबेथ द्वितीया तिनै राजा जर्ज छैटौ“की जेठी छोरी हुन् ।
यतिखेरको नेपालको सङ्कटको प्रमुख कारक पनि राजा नै हुन्, उनकै हठ र महत्त्वाकाङ्क्षा हो । गणतन्त्रका नारा, 'नारायणहिटी खाली गर' भन्ने दबाब, गद्दी छोड्ने मागलगायतका सान्दर्भिक विषयहरूको जरो राजहठ नै हो भन्ने तथ्य जगजाहेर छ । दम्भ, अहङ्कार र आक्रोशका परण्िाति एक-एक गरेर क्रमैसित दृश्यपटलमा आएका हुन् । एकाएक यो अवस्था निर्माण भएको किमार्थ होइन । २०४६ सालको जनआन्दोलनपछि संवैधानिक राजा हुन राजी भएका वीरेन्द्रका भाइ हुनुभन्दा ०१७ सालको फौजी काण्डमार्फ सक्रिय हुन अघि सरेका महेन्द्रको छोरो हुने महत्त्वाकाङ्क्षाले ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई बिगारेको निष्कर्षउनकै निकटस्थहरूले समेत निकालेका छन् ।
देश ०४६ सालबाट लामो फड्को मारेर डेढ दशक अगाडि पुग्दा ज्ञानेन्द्रले भने ०१७ को शैलीमा सैनिक हस्तक्ष्ँेपद्वारा देशका तात्कालिक राजनीतिक, आर्थिक चुनौतीहरूको सामना गर्न सकिन्छ भन्ठाने र सरासर गलत बाटो समाते । ०५९ असोज र ०६१ माघका कदम त्यसै प्रवृत्तिका जल्दाबल्दा प्रमाण हुन् । अनि, बेलायतका राजा एर्डवर्ड आठौ“लाई नारी-मोहले कर्तव्यबोधबाट च्यूत गर्राई दिग्भ्रमित तुल्याएझै“ राजा ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई पुत्रमोहले धृतराष्ट्र बनायो । र, कालक्रममा बाबुछोरा नै अलोकप्रिय हुन पुगे ।
राजसंस्थाको सामन्ती स्वरूप त्यसै पनि लोकप्रिय थिएन, त्यसमाथि जनसरोकारका मामिलाप्रतिको लगातारको उपेक्षाभावले राजाप्रतिको जनधारणा नकारात्मक हु“दै गयो । निर्धन देशको राज्यकोषलाई निजी ढुकुटीसरह खोलेर जथाभावी ढङ्गले भत्ता, भोज र भ्रमणहरूमा खर्च गर्ने सिलसिलाले जनस्तरमा पहिलेदेखि व्याप्त उदासीनता र आक्रोश विरोधमा परण्िात भएको हो । प्रस्टै छ, परििस्थति क्रमशः गरेर ब्रि्रेको हो, एकाएक अप्ठ्यारोपन आएको होइन । सच्याउने, सुधार गर्ने अवसर गुमाउ“दै गएपछि नै वातावरण धमिलिएको हो । आन्तरकि बलमा भन्दा बाहिरी आडमा टिक्ने रणनीति राजनीतिक दलहरूलाई काम नलागेजस्तै राजाका लागि पनि र्सार्थक वा निर्ण्ाायक हुन नसक्ने तथ्य पटकपटकका घटनाक्रमले पुष्टि गरेका छन् ।
उक्साउने रणनीति
नेपालको भलो नचाहनेले यस देशलाई सध“ै अस्िथर राख्न खोज्छन् । 'प्रभाव क्षेत्र'का नाममा हस्तक्षेपका लागि मलिलो ठाउ“ बनाउन खोज्छन् । यस क्रममा तिनले राजालाई पार्टर्ीीरुद्ध र पार्टर्ीीलाई राजाविरुद्ध उक्साउने रणनीति अख्तियार गर्न सक्छन्, गरअिाएकै छन् । तर, यस्तो कुरो ठम्याइसकेपछि पनि बाहिरी शक्तिले फालेको बल्छीमा जानाजान किन पर्नु - वार्ता, सम्झौताद्वारा मुलुकमै मामिला सुल्झाएको भए त्यस बखतका सात दलले दिल्ली गएर माओवादीसित हात मिलाउनुपर्ने थिएन ।
बाहिरी 'मध्यस्थ' अथवा 'भूमिका' आवश्यक पर्ने थिएन । र, 'निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्र'को अन्त्य गराउने योजना खेस्राकै स्तरमा तामेलीमा जाने थियो । अर्को कोणबाट हर्ेदा यसमा राजनीतिक पार्टर्ीीको पनि दोष देखिएला तर उदार भएर पहल गर्ने दायित्व त राजाको थियो र कैफियत त्यही“ भइदियो ।
०६५ सालको आरम्भमा आइपुग्दा नेपालको राजतन्त्रले विडम्बनायुक्त संयोग देख्दैछ ः ००७ सालमा बाजे त्रिभुवनको अनुपस्िथतिमा राजतन्त्रको निरन्तरता कायम राख्न उभ्याइएका नाबालिग ज्ञानेन्द्र नै ५८ वर्षछि राजतन्त्रको क्रमभङ्ग हुन लागेको स्िथति हर्ेर्दैछन्, बेहोर्दैछन् । राजा हुनाले अझै दैवीशक्तिको आशा-भरोसा हुनु र्सवथा स्वाभाविक हो । हुने हुनामी त टारेर र्टर्दैन †
राजाका अगाडि धेरै विकल्प देखि“दैनन् । ०६३ वैशाख ११ गतेको घोषणापछि उपलब्ध भएजति विकल्प पनि अब छैनन् । यसबीचमा गिरजिाप्रसाद कोइरालाले राजा र युवराज दुवैले 'स्टेप डाउन' गरििदए सानु राजा -बेबी किङ्)को बन्दोबस्त गर्न सकिने सङ्केत र्सार्वजनिक गरेका थिए । त्यो एउटा राम्रँे विकल्प हुनसक्थ्यो, आलङ्कारकि राजतन्त्रको सिलसिला अघि बढाउन । र्'र्सवनासे समुत्पन्ने अर्द्ध त्वजति पण्डितः' भन्ने नीति वचन छ । यसको आशय बुझेर आफूले -र, छोराले) गद्दीत्याग गरेर भए पनि नेपालमा राजसंस्थाको सान्दर्भिकता जोगाउन सक्ने थिए ।
टाढा जानैपर्दैन, भुटानकै राजा जिग्मेसिङ्गे वाङ्चुकले गद्दीत्यागको ताजा उदाहरण प्रस्तुत गरेका छन् । छोरालाई गद्दी दिए र आफू अवकाशको जीवन ढुक्कसित बिताइरहेको देखिन्छ । बेलाबखत छोरालाई परामर्श दि“दा हुन् । तर, लाग्छ- ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई यस्तो प्रस्ताव आकर्ष लागेन । परामर्शदाताहरूको सुझावमा सके राजाको यस्तो सोच बनेको छ ः राजतन्त्र नै नराखे कुरै सकियो, राख्ने हो भनेचाहि“ गद्दीमा कसले बस्न पाउ“छ भनेर अरूले तोक्न मिल्दैन । यस्तो तर्क आफ्नो ठाउ“मा ठीक होला तर चेतनशील नेपाली समाजले स्वीकार गर्न सक्दैन । यो घामजत्तिकै र्छलङ्ग तथ्य हो ।
नेपाली सेनाको आड र आधार राजतन्त्रका सर्न्दर्भमा बरोबर चर्चामा आउने अर्को पक्ष्ँ हो । परम्पराको मात्र कुरो गर्दा एक किसिमको अवधारणा बन्ला तर तथ्यगत विवेचना गर्दा सेनाको नेतृत्व यथार्थपरक दृष्टिकोण बनाउन सामान्यतः सक्षम नै देखिन्छ । उदाहरण ०६३ सालकै घटना हुनसक्छ । सैनिक कारबाहीबाट मात्र राजनीतिक समस्याको हल निस्कन सक्दैन भनी उतिखेर हात झिक्ने 'शाही' सेनाले अहिलेको परविर्तित स्िथतिमा आएर राजाका पक्षमा सैनिक हस्तक्षेप कसरी गर्ला - र, अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायले के आधारमा त्यस्ता कार्यलाई मान्यता देला - हो, दरबारमा करबि तीन हजारको सङ्ख्यामा रहेका सैनिकले माओवादी पक्षबाट एक्कासि आक्रमण भइहालेमा जवाफी कारबाहीमा हतियार चलाउन सक्छन् । तर, त्यो सानो टुकडीले तख्तापलट गर्ने व्रि्रँेही शक्तिको रूप लिने सम्भावना न्यून छ । सीमित समयको प्रतिरक्षा कार्य -डिफेन्सिभ एक्सन)सम्म हुनसक्छ । ठूलै रूप लिन लाग्यो भने बाहिरी शक्तिको सहमति वा भूमिका भएको अनुमान गर्नुपर्ने हुन्छ ।
