Combating vehicular pollution

The latest decision of the Ministry of Population and Environment (MOPE) to crack down on vehicles which fail to meet the existing emission standards, especially inside Kathmandu valley, is a step in the right direction towards improving the capital’s environment. However, the decision itself will not bear any fruit unless it is implemented effectively. The government’s seriousness in this regard is yet to be seen. Of course it will be irrational to doubt every government decision, but past experience gives us little room for assurance. This is even more relevant in the case of vehicular pollution. The government adopted a policy and even started testing emission levels. However, these tests can hardly be said to have been conducted with a view to enforcing emission standards strictly. This is the reason why many polluting vehicles still continue to ply.

The existing emission law underlines that a petrol-operated vehicle cannot exceed carbon monoxide level of more than three percent. Neither can diesel-operated vehicles exceed the limit of 65 Hartidge Smoke Unit (HSU). But the emission control authority has failed to maintain this standard and there are many vehicles which have flouted the emission law. What is more, the practice of supplying adulterated oil has not stopped even after the introduction of blue coloured kerosene. Lack of scientific equipment to check the quality of fuel in the market has also obstructed efforts to check vehicular pollution in the valley.

The latest MOPE decision seems to be a response to the continuing vehicular pollution even after the ban on diesel-operated three-wheelers in Kathmandu Valley. It is said  that the decision to crack down on all polluting vehicles — irrespective of who owns them — will be effective from the coming Democracy Day which falls on February 19, 2000. The move is laudable also because it aims to reform the existing emission testing mechanism as well introduce more effective technology. Not only that, the move to ban plastic bags and restrict the import of worn out vehicles that have been operating for more than 20 years, should work positively in repairing the valley’s degrading environment.  This apart, resolutions to discourage vehicles failing to meet the Nepali version of Euro-I standard and overwhelming percentage of tax exemption on the import of alternative micro-buses are also moves that can be expected to go down well with the people as attempts to improve the environment. However, the leeway given to heavy vehicles — although they don’t usually ply the city roads at peak hours   — leaves some room for criticism.

Any move that is sincerely committed to improve the degrading environment and public convenience deserves to be welcomed, but the catch is, everything depends on the implementation of the rules and regulations. It is to be hoped that the government has learnt its lesson from the first attempt to implement rules pertaining to vehicular emission.

Rizal and the Bhutanese movement

-By Rakesh Chhetri

Tek Nath Rizal who was imprisoned in a Bhutanese jail since 1989 was released on December 17, 1999, the National Day of Bhutan. It is  definitely a time for celebration  for all Lhotshampas of Bhutan.  Rizal was abducted from Nepal by Bhutanese agents on 16-11-1989. He was accused of sedition and treason under the National Security Act which was enacted only in 1992, three years after his abduction. Rizal, an Amnesty International declared Prisoner of Conscience and the recipient of an International Human Rights Award in prison is the father of the Bhutanese movement for human rights and  democracy and is often described as “Nelson Mandela” of Bhutan. He endured immeasurable mental agony and physical torture at the hands of the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB). 

King Jigme remains an unpredictable character. The report on his release is both heartening and amazing.  It is amazing since, the current Bhutanese movement is leaderless and it badly needs a rallying figure to push the movement ahead and there is no better person than Rizal. The Bhutanese government which is hell bent on protecting its archaic and absolute system has certainly not released Rizal so that he can unify   the pro-democratic forces to topple it. Bhutan’s biggest problem today is flushing out ULFA and Bodo militants of India from Bhutan and not repatriation of refugees. 

Release: The following factors could have influenced King Jigme’s decision to release Rizal. First, for Bhutan, southern Bhutanese problem is solved with the release of Rizal; second, Bhutan takes the opportunity to derive maximum international mileage on the human rights front; third, it allays concerns for Rizal’s deteriorating health in prison.

Solution:  When Rizal was  sentenced to life imprisonment by Bhutan’s Kangaroo High Court, King Jigme announced that Rizal will be released only after the resolution of the Southern Bhutanese problem, which inter alia, included the ‘people in the refugee camps in eastern Nepal’. However, linking the release of Tek Nath Rizal to a process over which he had no control is not only unfair but totally ridiculous. 

