Commendable job

The report of the high level committee probing the tragic happenings of June 1, 2001 at the royal palace is finally out. The two man committee headed by the Chief Justice, Keshav Prasad Upadhyaya, has by and large done a commendable job. Working on a war footing, the committee hastily put together a team of some 80 persons and kept well within the terms of reference given it by the new king. Although the report has not itself taken an explicit stand as to who was responsible for the shootings, it has laid out the facts as it found them and let the facts speak for themselves. Some loose ends still remain to be tied up and if a need for that is felt the committee report has certainly laid the groundwork. One happy result is that conspiracy theories as to what really happened that tragic evening have been more or less laid to rest. The country collectively can breathe a little easier.

Not so upbeat however is the image of the then crown prince that emerges from the committee’s findings. The image is one of a dual persona, one cultivated by the palace for public consumption and another that was less savoury. Had the public known more all along about this duality there would
have been less astonishment and incredulity over what happened in the end. It is now incumbent upon the palace to make the public privy to the shadier side of things so that it all adds up. Greater transparency is the word even when it comes to the palace. And still on palace premises, there is an urgent need to keep lethal weapons out of the hands of anyone but those who have a legitimate need for carrying them. Hunting guns might be made an exception but even these should not be allowed in the presence of the core royal family. If this means frisking everyone including royalty who seek access to the monarch or his spouse, so be it.

That the Upadhyaya- Ranabhat committee has done a commendable job is also borne out by the public reaction to its report. There has not been any violent protest or ugly scene as was feared by many. Rumours of another curfew have died down. The people seem to have adopted a more sober attitude. And there is no need for that situation to change if politics is kept out of this whole sorry episode in our national life. Politics should in particular be kept out of the way the committee report is received by the political leadership across the spectrum. At a time when the country is passing through a historic crisis with an unpopular prime minister in charge and a new king whose legitimacy, however constitutionally sound, is yet to be fully accepted at the emotional level, any angling for political advantage should be firmly ruled out. Let the country heal and make the transition back to normal.

King Birendra’s political legacy

By Dr Shreedhar Gautam

Today is the 13th day of the macabre massacres of King Birendra and Queen Aishwarya, along with other royal family members. The tragic demise came as a bolt from the blue to every Nepali citizen, irrespective of his faith or ideology. The shock and outrage over the killing could be gauged from the outbursts of grief by the hundreds of thousands who thronged the funeral procession. How could the King sustain his overwhelming grip over people’s minds and hearts even though he had been acting as a constitutional monarch with the advent of multiparty democracy 11 years ago? What are the factors that helped his popularity soar in the aftermath of the popular mass protest that eventually led to the restoration of multiparty system in the country? These are a few questions, which help us understand and analyse King Birendra’s political legacy for coming generation.

King Birendra presented a striking departure from the common run of modern kings since his accession to the throne in 1972. Though the reputation of the institution of monarchy had suffered setbacks due to the dissolution of the B P Koirala government in 1960 by King Mahendra, King Birendra very soon gave an impression of a statesman with a liberal and democratic disposition. He presented strong credentials of democratic outlook in 1979 by making bold announcement for referendum in the aftermath of the student unrest throughout the kingdom. Bishwa Bandhu Thapa, one of the stalwarts of erstwhile system, in an interview with weekly Bimarsha has revealed now that the King was not against the multiparty system as such, and so he was not enthusiastic when he heard the people’s verdict in favour of Panchayat system. In an exclusive interview given to Enayet Karim, the editor of the Tide, published from Dhaka in 1986, the King has expressed the view that in principle he was not against the party system, but with the given mandate in favour of Panchayat, it was his objective to work towards the partyless system. He hastened to add that every political system’s effectiveness depended on people working in the system, and so if the concerned people failed to act accordingly, change was bound to occur sooner or later. Though the reformed Panchayat system did not last more than 10 years, it should be noted that the King gave a democratic show to it by introducing direct elections to the Rastriya Panchayat and making the
Prime Minister directly responsible and accountable to the House.