राजाको हैसियतले ज्ञानेन्द्रले गरेका कार्यहरू लोकसम्मति अनुकूल थिएनन्, समयसापेक्ष रहेनन् भन्ने कुरामा सन्देह रहेन । राजा आफै“, राजसंस्था र मुलुक अनिश्चयको भुमरीमा पर्न गएकोमा पनि विवाद छैन । आन्दोलनलाई अघि बढाउनमा ती गलत नीति र कार्यहरूको सहयोगी भूमिका रह्यो भनेर प्रचण्डले ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई धन्यवाद दिने गरेको प्रसङ्ग पुरानो होइन । तर, समय सधै“ एकनास रह“दैन । सके 'जेठ १५ गतेअगावै नारायणहिटी खाली गर्नू' भन्ने माओवादी सन्देशको तत्काल सकारात्मक प्रत्युत्तर नआउनुको पछाडि यस्तै परविर्तित सर्न्दर्भसित गा“सिएका कारण हुन सक्छन् ।
आखिर २ सय ४० वर्षो इतिहास भएको राजसंस्थाको अस्ितत्वसित जोडिएको प्रश्न छ, त्यससित जोडिएका मान्यता र परम्पराहरू छन् । डेरामै बसेको मानिसले त घर खाली गराउन मनासिबमाफिकको समय पाउ“छ भने राजगद्दी -दरबार) छोड्नेबारे बीचबीचै आएको उर्दीको पालना तुरुन्तै भइहाल्छ भन्ने अपेक्षा गर्नु उचित हुन्न । संविधानसभा गठन नहु“दै र सरकार गठन नहु“दै जारी गरएिका आदेश-निर्देशको वैधानिकता र आधिकारकिता कसरी स्थापित हुने हो - प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक राजनीतिमा प्रवेश गरेको शक्ति -माओवादी) र यसको नेतृत्वपङ्क्तिले विधिको शासन र विवेकको प्रयोगमा अभ्यस्त हुने हो भने बेलैमा यस्ता कुराहरूबारे हेक्का राख्नु आवश्यक छ ।
खतरनाक दृष्टान्त
राजतन्त्रको अन्त्यपछिको रत्तिmताको पर्ूर्ति कसले गर्छ र कति सहज ढङ् गबाट हुन्छ, त्यसबारे ढुक्क हुन नसकेर नै नेपाली जनतामाझबाट तर्क र आशङ्काका तरङ्गहरू निस्केका हुन् । छरछिमेकका घटनाक्रमले असुरक्षाको वातावरण बनाएको हो । सिक्किममा राजा थिए र देश थियो । तर, पछि अनेक षड्यन्त्रको तानाबाना बुनियो र त्यहा“का राजा -चोग्याल) अलोकप्रिय हुने गतिविधिमा लागे । पछि गएर राजतन्त्रकै अन्त्य गरयिो । राजतन्त्र अन्त्य गरेपछि सिक्किमलाई भारतमा विलय गराइएको घटना पुरानो होइन । विलय गराउने कार्य ठीक थिएन भनेर इन्दिरा गान्धीको आलोचना गरे तापनि पछिल्ला प्रधानमन्त्री मोरारजी देसाइ भइसकेको विलयलाई उल्टाउन सकि“दैन भनेर टकटकिए । उत्तरको चीनले सुरुमा सिक्किमलाई भारतमा गाभेको कुरालाई मान्यता दिएन तर सन् २००३ मा आएर आफ्नो अडानलाई त्याग्यो र अटलविहारी वाजपेयी चीन भ्रमणमा आएको अवसर पारी भारतीय कब्जालाई मान्यता दियो ।
चीनको यस नीतिले दक्षिण एसियामा पारेको नकारात्मक असर एउटा छुट्टै विवेचनाको विषय हुनसक्छ । मुख्य कुरो, दक्षिणको छिमेकीको आशय र हस्तक्ष्ँेपकारी व्यवहार हो । अरूलाई खाने बाघले आफूलाई पनि खान सक्छ भन्ने आशङ्का निराधार पनि होइन । नेपालको आफ्नो चिनारी, आफ्नोपन झल्काउने आधारहरू मास्नु, मासिन दिनु भनेको अन्ततोगत्वा यसको अस्ितत्व लोप हुन दिनु हो । यसबारे सजग र चनाखो हुनु आफूलाई देशभक्त शक्ति सम्झनेहरूको टड्कारो कर्तव्य हो । नेताहरूले सोच्ने कुरो हो, देश नै नरहे तिनीहरूको राजनीतिले खेल्ने थलो कहा“ पाउ“छ -
राजतन्त्रको अन्त्य गरििदएपछि राज्य कब्जा गर्न सजिलो हु“दोरहेछ भन्ने अर्को उदाहरण अमेरकिामा भेटिन्छ । हाल संयुक्त राज्य अमेरकिाको ५०औ“ राज्यका रूपमा चिनिने राज्य हवाई -टापू) साविकमा राजतन्त्रात्मक स्वतन्त्र देश थियो । अमेरकिी शासकहरूले पहिले त्यस देशको राजतन्त्र समाप्त गरििदए र सन् १८९३ मा त्यस देशको अस्ितत्व नै समाप्त पारियो । हवाई अधिराज्यलाई अमेरकिी साम्रँज्यको एउटा अङ्ग तुल्याइयो । त्यस क्रममा अनेक ज्यादती भए, जसबापत एक सय वर्षछि अर्थात् सन् १९९३ मा राष्ट्रपति क्लिन्टनले अमेरकिाका तर्फाट हवाईका जनतासित औपचारकि हिसाबले 'क्ष्ँमायाचना' गरे । हवाई अधिराज्यकी महारानी लिलिओकालानीको सविस्तार उल्लेख भएको क्ष्ँमायाचना प्रस्तावसहित के-कस्तो अवस्थामा त्यहा“ राजतन्त्र मासेर देश नै कब्जा गरयिो, त्यसको विवरण अमेरकिी पत्रिका द नेसनमा भर्खरै -२८ अप्रिल २००८) पनि प्रकाशित भएको छ ।
अन्त्यमा,
राज्यव्यवस्थामा राजनीतिक आरोह-अवरोहका सर्न्दर्भले र्सवाधिक महत्त्व राख्छन् । तर, विधि-विधानका पक्ष्ँहरू पनि उत्तिकै प्रबल हुन्छन् । संवैधानिक कानुनका अध्येता एक मित्रले हालै एउटा प्रश्न गरे, "पशुपतिका मूलभट्ट -पुजारी)को आचरण खराब भयो भने उनलाई कार्यभारमुक्त गरेर अर्को भट्ट नियुक्त गर्ने कि पशुपतिको मन्दिर नै भत्काउने -" अहिलेको यहा“को कार्यशैली मन्दिर नै भत्काउने ढङ्गको छ । होला, खा“टी कम्युनिस्टलाई धर्मकर्मको मतलब रह“दैन । तर, यो देशका सबै बासिन्दा त कम्युनिस्ट होइनन् । र, खा“टी हौ“ भन्ने माओवादीकै नेता बाबुराम भट्टर्राईले चुनावअघि देवताको दर्शन गरी आशर्ीवाद लिएको घटना जनमानसमा ताजै छ ।