If King Jigme’s announcement is taken at its face value- it could mean that the problems in Southern Bhutan is solved. Many Bhutanese refugees are suspicious that the Bhutanese government now, might step up its campaign for disbanding refugee camps by saying that the Southern Bhutanese problems have been solved and it will work for the assimilation of refugees outside Bhutan. 

Recently, a report from London stated that Bhutan’s Geneva-based mission is actively engaged in propaganda against refugees in various Universities in England.   It has been distributing pamphlets saying that the refugees are not Bhutanese and they are planning to make Bhutan another “Sikkim” within India. 

International: Various international human rights organisations and donor agencies have been persuading Bhutan to introduce democratic and human rights reforms. The so-called election of the ‘cabinet’ by the National Assembly in 1997 is one among them. The International Committee of Red Cross periodically visits Bhutanese prisons. Amnesty International, (AI) London has been lobbying Bhutan for the unconditional release of political prisoners. It has published three reports on the violation of human rights by the government of Bhutan. 

In  December 1998, a delegation of Amnesty International, London was allowed to visit Rizal  and other political prisoners held at Chemgang prison in Bhutan. The delegation is reported to have expressed its concern over the deteriorating health of Rizal and called for his release on humanitarian grounds. It is also reported that since then AI has been working  confidentially on the release of political prisoners in Bhutan. AI’s public statement “News Service 240/99: AI INDEX: ASA14/04/99” dated 21 December 1999  on the release of Rizal states that “Amnesty   International has always argued (with Bhutan government) that linking the release of Tek Nath Rizal to a process over which he has no control is unfair”. 

Human Rights: Bhutan’s cooperation  with    international human rights watchdog organisations would definitely put Bhutan in their good books. Although the release of Rizal would not bring any perceptible, or substantial change in the human rights situation in Bhutan or repatriation of Bhutanese refugees, Bhutan will derive maximum international mileage on the human rights front by the release of Rizal. It  would now work for building international opinion in its favour. 

In the Bhutanese context, it is also important to note the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s recent statement (on East Timore and Kosovo) that the human rights issue is beyond the limit of state sovereignty and violation of human rights could be an act of crime against humanity. 

Health: Rizal was continuously tortured from the day of his arrest. King Jigme reportedly had beaten Rizal during his first arrest. Rizal was inflicted inhuman torture under the supervision of former Home Minister Dago Tshering (now Ambassador to India), who personally tortured him. Rizal was long reported to be unsound both mentally and physically. He was kept in solitary confinement for a long time and not given food for days. The government of  Bhutan is fully responsible for the status of his poor health. It must send Rizal abroad for adequate medical treatment. The international community must appeal to King Jigme to provide Rizal with adequate medical treatment and persuade Bhutan to sign the UN Convention Against Torture. 

Leadership: The granting of clemency is definitely not going to bring about a breakthrough on the refugee issue as some refugees expect. But its impact will be felt on overall Bhutanese context. Rizal has been a rallying figure for Bhutanese people during the initial phase of the movement. Rizal is still the undisputed leader of the pro-democracy movement of Bhutan. He initiated it. Bhutanese people naturally expect him  to take the movement to its logical conclusion, ie, the establishment of democracy. At present the movement  is in total disarray and confusion and rudderless. Every year some organisations crop up in the name of unifying the movement, but they just fade away. 

Bhutanese people,  tired of the current mushroom-like leadership want him to take up the leadership, whether he lives in Bhutan or elsewhere. It is a golden opportunity for the Bhutanese people to unite under him and fight for their rights. We have missed many opportunities in the past and this should not be missed at any cost. Rizal is still bold and courageous to be the leader of mass as has been demonstrated by his interview in this paper. 

Rizal may be forced to leave Bhutan. Other political prisoners released along with him who arrived at the refugee camps at Jhapa said that Major Kipchu of Royal Bhutan Police gave them two days to leave the country. Bhutanese regime does not recognize any leader other than King Jigme, Rizal also will not be officially recognized as leader by the regime. But once he takes up the unified leadership, the days are not far when the Bhutanese regime will be compelled to  address the problem with objectivity. 

