Undemocratic

The Police headquarters' order to regional police offices that the press is to be refused all information relating to Maoist-police encounters is not only disappointing but also infringes on the basic right to information guaranteed by the constitution. By denying the right to information, the government has taken a step that is clearly retrogressive. It goes against not only democratic norms but also implies that Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has undermined the right to freedom of press.

All those in power tend to think and believe that once there is a media blackout on certain events or issues, the problem can be easily managed. Nothing could be further from the truth. Keeping the public in the dark is no way to solve any problem. If the Koirala government thinks that such a decision will eventually lead to resolution of the four-year old insurgency problem in the country, it is mistaken. Rather, it will only further increase police atrocities.

The constitution promulgated in 1990 guarantees the right to freedom of press. Furthermore, there are instances when the press has taken up serious issues that need to be highlighted since they happen to be public concerns. This practice needs to be encouraged because it is

what any democratic constitution ensures. Therefore, any political party that tends to censor access to information cannot be tolerated as such decisions goes against our fundamental right. In other words, the NC government's decision to ban information goes against the policy that encourages freedom of press, and as such, this move must be taken back.

Some members of the ruling establishment have, time and again, lamented the trend followed by newspapers especially since the outbreak of the Maoist insurgency. Even Prime Minister Koirala and former Prime Minister KP Bhattarai went on record saying that the press have tended to overdo things while reporting events. This is a debatable issue. However, there is no disputing or distorting the fact that the Koirala led government has failed to contain the insurgency. But to blame the press for the government's failure and to work against people's right to information cannot be justified.

One thing is clear, the government has assaulted the "fundamental right to information guaranteed by the democratic constitution". This step may serve the interest of the political party in power but not the country's. The NC led government, must therefore think once again before it actually puts an embargo on the fundamental right to information.

Beyond elective despotism

By Prakash C Lohani

These days newspaper reports about Maoist violence have become almost routine. Hesitatingly, the government calls these actions attempts by Maoists to spread terror in the nation, implying that they, the Maoists are terrorists. The Maoists on the other hand claim that violence is an essential part of their political doctrine that assigns a key role to the power of the gun in seizing state power presumably to achieve a radical transformation of the social system.

Violence and a general breakdown in the law and order situation in the country is a grim nightmare for people in different parts of the kingdom. The terror characteristic of sudden violence has been a source of misery and suffering for thousands of people all over the country. The government claims that it is the Maoists who are creating terror among the people. Many people, however, are not wholly convinced with this logic. Is terror from the Maoists the only form of distress and pain that people have to endure? Should we not consider the terror unleashed by the state against the people in the name of combating the Maoist terror? Still more, how does one define the term terror? The killing of an informer by the Maoists is often vividly portrayed as an example of terror. How does one explain however the beatings, tortures and killings and outright murders of ordinary citizens on the ground that they may be supporting Maoists? Human rights groups claim that dozens of people opposing the government have simply disappeared and the government has remained totally indifferent to the problem. Political leaders claiming five decades of commitment to democracy have been known to remark casually before groups of people that the security apparatus of the government may already have killed those who have disappeared. Are we then to believe that state terror is somehow better than Maoist terror? For the family which loses its beloved member in this orgy of violence, does it really matter whether it is the police or the Maoist terror that causes death and destruction?

A new social base: Those who are within the mainstream of the political system, especially those who wield state power and benefit from it, always label armed political movement against the established political order as terror. And yet there is no denying that terror unleashed in any armed political movement has a different focus and dimension than that of a criminal gang that thrives on killing and looting. The former, if it persists can be said to have a social base that supports the movement for what it represents in the framework of an ideology used to explain the present social reality and to project a vision of the future. Armed militancy based on an ideology promising political and social transformation irrespective of how weak and unrealistic it may seem to the ruling establishment, creates a new dimension to social conflict not to be found in other forms of terror unleashed by organized crime or random killings. Essentially, it is claimed as politics aiming at a restructuring of power and social relations with violence as the chief instrument of action. This is not to imply that it is the only way or even the proper method to save the country from the present state of decay and decadence that one observes in mainline Nepali politics today. Nevertheless it is a fact that Maoist violence represents a revolt against the insensitivity of the established political order to cries of injustice, corruption and economic crime that the people are being forced to endure.

Economic crime that includes a total disregard for relevant laws by the high and the mighty in the ruling political establishment has become a normal happening in the country. Important projects and vital investments may be delayed or simply ignored because financial kickback being negotiated may still be incomplete. Key positions in government departments, public corporations and development projects supposed to be financially attractive are in many cases virtually for sale to the highest bidder. Economic crime as a form of violence against the interest of the people is not as dramatic and terrorizing as a bullet or a bomb blast; it is however a slow poison that destroys the vitals of a nation and saps the strength and spirit of the people to work with hope and optimism for a better future. For the common people who have to endure the filth and pain of this kind of violence, the image of rulers gradually takes the shape of an exploiting class that uses the democratic ideology as a smoke-screen and a shield to justify the rot within. It is in this setting that Maoist violence promising a vision of Marxist Nirvana starts building a social base and a collective momentum that is able to attract the poor and the downtrodden to throw the ballot in favour of the bullet.