अर्को कुरा, चुनावमा माओवादीले जम्मा ३० प्रतिशत मत पाएको समानुपातिकको परण्िाामले देखाएको छ । यसको अर्थ ७० प्रतिशत नेपालीले माओवादीको कार्यसूची -एजेन्डा)लाई सोझै र्समर्थन नगरेको स्िथति छ । माओवादीले यस तथ्यमा निहित सन्देशलाई ठम्याएर पाइला सार्नु उचित हुन्छ । बाटो त अग्रगामी नै लिने हो तर सावधानीका साथ । होसियारीका साथ । संयमित भएर । अन्यथा दलिन बालेर खरानीको खडेरी टार्ने बाटो समातेसरह हुनेछ ।
राजाको त्यस प्रस्तावलाई प्रधानमन्त्री स्टान्ली बाल्डवीनको सरकारले अनुमति दिन मानेन । महिनौ“सम्म धार्मिक, राजनीतिक र सामाजिक मान्यताका कुराहरू र्सार्वजनिक बहसमा आए । राजालाई आफ्नो विचार त्याग्न प्रेरति गरयिो । तर, उनले हठ छोडेनन् । सरकारले पनि उनको योजनालाई स्वीकृति दिएन । कि गद्दी त्याग्नुपर्ने भयो, कि मनपरेकी स्त्री छोड्नुपर्ने परििस्थति सिर्जना भयो । अन्ततोगत्वा राजाले गद्दी त्यागकै घोषणा गरे १० डिसेम्बर १९३६ का दिन । खाली राजगद्दीमा राजकुमार अर्ल्बर्टलाई राजा जर्ज छैटौ“का रूपमा आरोहण गराएर सङ्कट सुल्झाइयो । अहिलेकी गद्दीनसिन महारानी एलिजाबेथ द्वितीया तिनै राजा जर्ज छैटौ“की जेठी छोरी हुन् ।
यतिखेरको नेपालको सङ्कटको प्रमुख कारक पनि राजा नै हुन्, उनकै हठ र महत्त्वाकाङ्क्षा हो । गणतन्त्रका नारा, 'नारायणहिटी खाली गर' भन्ने दबाब, गद्दी छोड्ने मागलगायतका सान्दर्भिक विषयहरूको जरो राजहठ नै हो भन्ने तथ्य जगजाहेर छ । दम्भ, अहङ्कार र आक्रोशका परण्िाति एक-एक गरेर क्रमैसित दृश्यपटलमा आएका हुन् । एकाएक यो अवस्था निर्माण भएको किमार्थ होइन । २०४६ सालको जनआन्दोलनपछि संवैधानिक राजा हुन राजी भएका वीरेन्द्रका भाइ हुनुभन्दा ०१७ सालको फौजी काण्डमार्फ सक्रिय हुन अघि सरेका महेन्द्रको छोरो हुने महत्त्वाकाङ्क्षाले ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई बिगारेको निष्कर्षउनकै निकटस्थहरूले समेत निकालेका छन् ।
देश ०४६ सालबाट लामो फड्को मारेर डेढ दशक अगाडि पुग्दा ज्ञानेन्द्रले भने ०१७ को शैलीमा सैनिक हस्तक्ष्ँेपद्वारा देशका तात्कालिक राजनीतिक, आर्थिक चुनौतीहरूको सामना गर्न सकिन्छ भन्ठाने र सरासर गलत बाटो समाते । ०५९ असोज र ०६१ माघका कदम त्यसै प्रवृत्तिका जल्दाबल्दा प्रमाण हुन् । अनि, बेलायतका राजा एर्डवर्ड आठौ“लाई नारी-मोहले कर्तव्यबोधबाट च्यूत गर्राई दिग्भ्रमित तुल्याएझै“ राजा ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई पुत्रमोहले धृतराष्ट्र बनायो । र, कालक्रममा बाबुछोरा नै अलोकप्रिय हुन पुगे ।
राजसंस्थाको सामन्ती स्वरूप त्यसै पनि लोकप्रिय थिएन, त्यसमाथि जनसरोकारका मामिलाप्रतिको लगातारको उपेक्षाभावले राजाप्रतिको जनधारणा नकारात्मक हु“दै गयो । निर्धन देशको राज्यकोषलाई निजी ढुकुटीसरह खोलेर जथाभावी ढङ्गले भत्ता, भोज र भ्रमणहरूमा खर्च गर्ने सिलसिलाले जनस्तरमा पहिलेदेखि व्याप्त उदासीनता र आक्रोश विरोधमा परण्िात भएको हो । प्रस्टै छ, परििस्थति क्रमशः गरेर ब्रि्रेको हो, एकाएक अप्ठ्यारोपन आएको होइन । सच्याउने, सुधार गर्ने अवसर गुमाउ“दै गएपछि नै वातावरण धमिलिएको हो । आन्तरकि बलमा भन्दा बाहिरी आडमा टिक्ने रणनीति राजनीतिक दलहरूलाई काम नलागेजस्तै राजाका लागि पनि र्सार्थक वा निर्ण्ाायक हुन नसक्ने तथ्य पटकपटकका घटनाक्रमले पुष्टि गरेका छन् ।
उक्साउने रणनीति
नेपालको भलो नचाहनेले यस देशलाई सध“ै अस्िथर राख्न खोज्छन् । 'प्रभाव क्षेत्र'का नाममा हस्तक्षेपका लागि मलिलो ठाउ“ बनाउन खोज्छन् । यस क्रममा तिनले राजालाई पार्टर्ीीरुद्ध र पार्टर्ीीलाई राजाविरुद्ध उक्साउने रणनीति अख्तियार गर्न सक्छन्, गरअिाएकै छन् । तर, यस्तो कुरो ठम्याइसकेपछि पनि बाहिरी शक्तिले फालेको बल्छीमा जानाजान किन पर्नु - वार्ता, सम्झौताद्वारा मुलुकमै मामिला सुल्झाएको भए त्यस बखतका सात दलले दिल्ली गएर माओवादीसित हात मिलाउनुपर्ने थिएन ।
बाहिरी 'मध्यस्थ' अथवा 'भूमिका' आवश्यक पर्ने थिएन । र, 'निरङ्कुश राजतन्त्र'को अन्त्य गराउने योजना खेस्राकै स्तरमा तामेलीमा जाने थियो । अर्को कोणबाट हर्ेदा यसमा राजनीतिक पार्टर्ीीको पनि दोष देखिएला तर उदार भएर पहल गर्ने दायित्व त राजाको थियो र कैफियत त्यही“ भइदियो ।
०६५ सालको आरम्भमा आइपुग्दा नेपालको राजतन्त्रले विडम्बनायुक्त संयोग देख्दैछ ः ००७ सालमा बाजे त्रिभुवनको अनुपस्िथतिमा राजतन्त्रको निरन्तरता कायम राख्न उभ्याइएका नाबालिग ज्ञानेन्द्र नै ५८ वर्षछि राजतन्त्रको क्रमभङ्ग हुन लागेको स्िथति हर्ेर्दैछन्, बेहोर्दैछन् । राजा हुनाले अझै दैवीशक्तिको आशा-भरोसा हुनु र्सवथा स्वाभाविक हो । हुने हुनामी त टारेर र्टर्दैन †
राजाका अगाडि धेरै विकल्प देखि“दैनन् । ०६३ वैशाख ११ गतेको घोषणापछि उपलब्ध भएजति विकल्प पनि अब छैनन् । यसबीचमा गिरजिाप्रसाद कोइरालाले राजा र युवराज दुवैले 'स्टेप डाउन' गरििदए सानु राजा -बेबी किङ्)को बन्दोबस्त गर्न सकिने सङ्केत र्सार्वजनिक गरेका थिए । त्यो एउटा राम्रँे विकल्प हुनसक्थ्यो, आलङ्कारकि राजतन्त्रको सिलसिला अघि बढाउन । र्'र्सवनासे समुत्पन्ने अर्द्ध त्वजति पण्डितः' भन्ने नीति वचन छ । यसको आशय बुझेर आफूले -र, छोराले) गद्दीत्याग गरेर भए पनि नेपालमा राजसंस्थाको सान्दर्भिकता जोगाउन सक्ने थिए ।