Media: Nepalese media has been an anathema to the RGOB. In the recent past the RGOB has been very critical of Nepalese media. Earlier, the Lhotshampa listeners of Radio Nepal’s popular programme Ghatna ra Bichar in side Bhutan were arrested and imprisoned. Nepalese and other newspapers which criticize RGOB are banned in Bhutan. In a country where people cannot discuss politics let alone enjoy the freedom of expression, Rizal was allowed to give interview to this paper and Radio Nepal from Thimphu - this is amazing. 

Kuensel, the Bhutan government’s mouth piece has played down the status of Rizal as political prisoner describing him as ‘anti-national’ and ‘conspirator’ against the state. No distinction is made between an ordinary criminal and  political prisoner in Bhutan. 

South China Morning Post, a Hong Kong based daily published two news articles on the release of Rizal in its issue of  21-12 and 27-12-1999. It says that “those who say Mr Rizal’s release might be a ploy to buy time point to reports that US Assistant Secretary of State Julia Taft will visit Bhutan next month. Ms Taft has pressed for human rights improvements”.

Whatever may be the reason or motive of the RGOB behind Rizal’s release, all Bhutanese refugees must unite under him to launch a united movement for establishing human rights and democracy in Bhutan.

The millennium mania

-By Chiranjibi Kafle

Come tomorrow and a significant chunk of ignoramuses are all too adamantly set to welcome in various ways what they are frantically regarding as the ‘new millennium’. In our part of the world, some are just overwhelmed with the idea of greeting the “millennium sun” from the same old Nagarkot Hill early in the morning. It’s as if the sun  were to show its magnificent beam for the first time in thousand years. And there are others who plan to celebrate it with pegs of various brands of liquors at various hotels, motels and rotels (please read roadside pubs), as if boozing around on this particular day was bound to bring in millennial good to their lives.

And there is no dearth of “experts”, especially in the Planning Commission, who are virtually going sleepless trying to find out fresh and more catchy slogans to outsmart the whole gamut of unfulfilled pledges so hopelessly made in the name of the year 2000. For, if pledges were reasons to celebrate, then by tomorrow, that is, by the Year 2000 AD, Nepal would have attained Health for All, Water for All, Food for All, Education for All and many more for-alls. By tomorrow, our lives are also supposed to leap up to the “Asian Standard”. The shift probably would have been too revolutionary for us poor Nepalese. That’s why all the all’s claimed in the pledges were   conveniently replaced with few’s long time ago to suit our glorious national interest!

And yes, there are a number of other enthusiastic celebrators, ranging from lovers planning a ‘millennial affair’ to hawkers planning a ‘millennial fair’ — all in choice and in style. So, let the frenzied lot celebrate the millennium in whatever way they like, if they are really celebrating it at all. But let them be aware of the fact that every day marks the new millennium of its respective past, and therefore the hullabaloo attached with a particular ordinary date of the English calendar is nothing more than an ignorant outpouring of hysterical frenzy. Consider, for example, the Nepali national calendar itself, which has left the crazy Y2K more than half a century behind. Likewise, many other calendars might have done so on different dates. As such, you can watch neither the “Millennial Sunrise” nor the moonshine of thousand years.  What you can do at best is to watch your own ‘millennial folly’ and share it with like-minded fools with any place as your rendezvous, while the same sun that beamed yesterday rises on the horizon, without any implication of time or space.     

The celebration of 'tomorrow', therefore, is quite meaningless as long as you fail to celebrate 'today'. Because today also is a new millennium day, and in no way inferior but rather superior to tomorrow’s new millennium, because today is very much under our grip. For those who celebrate today, the millennium will ever stay with them. For those who wait for tomorrow, the millennium will never come in their life again. So choose rightly and celebrate the way you like. The choice is entirely yours.

Nepal 2000 !

-By Pratyoush Onta

In my last column I argued that the 20th century was the time in which a collective effort to generate conditions in which all Nepalis can live a dignified life was first launched. In that sense, I claimed that the century ending today is also a Nepali century. Here I reflect on the developments in the economic and social fronts during the past 100 years. 

Economy: Nepal’s economy during the 20th century does not give us much to celebrate. On 1 January 1900, Nepal was under the firm grip of Rana premier Bir Shamsher and his brothers. Outside involvement in the Nepali economy, except for regional trade, was minimal. Agriculture was the mainstay activity of the population. Ranas were benefiting from the extractions of what by then had become a pan-Nepal agrarian bureaucracy but re-invested virtually nothing to improve agricultural productivity.