Threat and reform: A political elite that is unable to control economic crime and violence against the people will dig its own grave over a period of time. In our own region, Pakistan continues to highlight the fact that economic crime bordering on open loot and plunder in the garb of democracy is a poor recipe for stability and growth even when it is led by leaders educated in the sombre atmosphere of Oxford and Yale. On the other hand, the strength of the democratic process lies in the fact that as a political system it is supposed to have the capability of correcting before the situation reaches a point of no return. In theory this may be true, in practice it also implies a ruling class that is willing to engage in a process of introspection and is willing to reform if only to survive and avoid the wrath and fury of the masses. The British achieved this feat in the 19th century even though it took them a full century of struggle to come to the point of granting adult franchise to women. History, if it is any guide, makes it clear that no ruling class will willingly reform itself unless its own survival is challenged by a new political force with a social base that may gain strength over time. In Nepal, the rent seeking predatory ruling class has consistently ignored this threat; it has continued to enrich itself at the cost of the people, confident that the shield provided by the concept of democracy will somehow resolve the emerging social contradictions automatically without any threat to its style of elective despotism. The result is, increasing violence, social polarization and a gradual breakdown of governance.

The real threat to a democratic system in Nepal is not the Maoist politics of violence, it is rather the predatory character of the Nepali state and the utter inability of the constitutional process to keep the rein. People will not tolerate for long. It must show flexibility by reforming itself. And that means a constitutional reform that goes beyond elective despotism and neo-feudalism characteristic of the present.

(The author is a member of the House of Representatives)

Blinding pride

By Anita Lama

Streaks of madness is said to run through the species called Homo-Sapiens. However, my personal experience tells me that this species is not left untouched with streaks of another kind -- PRIDE. Now hold on, I need to make a correction here. It's not just 'in streaks' but in excess', so much so that we can actually witness the cup of pride overflow.

Inevitably, my stars had to be unfavourable, and it had to be that fateful night. Such had to be the scenario when I bumped or rather brushed across this proud character. To my utter horror, he happened to fall at the extreme end of the measurement scale of pride (in increasing order of course!). A grotesque looking man hailing from a very big city but ironically lacking the etiquette of a well-civilized man.

Now how would you view such a person ? As a by-product, end-product or anti-product of that big city. Well! He has to be either of these three kinds of products but definitely not in a graceful sense.

Have you ever gone to live in a city, much bigger than sweet, little Kathmandu, for the first time? (to live and not just visit). How did you feel? To be honest, you must have found yourself like a drop in the ocean, unlike in kathmandu. Now, if you can feel like that, don't you think that there is a possibility it could be the other way round, when people from big cities land in small cities? This fact is not necessarily applicable to all and sundry but selectively to those flying under the wings of pride.

This acquaintance of mine happens to be one among the unpleasant selective lot. Once, I complemented him for his rich vocabulary and now I wish I had not passed this comment (Sometimes we ought to be miserly in giving compliments because it fires back). He considers himself as the Webster dictionary in vocabulary and a Shakespeare in English. That isn't all. He is under the impression that he is intelligent and the rest are dumb. His statement belittles you and I personally think that one should avoid the company that doesn't allow your growth but cripples you.

This anecdote reveals how pride is blinding. Underestimation of others potentials and overestimation of one's talents is a significant aspect of pride. Another wrong concept that comes to the forefront is that of good language. Use of bombastic words and hi-fi sentences is not necessarily good English. Intelligibility is what counts. This is the golden rule not just in English language but in every other language for that matter. Flexibility in levels of conversation should be maintained with regard to the receiving end. We cannot converse in the same level and manner with a 5-year old and a 30-year old. Can we? Therefore, with highly-educated people (depends on their respective fields) one could perhaps use bombastic words but not with a layperson. If you do so, you know it all the way, deep down in your heart that you are doing nothing but showing off.

If you happen to come across such characters, feel challenged and tap all your dormant talents and then it's going to be Eureka, Eureka and more of Eureka, but just make sure you don't run around naked in the city.

Was the PM's visit a success ? 

The Kathmandu Post and Mercantile Communications jointly conducted a survey on the question "Is the visit of PM Koirala to India a success ?" last week on the Net. Of the total 275 respondents, 85.8 percent said "they did not know", 10.9 percent said "No" and over three percent only said "Yes".

We regret the inconvenience, if any that may be caused on account of original names being kept back by some respondents.

Koirala's visit to India reminds me of WWF wrestling; pre-fabricated, pretentious but very entertaining. The winner has been chosen beforehand (India) but just to make the blow softer, the loser (Nepal) gets to swing a couple of times. The audience gets their moneys' worth, we clap at the game and move on our ways. There is nothing more to say about that.