टाढा जानैपर्दैन, भुटानकै राजा जिग्मेसिङ्गे वाङ्चुकले गद्दीत्यागको ताजा उदाहरण प्रस्तुत गरेका छन् । छोरालाई गद्दी दिए र आफू अवकाशको जीवन ढुक्कसित बिताइरहेको देखिन्छ । बेलाबखत छोरालाई परामर्श दि“दा हुन् । तर, लाग्छ- ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई यस्तो प्रस्ताव आकर्ष लागेन । परामर्शदाताहरूको सुझावमा सके राजाको यस्तो सोच बनेको छ ः राजतन्त्र नै नराखे कुरै सकियो, राख्ने हो भनेचाहि“ गद्दीमा कसले बस्न पाउ“छ भनेर अरूले तोक्न मिल्दैन । यस्तो तर्क आफ्नो ठाउ“मा ठीक होला तर चेतनशील नेपाली समाजले स्वीकार गर्न सक्दैन । यो घामजत्तिकै र्छलङ्ग तथ्य हो ।
नेपाली सेनाको आड र आधार राजतन्त्रका सर्न्दर्भमा बरोबर चर्चामा आउने अर्को पक्ष्ँ हो । परम्पराको मात्र कुरो गर्दा एक किसिमको अवधारणा बन्ला तर तथ्यगत विवेचना गर्दा सेनाको नेतृत्व यथार्थपरक दृष्टिकोण बनाउन सामान्यतः सक्षम नै देखिन्छ । उदाहरण ०६३ सालकै घटना हुनसक्छ । सैनिक कारबाहीबाट मात्र राजनीतिक समस्याको हल निस्कन सक्दैन भनी उतिखेर हात झिक्ने 'शाही' सेनाले अहिलेको परविर्तित स्िथतिमा आएर राजाका पक्षमा सैनिक हस्तक्षेप कसरी गर्ला - र, अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायले के आधारमा त्यस्ता कार्यलाई मान्यता देला - हो, दरबारमा करबि तीन हजारको सङ्ख्यामा रहेका सैनिकले माओवादी पक्षबाट एक्कासि आक्रमण भइहालेमा जवाफी कारबाहीमा हतियार चलाउन सक्छन् । तर, त्यो सानो टुकडीले तख्तापलट गर्ने व्रि्रँेही शक्तिको रूप लिने सम्भावना न्यून छ । सीमित समयको प्रतिरक्षा कार्य -डिफेन्सिभ एक्सन)सम्म हुनसक्छ । ठूलै रूप लिन लाग्यो भने बाहिरी शक्तिको सहमति वा भूमिका भएको अनुमान गर्नुपर्ने हुन्छ ।
राजाको हैसियतले ज्ञानेन्द्रले गरेका कार्यहरू लोकसम्मति अनुकूल थिएनन्, समयसापेक्ष रहेनन् भन्ने कुरामा सन्देह रहेन । राजा आफै“, राजसंस्था र मुलुक अनिश्चयको भुमरीमा पर्न गएकोमा पनि विवाद छैन । आन्दोलनलाई अघि बढाउनमा ती गलत नीति र कार्यहरूको सहयोगी भूमिका रह्यो भनेर प्रचण्डले ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई धन्यवाद दिने गरेको प्रसङ्ग पुरानो होइन । तर, समय सधै“ एकनास रह“दैन । सके 'जेठ १५ गतेअगावै नारायणहिटी खाली गर्नू' भन्ने माओवादी सन्देशको तत्काल सकारात्मक प्रत्युत्तर नआउनुको पछाडि यस्तै परविर्तित सर्न्दर्भसित गा“सिएका कारण हुन सक्छन् ।
आखिर २ सय ४० वर्षो इतिहास भएको राजसंस्थाको अस्ितत्वसित जोडिएको प्रश्न छ, त्यससित जोडिएका मान्यता र परम्पराहरू छन् । डेरामै बसेको मानिसले त घर खाली गराउन मनासिबमाफिकको समय पाउ“छ भने राजगद्दी -दरबार) छोड्नेबारे बीचबीचै आएको उर्दीको पालना तुरुन्तै भइहाल्छ भन्ने अपेक्षा गर्नु उचित हुन्न । संविधानसभा गठन नहु“दै र सरकार गठन नहु“दै जारी गरएिका आदेश-निर्देशको वैधानिकता र आधिकारकिता कसरी स्थापित हुने हो - प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक राजनीतिमा प्रवेश गरेको शक्ति -माओवादी) र यसको नेतृत्वपङ्क्तिले विधिको शासन र विवेकको प्रयोगमा अभ्यस्त हुने हो भने बेलैमा यस्ता कुराहरूबारे हेक्का राख्नु आवश्यक छ ।
खतरनाक दृष्टान्त
राजतन्त्रको अन्त्यपछिको रत्तिmताको पर्ूर्ति कसले गर्छ र कति सहज ढङ् गबाट हुन्छ, त्यसबारे ढुक्क हुन नसकेर नै नेपाली जनतामाझबाट तर्क र आशङ्काका तरङ्गहरू निस्केका हुन् । छरछिमेकका घटनाक्रमले असुरक्षाको वातावरण बनाएको हो । सिक्किममा राजा थिए र देश थियो । तर, पछि अनेक षड्यन्त्रको तानाबाना बुनियो र त्यहा“का राजा -चोग्याल) अलोकप्रिय हुने गतिविधिमा लागे । पछि गएर राजतन्त्रकै अन्त्य गरयिो । राजतन्त्र अन्त्य गरेपछि सिक्किमलाई भारतमा विलय गराइएको घटना पुरानो होइन । विलय गराउने कार्य ठीक थिएन भनेर इन्दिरा गान्धीको आलोचना गरे तापनि पछिल्ला प्रधानमन्त्री मोरारजी देसाइ भइसकेको विलयलाई उल्टाउन सकि“दैन भनेर टकटकिए । उत्तरको चीनले सुरुमा सिक्किमलाई भारतमा गाभेको कुरालाई मान्यता दिएन तर सन् २००३ मा आएर आफ्नो अडानलाई त्याग्यो र अटलविहारी वाजपेयी चीन भ्रमणमा आएको अवसर पारी भारतीय कब्जालाई मान्यता दियो ।
चीनको यस नीतिले दक्षिण एसियामा पारेको नकारात्मक असर एउटा छुट्टै विवेचनाको विषय हुनसक्छ । मुख्य कुरो, दक्षिणको छिमेकीको आशय र हस्तक्ष्ँेपकारी व्यवहार हो । अरूलाई खाने बाघले आफूलाई पनि खान सक्छ भन्ने आशङ्का निराधार पनि होइन । नेपालको आफ्नो चिनारी, आफ्नोपन झल्काउने आधारहरू मास्नु, मासिन दिनु भनेको अन्ततोगत्वा यसको अस्ितत्व लोप हुन दिनु हो । यसबारे सजग र चनाखो हुनु आफूलाई देशभक्त शक्ति सम्झनेहरूको टड्कारो कर्तव्य हो । नेताहरूले सोच्ने कुरो हो, देश नै नरहे तिनीहरूको राजनीतिले खेल्ने थलो कहा“ पाउ“छ -
राजतन्त्रको अन्त्य गरििदएपछि राज्य कब्जा गर्न सजिलो हु“दोरहेछ भन्ने अर्को उदाहरण अमेरकिामा भेटिन्छ । हाल संयुक्त राज्य अमेरकिाको ५०औ“ राज्यका रूपमा चिनिने राज्य हवाई -टापू) साविकमा राजतन्त्रात्मक स्वतन्त्र देश थियो । अमेरकिी शासकहरूले पहिले त्यस देशको राजतन्त्र समाप्त गरििदए र सन् १८९३ मा त्यस देशको अस्ितत्व नै समाप्त पारियो । हवाई अधिराज्यलाई अमेरकिी साम्रँज्यको एउटा अङ्ग तुल्याइयो । त्यस क्रममा अनेक ज्यादती भए, जसबापत एक सय वर्षछि अर्थात् सन् १९९३ मा राष्ट्रपति क्लिन्टनले अमेरकिाका तर्फाट हवाईका जनतासित औपचारकि हिसाबले 'क्ष्ँमायाचना' गरे । हवाई अधिराज्यकी महारानी लिलिओकालानीको सविस्तार उल्लेख भएको क्ष्ँमायाचना प्रस्तावसहित के-कस्तो अवस्थामा त्यहा“ राजतन्त्र मासेर देश नै कब्जा गरयिो, त्यसको विवरण अमेरकिी पत्रिका द नेसनमा भर्खरै -२८ अप्रिल २००८) पनि प्रकाशित भएको छ ।