In post-Rana Nepal, despite governmental rhetoric of commitment, agriculture has continued to be neglected. While reforms in land-ownership distribution were tried in the early days of the Panchayat system, they were more useful as propaganda devices for that regime than for agricultural development. Once a food-sufficient country, Nepal’s food output can no longer feed its population. Those families that still rely on agriculture have now resorted to a two-pronged strategy: doing subsistence agriculture at home and sending off at least one able-bodied member for long-distance labour within or beyond Nepal’s borders. It has recently been estimated that the annual remittance economy of Nepal is at least 70 billion rupees. 

Since the early 1970s, tourism has been one of the major hard-currency earning industries in Nepal but its benefits have not really trickled down to lift the labouring classes beyond a life of subsistence. In the early 1990s, export of carpets and garments to the Euro-American world recorded moderate successes. However, subsequent stagnation in these industries has tempered the earlier euphoria regarding how such export business might lift Nepalis out of poverty.

Foreign aid has been the mainstay of resources used for physical and social infrastructure development in post-Rana Nepal. Such aid has clearly helped to make almost half of the 22 million Nepalis literate, improve their average life expectancy, provide better health care facilities to a part of the population, build infrastructure such as roads and power plants. But such aid has also created a culture of dependency, one in which modes of operationalizing domestic resources in productive sectors of the economy remain largely immature. At the end of the century, an overwhelming portion of Nepal’s development budget is covered by foreign aid. Even as debates regarding aid have taken a sophisticated turn, basic questions related to aid go unanswered. There seems to be no consensus in the country regarding how best to utilize aid - increasingly in loan form rather than grant - for its development. But recent experiences of community-level developments, especially in the area of forestry, have suggested that foreign aid must somehow be used to support such initiatives and not be squandered at the governmental-bureaucratic levels. 

Even as only about 15 percent of the population has access to electricity, the country is said to be very ‘rich’ in hydropower. Domestic financing of this low-return over a long time kind of investment is only beginning for micro and mini hydropower projects. This has come after long-drawn debates on the need to invest in smaller hydropower projects in which the risks can be managed by Nepal. The relatively successful operation of the micro-hydro and related industries and the very recent success of the Electric Vehicle industry (of 300 million rupees size at the moment but expected to have an annual turnover of at least 250 million rupees from 2001) give hope that some day soon, a whole set of industries, based on electricity, and having both forward and backward linkages, will come into operation. 

Society: At the end of the 20th century, the Nepali society is showing many signs of opening up for democratization. While changes brought about by some of the development exercises of the pre-1990 era - especially in the field of education - are also responsible for today’s achievements, social movements - whose possibilities have been ensured by the 1990 constitution of Nepal - are transforming Nepali society in positive ways. Despite having also earned a bad name, the NGO movement is not only growing in size but also becoming increasingly mature. The service-delivery mode in which the modern NGOs first started in Nepal, is still dominant but NGOs that only play the role of advocates of specifically defined issues are beginning to show how effective such civil society organizations can be in today’s Nepal. NGOs that are part of the feminist or green movement in Nepal or those engaged in media education are the proof for this statement. 

The feminist movement has, to a large extent, been successful in placing questions of gender equality and justice in the mainstream national agenda although they have not yet gotten adequate attention from lawmakers. The ethnic movement, although described by many as a ‘country dividing phenomenon’, has raised fundamental issues regarding fair ethnic representation in all walks of Nepali public life. This movement has also challenged the constitutional declaration of Nepal as a Hindu kingdom and placed issues related to the rights of languages other than Nepali, cultures other than those of the hill Parbatiyas, and religions other than Hinduism in the central agenda of a new Nepal in the making. The dalit movement is beginning to show signs of seriously challenging Nepal’s caste society and is getting increasing support from sympathizers within political parties, the intelligentsia and the media. These movements and others that do not yet have names are democratizing Nepali society in ways whose full importance has not yet been captured by our social analysts. 

Activists that constitute the above-mentioned movements, the increasing presence of an independent media, and growing forms of community-level democratic initiatives suggest that power decentralization is in fact happening in Nepal. These facts of contemporary history and their collective implications for efforts to reduce, among other things, the incidence of poverty in Nepal, should be the basis for our optimism for the 21st century.