- Diwakar Thapa

Koirala brought something back home from India even though he had taken nothing with him. He went without expectations but returned with explanations.

- Bill Bahadur

Every time, Nepalese leaders go to India to seek blessing for their continuation in power. That is the reason Koirala didn't put forth the Nepalese cause strongly. I don't know what he has gained this time in terms of political support from India, but for a Nepali it was a total failure.

- Kumud Sharma

Girija Prasad Koirala's trip to India was a total failure. He was a clown moving around without pre-appointments. It was a total failure and total misuse of taxpayers' fund.

- Rajdev

Girija Babu is the best leader that we have among all our leaders. Whatever he does, he does it for us. He puts his ideas straight in front of Indian leaders. What they say he agrees and comes with the thing that benefits us. He is the most honest Nepali leader whom Indians can rely on.

- Dinesh Karna

This visit cannot be considered a success because in my opinion Prime Minister Koirala had not visited India for a long time. Thus, he just wanted to show himself to Indians that he has become a prime minister thrice even though he was born in Patna and brought up in Banaras. Next time, the one who visits India like Prime Minister Koirala will be from Sadbhavana Party since he will be the Prime Minister. Remember the visit he claimed was Shatbhawana.

- Tula Ram

Prime Minister Koirala's visit was useless in every way. He has not yet explained why he has been to India. Shatbhawana yatra sounds stupid as it is officially related to nothing. I think he has been to India to gain the sympathy of Indians but he must know that Nepalese do not want sympathy from Indians instead we want respect from them. The visit was as if Koirala was on a pilgrimage and Vajpayee was the blesser.

- Sagar Bhattarai

A man without a vision is a man without ability. Such a man has no option but to become a slave. Similarly, Girija Prasad Koirala's visit to New Delhi was like a slave visiting his master to inform about his activities and seeking advice from him what not to do, not what to do.

- Prakash Subedi

We must know that we have got no benefit from Indians. Instead, they always seek alms from us. Why should we keep good relations with them when we get nothing from them? Everyone knows Indians are aggressive and do what interests them. They have snatched Tanakpur, Koshi, Gandaki, Karnali and now the Koshi high dam. They have built the Laxmanpur barrage, stationed their troops in Kalapani and even accused us as hijackers of Indian plane. If these are our problems then, what did Prime Minister Koirala achieve in his recent visit? But I doubt Koirala appears more an Indian than a genuine Nepali citizen.

- Kamal Bista

In my opinion, every visit helps strengthen the existing relations between Nepal and India. But we have to rethink about the national consensus vote, apply them very seriously in a positive way, make sure what is the role of being a leader, take care about responsibility and opportunity of Prime Minister visiting New Delhi. This has, however, yet to happen in our context.

- Rajen Bhattarai

I think Prime Minister Koirala's visit was a failure. He was not able to persuade the Indians to get out from Kalapani. He showed his Indian tilt by not bringing the matter of Bhutanese refugees and Laxmanpur dam.

- Bhumika Ghimire

There is no other Nepali leader capable of doing anything for the country. I feel the visit was not a success but, trying is good. I think Nepalis are slackers in general, no one really thinks of the future, everyone blames the Prime Minister for all their problems. I know Koirala is not the best, but he is the only one we have. Everyone stop whining and do your part to make this country a better place for our children.

- Jack Herer

This visit is historic, no other Nepali head of state has done what has been done in this visit. Prime Minister Koirala went on doing his job around the Rastrapati Bhawan as planned by Foreign Minister Chakra Bastola. While the Nepali Congress coterie substituted Indian political leaders. I thought the Koirala family and the Nepali Congress were pro-Indians. Unfortunately, I am wrong. There are some parliamentarians from other political parties too who act as if they are Indians in New Delhi. This demonstrates that the recent visit by high profile Nepali leaders was a truly historic visit.

- Suman Prasad Sharma

The official visit of our PM was neither success nor failure. What can we expect from a leader who has bred more corrupt political leaders than able? It is vain to expect something from him. Apart from that, our neighbouring country is continuously blaming us about all the criminal activities happening in India. They are blaming us, which is natural ,but our leader has not even spoken to them of our problems. This is absolutely ridiculous.

- Ashok Raj Pokhrel

The trip to India by Girija Prasad Koirala was a total failure and it has given a further edge to the Indians. Nepal has lost Koshi high dam this time and will lose some more territories under his leadership. Now, Indians say they want to run couple of corporations under the South Block. For heavens sake, why can't we have a good leadership? Where is the sense of patriotism?

- Babar Chhetri

India will keep on screwing Nepal up. This will go on as long as we don't have a good leader. One would have been a fool to expect Girija Prasad Koirala to come home with 'success' stories about Kalapani, Laxmanpur Barrage. It was shock to learn that he was so incompetent.

- Bhekh Bahadur