अन्त्यमा,
राज्यव्यवस्थामा राजनीतिक आरोह-अवरोहका सर्न्दर्भले र्सवाधिक महत्त्व राख्छन् । तर, विधि-विधानका पक्ष्ँहरू पनि उत्तिकै प्रबल हुन्छन् । संवैधानिक कानुनका अध्येता एक मित्रले हालै एउटा प्रश्न गरे, "पशुपतिका मूलभट्ट -पुजारी)को आचरण खराब भयो भने उनलाई कार्यभारमुक्त गरेर अर्को भट्ट नियुक्त गर्ने कि पशुपतिको मन्दिर नै भत्काउने -" अहिलेको यहा“को कार्यशैली मन्दिर नै भत्काउने ढङ्गको छ । होला, खा“टी कम्युनिस्टलाई धर्मकर्मको मतलब रह“दैन । तर, यो देशका सबै बासिन्दा त कम्युनिस्ट होइनन् । र, खा“टी हौ“ भन्ने माओवादीकै नेता बाबुराम भट्टर्राईले चुनावअघि देवताको दर्शन गरी आशर्ीवाद लिएको घटना जनमानसमा ताजै छ ।
अर्को कुरा, चुनावमा माओवादीले जम्मा ३० प्रतिशत मत पाएको समानुपातिकको परण्िाामले देखाएको छ । यसको अर्थ ७० प्रतिशत नेपालीले माओवादीको कार्यसूची -एजेन्डा)लाई सोझै र्समर्थन नगरेको स्िथति छ । माओवादीले यस तथ्यमा निहित सन्देशलाई ठम्याएर पाइला सार्नु उचित हुन्छ । बाटो त अग्रगामी नै लिने हो तर सावधानीका साथ । होसियारीका साथ । संयमित भएर । अन्यथा दलिन बालेर खरानीको खडेरी टार्ने बाटो समातेसरह हुनेछ ।
दर्घटना हुनसक्छ दर्घटना हुनसक्छ
http://www.kantipuronline.com/Nepal/aabaran.php
अहिले पनि राजतन्त्रको वकालत गरिरहेको पार्टर्ीीाप्रपा नेपालका अध्यक्ष कमल थापा राजा र माओवादीबीच सम्भव भए कुनै सहमति गराउन प्रयत्नशील हुनुहुन्छ, भलै त्यस्तो सूत्रधार-भूमिकाको औपचारिक स्वीकारोक्तिचाहि“ उहा“को मुखबाट निस्कन्न ।
राजा र माओवादीबीच तपाईंले कस्तो भूमिका खेल्नुभएको हो -
मैले राजा र माओवादीबीच सन्देश आदानप्रदान गर्ने काम गरेको छैन । माओवादीलगायत विभिन्न दलस“गको मेरो भेटघाट राप्रपा नेपालको अध्यक्षको हैसियतमा भएको हो । संविधानसभा निर्वाचनअघि र पछि पनि राजतन्त्र र गणतन्त्र महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा एजेन्डाका रूपमा रहेको छ । त्यसैले खासगरी माओवादीस“गको कुराकानीका क्रममा मैले हतारमा राजतन्त्रबारे निर्ण्र्ाानगरौ“, संविधानसभाले संविधान निर्माण गरसिकेपछि मात्रै फैसला गर्न उपयुक्त हुन्छ भन्ने धारणा राखेको छु ।
नया“ बन्ने संविधान लागू नहुन्जेल गणतन्त्रको कुरालाई थाती राख्ने भन्न खोज्नुभएको -
हो, निश्चय नै । अहिलेको निर्वाचन परण्िाामबाट प्रस्ट के देखिन्छ भने दलहरूले चाहेको खण्डमा कुनै पनि बेला गणतन्त्रको घोषणा गर्न सक्छन् । तर, संविधानको पहिलो अक्ष्ँर पनि नलेखीकन, भोलिको संवैधानिक व्यवस् था, राज्यप्रणाली, राज्यको संरचनाको टुङ्गो नलगाई लामो ऐतिहासिक पृष्ठभूमि रहेको संस् थालाई हठात् हटाउ“दा सिर्जना हुनेे रत्तिmताका कारण दर्ुघटना पनि हुनसक्छ ।
यसबारे माओवादी नेताहरूको प्रतिक्रिया कस्तो पाउनुभयो -
माओवादीका शर्ीष्ास्थ नेताहरूले नै राजालाई धार्मिक, सांस्कृतिक प्रतीकका रूपमा राख्न सकिने सम्भावना छ भनेर र्सार्वजनिक रूपमा आफ्ना धारणा राखिसक्नुभएको छ । विषयको संवेदनशीलतालाई ध्यानमा राखेर त्यसबारे मैले थप टीकाटिप्पणी गर्नु उपयुक्त हु“दैन । तर, माओवादीहरूमा पहिला जुन किसिमको व्रि्रँेही धारणा थियो, त्यसमा परमिार्जन आएको, जिम्मेवार राजनीतिक शक्तिमा रहनुपर्ने शैली, सोच र व्यावहारकि पक्ष मैले कुराकानीका क्रममा पाएको छु ।
राजाको मुडचाहि“ कस्तो छ -
भेटघाटका क्रममा मैले राजामा एउटा विचित्र किसिमको आत्मविश्वास पाएको छु । र, पटकपटकको भेटमा स्वयम् राजाबाटै म कुनै पनि परििस्थतिमा देश छाडेर जान्न भन्ने अभिव्यक्ति पाएको छु ।
अघि तपाईंले राजसंस्था हटाए दर्ुघटना हुनसक्छ भन्नुभयो, कस्तो दर्ुघटना -
अहिले पनि विभिन्न राजनीतिक शक्तिहरूका बीचमा धेरै ठूलो वैचारकि, सैद्धान्तिक र व्यावहारकि मतभेद कायम छ । यसबाहेक आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकार, समग्र मधेस एक प्रदेश, सेना समायोजनजस्ता कैयौ“ यस्ता विषय छन्, यसले विखण्डनका आवाज ल्याउन सक्छ, विदेशीको चलखेल बढाउन सक्छ । दर्ुघटना निम्त्याउन सक्छ । र, संविधान निर्माणको कार्य नै अपर्ूण्ा रहन सक्छ ।
यी विषयस“ग राजतन्त्र रहनु र नरहनुको के सम्बन्ध छ र -
राजतन्त्रको अन्त्यपछि रहने रत्तिmताको प्रत्यक्ष असर नेपालको परम्परागत राज्यका सबै संयन्त्रहरूमा पर्न जान्छ । नेपाली सेनामा त्यसको असर पर्न सक्छ, सुरक्षाका अन्य अङ्गमा त्यसको असर पर्न सक्छ । यसले सङ्र्घष्ा र द्वन्द्वको सम्भावनालाई चर्काउन सक्छ ।
अहिले नेपाली सेना र राजदरबारको सम्बन्धचाहि“ कस्तो रहेको छ -
नेपाली सेनाको जन्म नै शाहवंशीय राजाहरूबाट भएको हो र २ सय ४० वर्षलामो इतिहासका क्रममा ऊ जहिले पनि राजसंस्थाप्रति बफादार रह“दै आएको छ । आफ्नो जन्मदाता भएकाले दरबारस“ग सेनाको गहिरो भावनात्मक सम्बन्ध हुनर्ुपर्छ भन्ने लाग्छ ।
आफ्नो जन्मदातालाई नै हटाइदाखेरि सेनाको प्रतिक्रिया के होला -
सेनाको प्रमुखले नै बारम्बार भन्दै आइरहनुभएको छ कि, नेपाली सेना राष्ट्रिय एकता र अखण्डताको संरक्षणका निमित्त र प्रजातन्त्रप्रति प्रतिबद्ध रहनेछ । राजसंस्थास“ग गहिरो भावनात्मक सम्बन्ध रह“दारह“दै नेपाली सेना परम्परादेखि नै तत्काल कायम रहेको सरकारको नीति-निर्देशन र संविधानबमोजिम सञ्चालन हु“दै आएको छ ।
परम्परागत रूपमा राजालाई राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक मानिएको अवस्थामा सेना प्रमुखले बार म्बारका सम्बोधनमा राष्ट्रिय एकताको कुरा गरेर राजा नहटाउन साङ्केतिक खबरदारी गरेका हुन् त -
सेना प्रमुखले कुन प्रसङ्गमा त्यो कुरा भन्नुभयो, त्यसको त म जवाफ दिन सक्दिन“ । तर, व्यक्तिगत बुझाइमा राष्ट्रियता र राष्ट्रिय एकताको कुरा गर्दाखेरी परम्परागत रूपमा राजालाई राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक मानिएको अवस् थामा त्यो पनि त्यस परविेशभित्र परेको हुनर्ुपर्छ भन्ने मेरो मान्यता हो ।
अहिले पनि राजतन्त्रको वकालत गरिरहेको पार्टर्ीीाप्रपा नेपालका अध्यक्ष कमल थापा राजा र माओवादीबीच सम्भव भए कुनै सहमति गराउन प्रयत्नशील हुनुहुन्छ, भलै त्यस्तो सूत्रधार-भूमिकाको औपचारिक स्वीकारोक्तिचाहि“ उहा“को मुखबाट निस्कन्न ।
राजा र माओवादीबीच तपाईंले कस्तो भूमिका खेल्नुभएको हो -
मैले राजा र माओवादीबीच सन्देश आदानप्रदान गर्ने काम गरेको छैन । माओवादीलगायत विभिन्न दलस“गको मेरो भेटघाट राप्रपा नेपालको अध्यक्षको हैसियतमा भएको हो । संविधानसभा निर्वाचनअघि र पछि पनि राजतन्त्र र गणतन्त्र महत्त्वपर्ूण्ा एजेन्डाका रूपमा रहेको छ । त्यसैले खासगरी माओवादीस“गको कुराकानीका क्रममा मैले हतारमा राजतन्त्रबारे निर्ण्र्ाानगरौ“, संविधानसभाले संविधान निर्माण गरसिकेपछि मात्रै फैसला गर्न उपयुक्त हुन्छ भन्ने धारणा राखेको छु ।
नया“ बन्ने संविधान लागू नहुन्जेल गणतन्त्रको कुरालाई थाती राख्ने भन्न खोज्नुभएको -
हो, निश्चय नै । अहिलेको निर्वाचन परण्िाामबाट प्रस्ट के देखिन्छ भने दलहरूले चाहेको खण्डमा कुनै पनि बेला गणतन्त्रको घोषणा गर्न सक्छन् । तर, संविधानको पहिलो अक्ष्ँर पनि नलेखीकन, भोलिको संवैधानिक व्यवस् था, राज्यप्रणाली, राज्यको संरचनाको टुङ्गो नलगाई लामो ऐतिहासिक पृष्ठभूमि रहेको संस् थालाई हठात् हटाउ“दा सिर्जना हुनेे रत्तिmताका कारण दर्ुघटना पनि हुनसक्छ ।
यसबारे माओवादी नेताहरूको प्रतिक्रिया कस्तो पाउनुभयो -
माओवादीका शर्ीष्ास्थ नेताहरूले नै राजालाई धार्मिक, सांस्कृतिक प्रतीकका रूपमा राख्न सकिने सम्भावना छ भनेर र्सार्वजनिक रूपमा आफ्ना धारणा राखिसक्नुभएको छ । विषयको संवेदनशीलतालाई ध्यानमा राखेर त्यसबारे मैले थप टीकाटिप्पणी गर्नु उपयुक्त हु“दैन । तर, माओवादीहरूमा पहिला जुन किसिमको व्रि्रँेही धारणा थियो, त्यसमा परमिार्जन आएको, जिम्मेवार राजनीतिक शक्तिमा रहनुपर्ने शैली, सोच र व्यावहारकि पक्ष मैले कुराकानीका क्रममा पाएको छु ।
राजाको मुडचाहि“ कस्तो छ -
भेटघाटका क्रममा मैले राजामा एउटा विचित्र किसिमको आत्मविश्वास पाएको छु । र, पटकपटकको भेटमा स्वयम् राजाबाटै म कुनै पनि परििस्थतिमा देश छाडेर जान्न भन्ने अभिव्यक्ति पाएको छु ।
अघि तपाईंले राजसंस्था हटाए दर्ुघटना हुनसक्छ भन्नुभयो, कस्तो दर्ुघटना -
अहिले पनि विभिन्न राजनीतिक शक्तिहरूका बीचमा धेरै ठूलो वैचारकि, सैद्धान्तिक र व्यावहारकि मतभेद कायम छ । यसबाहेक आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकार, समग्र मधेस एक प्रदेश, सेना समायोजनजस्ता कैयौ“ यस्ता विषय छन्, यसले विखण्डनका आवाज ल्याउन सक्छ, विदेशीको चलखेल बढाउन सक्छ । दर्ुघटना निम्त्याउन सक्छ । र, संविधान निर्माणको कार्य नै अपर्ूण्ा रहन सक्छ ।
यी विषयस“ग राजतन्त्र रहनु र नरहनुको के सम्बन्ध छ र -
राजतन्त्रको अन्त्यपछि रहने रत्तिmताको प्रत्यक्ष असर नेपालको परम्परागत राज्यका सबै संयन्त्रहरूमा पर्न जान्छ । नेपाली सेनामा त्यसको असर पर्न सक्छ, सुरक्षाका अन्य अङ्गमा त्यसको असर पर्न सक्छ । यसले सङ्र्घष्ा र द्वन्द्वको सम्भावनालाई चर्काउन सक्छ ।
अहिले नेपाली सेना र राजदरबारको सम्बन्धचाहि“ कस्तो रहेको छ -
नेपाली सेनाको जन्म नै शाहवंशीय राजाहरूबाट भएको हो र २ सय ४० वर्षलामो इतिहासका क्रममा ऊ जहिले पनि राजसंस्थाप्रति बफादार रह“दै आएको छ । आफ्नो जन्मदाता भएकाले दरबारस“ग सेनाको गहिरो भावनात्मक सम्बन्ध हुनर्ुपर्छ भन्ने लाग्छ ।
आफ्नो जन्मदातालाई नै हटाइदाखेरि सेनाको प्रतिक्रिया के होला -
सेनाको प्रमुखले नै बारम्बार भन्दै आइरहनुभएको छ कि, नेपाली सेना राष्ट्रिय एकता र अखण्डताको संरक्षणका निमित्त र प्रजातन्त्रप्रति प्रतिबद्ध रहनेछ । राजसंस्थास“ग गहिरो भावनात्मक सम्बन्ध रह“दारह“दै नेपाली सेना परम्परादेखि नै तत्काल कायम रहेको सरकारको नीति-निर्देशन र संविधानबमोजिम सञ्चालन हु“दै आएको छ ।
परम्परागत रूपमा राजालाई राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक मानिएको अवस्थामा सेना प्रमुखले बार म्बारका सम्बोधनमा राष्ट्रिय एकताको कुरा गरेर राजा नहटाउन साङ्केतिक खबरदारी गरेका हुन् त -
सेना प्रमुखले कुन प्रसङ्गमा त्यो कुरा भन्नुभयो, त्यसको त म जवाफ दिन सक्दिन“ । तर, व्यक्तिगत बुझाइमा राष्ट्रियता र राष्ट्रिय एकताको कुरा गर्दाखेरी परम्परागत रूपमा राजालाई राष्ट्रिय एकताको प्रतीक मानिएको अवस् थामा त्यो पनि त्यस परविेशभित्र परेको हुनर्ुपर्छ भन्ने मेरो मान्यता हो ।
Issues surrounding abolition of monarchy
By BIPIN ADHIKARI
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=147732
The Kathmandu Post May 22, 2008
With less than a week left for the apparent end of monarchy, the CPN (Maoist) leaders have intensified their demand that King Gyanendra leave the palace well before May 28. This is the fateful date set by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala for the first meeting of the newly elected Constituent Assembly, where he is going to table a motion to abolish monarchy, and lay down the foundation of the 'New Nepal.'
In the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly, Prime Minister Koirala is supposed to invoke Article 159 of the Interim Constitution, which gives him power to table such a motion, and the members of the Assembly are to vote on it according to Article 75. The fathers of the Interim Constitution, who believed that revolutions know no bounds of law, probably thought that the Assembly does not need any governing principles as to how the decision of the House is to be made and implemented.
As such, the existing interim parliament, the unelected members of which are still drawing their remuneration from the national coffer, did not think of the Abolition of Monarchy Act to meet the requirement of the due process. So the decision to be made politically is also likely to be implemented in a most controversial way.
While the Assembly process is yet to begin, the Maoist leaders have already started threatening the king and his family to leave the Narayanhiti palace as fast as possible. They have consistently indicated the possibility of the use of force to get the king out after May 28. Prime Minister Koirala too is on record several times for having said that the king should abdicate, and make the transition smooth. His remarks, although not as bitter as that of the Maoist leaders, also had contents of a veiled threat. While it is not clear why the Maoists want the king to leave the palace, at least a day before, or what political benefits will accrue to them if the king really gratifies them by accepting the request, the issues that involve in this context go beyond. The concern here is emphatically legal.
To a lawyer, it is not understandable how somebody can execute a decree without a court first awarding it. For example, whether a decree is for payment of money or for the recovery of any land or property, it must first be obtained from a law court. Such a decree gives necessary entitlement to the decree-holder to execute the decree against the judgment debtors. Then the execution may be effected by delivery of property, or by attachment and sale, or arrest of the defaulter, or in such other manner as the nature of the relief granted may require. This is what the civil law of Nepal states. Unless it does not apply to King Gyanendra, there is no reason why the rule of law should be parted with like this. Hence, the May 28 process must first be complied with before asking the King to leave the palace.
Again, Narayanhiti is not an illegal possession of the monarch. He is not its illegal occupant. He has every right to stay there until the law of the land is amended and he is deprived of his possession based on a valid piece of law. The legal tradition of this country builds around the principle that possession is 9/10ths of the law — or that one who has physical control of his property is clearly at an advantage should his rightful ownership of the property ever be subject to challenge. Even when a tiny public company is liquidated, it takes months to settle all claims. It is not convincing when the king as an ordinary individual is deprived of this process. It is better for the 'new regime', therefore, to wait for the May 28 process, and follow the legitimate course afterwards so that when they are at low ebbs, the legal system is able to protect their legitimate rights too.
King Charles the First, known as a noted English autocrat, was put on trial in January 1649 and executed following disagreements between him and his rump Parliament controlled by the army. Both sides claimed that they stood for the rule of law. The rump Parliament, with the backing of the army, established a High Court of Justice, where he was charged with high treason 'against the realm of England'.
The only people allowed into Parliament were those who Oliver Cromwell (Prachanda's rightist counterpart by analogy) thought supported the trial of the king. In fact only 68 out of 135 judges turned up for the trial. The public was not allowed into the hall until after the charge had been read out. The king refused to plead guilty, saying that he did not recognize the legality of the High Court in the first place. He said it was established by a Commons purged of dissent, which had never acted as a judicature, and without the House of Lords.
On the scaffold, the man who was to execute Charles refused to do it. So did others. Very quickly, another man and his assistant were found to do the job. His last speech to the crowd was "I have delivered to my conscience; I pray (to) God you do take those courses that are best for the good of the kingdom and (to) your own salvation."
Time changed even if some people were not looking forward to it. When Charles II returned to become King of England in 1660, following a long period of instability, those men who had signed his father's death warrant (and were still alive) were tried as regicides (the murderer of a king) and executed. Everyone associated with the execution except the executioners of Charles was put on trial. These executioners were able to escape as no-one knew who they were. After a struggle for about twenty years between royalists and republicans, monarchy was restored, and the English people again became subjects of the head of the Scottish house of Stuart. The main reason behind it was the unfair trial of Charles I.
In a similar case in Nepal, where it is not an army-supported trial which is involved in the abolition of monarchy, the Assembly should indeed enable the controversial monarch to contest the motion against him in the House, and present his version of the story before the actual voting under Article 75 of the Constitution. It will be too youthful to think that this can any way change the mood of the Assembly, or of the revolution which is making advances.
Nevertheless, the king of Nepal, who is being treated as the principal defendant should have the opportunity to speak to the people who must know what the other side of the story is. In democracy it matters; and it matters in the most powerful sense. The king is not being toppled, he is being laid off. If this is the truth, then the process requires that he must be allowed an adequate opportunity to present his case. Additionally, even if the faulty Constitution is silent on whether the sovereign representatives of the people have the right to caste their vote of conscience on the issue, they should be afforded this opportunity without expressing or implying whips from their parliamentary parties.
Eventually, those who are said to be making history should make it on the strength of self-respect and certain universal values. These values — justice, equality, the rule of law, to mention the most basic ones — need to be protected, no matter who gains from it. It might delay the process a little, but it can surely give a clear outlet to the problem and a firm footing to the democrats.
lawyers_inc_nepal@yahoo.com
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=147732
The Kathmandu Post May 22, 2008
With less than a week left for the apparent end of monarchy, the CPN (Maoist) leaders have intensified their demand that King Gyanendra leave the palace well before May 28. This is the fateful date set by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala for the first meeting of the newly elected Constituent Assembly, where he is going to table a motion to abolish monarchy, and lay down the foundation of the 'New Nepal.'
In the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly, Prime Minister Koirala is supposed to invoke Article 159 of the Interim Constitution, which gives him power to table such a motion, and the members of the Assembly are to vote on it according to Article 75. The fathers of the Interim Constitution, who believed that revolutions know no bounds of law, probably thought that the Assembly does not need any governing principles as to how the decision of the House is to be made and implemented.
As such, the existing interim parliament, the unelected members of which are still drawing their remuneration from the national coffer, did not think of the Abolition of Monarchy Act to meet the requirement of the due process. So the decision to be made politically is also likely to be implemented in a most controversial way.
While the Assembly process is yet to begin, the Maoist leaders have already started threatening the king and his family to leave the Narayanhiti palace as fast as possible. They have consistently indicated the possibility of the use of force to get the king out after May 28. Prime Minister Koirala too is on record several times for having said that the king should abdicate, and make the transition smooth. His remarks, although not as bitter as that of the Maoist leaders, also had contents of a veiled threat. While it is not clear why the Maoists want the king to leave the palace, at least a day before, or what political benefits will accrue to them if the king really gratifies them by accepting the request, the issues that involve in this context go beyond. The concern here is emphatically legal.
To a lawyer, it is not understandable how somebody can execute a decree without a court first awarding it. For example, whether a decree is for payment of money or for the recovery of any land or property, it must first be obtained from a law court. Such a decree gives necessary entitlement to the decree-holder to execute the decree against the judgment debtors. Then the execution may be effected by delivery of property, or by attachment and sale, or arrest of the defaulter, or in such other manner as the nature of the relief granted may require. This is what the civil law of Nepal states. Unless it does not apply to King Gyanendra, there is no reason why the rule of law should be parted with like this. Hence, the May 28 process must first be complied with before asking the King to leave the palace.
Again, Narayanhiti is not an illegal possession of the monarch. He is not its illegal occupant. He has every right to stay there until the law of the land is amended and he is deprived of his possession based on a valid piece of law. The legal tradition of this country builds around the principle that possession is 9/10ths of the law — or that one who has physical control of his property is clearly at an advantage should his rightful ownership of the property ever be subject to challenge. Even when a tiny public company is liquidated, it takes months to settle all claims. It is not convincing when the king as an ordinary individual is deprived of this process. It is better for the 'new regime', therefore, to wait for the May 28 process, and follow the legitimate course afterwards so that when they are at low ebbs, the legal system is able to protect their legitimate rights too.
King Charles the First, known as a noted English autocrat, was put on trial in January 1649 and executed following disagreements between him and his rump Parliament controlled by the army. Both sides claimed that they stood for the rule of law. The rump Parliament, with the backing of the army, established a High Court of Justice, where he was charged with high treason 'against the realm of England'.
The only people allowed into Parliament were those who Oliver Cromwell (Prachanda's rightist counterpart by analogy) thought supported the trial of the king. In fact only 68 out of 135 judges turned up for the trial. The public was not allowed into the hall until after the charge had been read out. The king refused to plead guilty, saying that he did not recognize the legality of the High Court in the first place. He said it was established by a Commons purged of dissent, which had never acted as a judicature, and without the House of Lords.
On the scaffold, the man who was to execute Charles refused to do it. So did others. Very quickly, another man and his assistant were found to do the job. His last speech to the crowd was "I have delivered to my conscience; I pray (to) God you do take those courses that are best for the good of the kingdom and (to) your own salvation."
Time changed even if some people were not looking forward to it. When Charles II returned to become King of England in 1660, following a long period of instability, those men who had signed his father's death warrant (and were still alive) were tried as regicides (the murderer of a king) and executed. Everyone associated with the execution except the executioners of Charles was put on trial. These executioners were able to escape as no-one knew who they were. After a struggle for about twenty years between royalists and republicans, monarchy was restored, and the English people again became subjects of the head of the Scottish house of Stuart. The main reason behind it was the unfair trial of Charles I.
In a similar case in Nepal, where it is not an army-supported trial which is involved in the abolition of monarchy, the Assembly should indeed enable the controversial monarch to contest the motion against him in the House, and present his version of the story before the actual voting under Article 75 of the Constitution. It will be too youthful to think that this can any way change the mood of the Assembly, or of the revolution which is making advances.
Nevertheless, the king of Nepal, who is being treated as the principal defendant should have the opportunity to speak to the people who must know what the other side of the story is. In democracy it matters; and it matters in the most powerful sense. The king is not being toppled, he is being laid off. If this is the truth, then the process requires that he must be allowed an adequate opportunity to present his case. Additionally, even if the faulty Constitution is silent on whether the sovereign representatives of the people have the right to caste their vote of conscience on the issue, they should be afforded this opportunity without expressing or implying whips from their parliamentary parties.
Eventually, those who are said to be making history should make it on the strength of self-respect and certain universal values. These values — justice, equality, the rule of law, to mention the most basic ones — need to be protected, no matter who gains from it. It might delay the process a little, but it can surely give a clear outlet to the problem and a firm footing to the democrats.
lawyers_inc_nepal@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)