The restoration of multiparty system was a turning point in King’s life. Though the multiparty electoral system was installed and restored in the context of countrywide mass protests and in the light of international wave in favour liberal democracy soon after the collapse of Soviet Union, the King should be credited with for not taking too much time to realise the gravity of people’s demands. It is not hidden from anybody that there were pressures from hardliners and conservatives within and outside the royal palace, who did not want him to cede his political powers despite the fact that hundreds of people had been killed and wounded in the mass uprising against the Panchayat system.

With the promulgation of new constitution in 1991, his executive powers no more remained exclusive and absolute. But the King continued to be taken in high esteem. He earned people’s respect immensely by his choice of Ganesh Man Singh as an interim Prime Minister, though he was not among the members of delegation that visited the palace on the eve of lifting the ban on party system. Ganesh Man Singh is among the misunderstood persons in our country and some narrow minded political Pundits brand him as racist and anti-Bahun. But he was not only the tallest among the Congress leaders, but also a person with an unflinching nationalistic vision. By opting for Ganesh Man Singh, the King definitely showed his concern for national cause. Unfortunately, he did not accept the offer and the country missed the service of a great nationalist. Earlier, the King took nationalistic stand during the stand off between Nepal and India, when India’s Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi imposed punitive sanction on Nepal.

King Birendra antagonised many staunch supporters of erstwhile system by refraining himself largely from overstepping his bounds and preferring to be guarded as a constitutional monarch. His reluctance to use army against the Maoists is known to all. Very recently American Ambassador and representatives of European Community had to issue statements in favour of the government’s right to use military against the Maoists, in the light of the King’s unwillingness to use army against the civilians in the name of solving Maoist problem.

Similarly, King Birendra showed his mature statesmanship by returning the Citizenship Act passed by the Parliament to the Supreme Court for legal opinion. Though some critics think the King erred greatly in the name of cautiousness by asking the Supreme Court for advice on the issue of Citizenship Act, majority of the people thought that King acted wisely to avoid the devastating consequences and implications of the Bill. Parliament record suggests that King Birendra has signed over 500 new acts into law over the last ten years without sending them back to the parliament, except in the case of the sensitive Citizenship Act. Likewise, none of the Prime Ministers in the last decade has ever complained that King Birendra did not heed his advice or created unnecessary problem for him.

Having placed on record the King’s democratic role in the aftermath of the multiparty democracy, it would be injustice to the late King if we say that all national issues were solved during his reign. All of us know that there are problems between Nepal and India caused by some unequal provisions in the treaties of 1950, 1965 and also the presence of Indian army in Kalapani. These problems are not new and they need urgent attention of the present King as well for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country. As the responsible citizens of this country, we should praise our King for every democratic and nationalistic approach in solving domestic as well as bilateral problems existing between two countries. At the same time, we should voice our rational opinion whenever we see our national interests in jeopardy. Though some vital national issues remained unsolved during King Birendra’s rule, his greatness lies in acting prudently and maturely while confronting national and international issues. It is for this reason that in the last four-five years when the government’s image declined severely, his stature grew up.

Grief and distress seen in the people at his sudden death and the rush of the people to take the last glimpse of his body during the funeral procession unmistakably reflected the high esteem in which the people held him. This is an eye-awakening example for our Prime Minister and other politicians who have completely lost people’s faith, and whose mere presence can cause irritation and trouble in the public. There could be no greater irony than the fact that while on the one hand ‘Long live our beloved King Birendra’ rent the air, on the other, the ‘elected’ Prime Minister was not feeling safe to accompany the dead King’s caravan to the Aryaghat, and had to be escorted along the route with full military security. This incident speaks volume about the people’s alienation from their
elected representatives, who have brought governance to a standstill with the escalated corruption and political infighting.

In this hour of grief, the tragedy should awaken our politicians who have disappointed the people by showing utter disregard to their mandated responsibilities. The King Birendra’s political legacy is significant in the sense that only being elected by the people does not make any one a great leader. Our politicians should take the present challenge seriously and sincerely. Our hard won democracy is endangered today because of the government’s failure to tackle poverty, corruption, exploitation and mismanagement which are responsible for keeping Nepalese always poor and destitute. There has been no significant economic development during 11 years of multiparty government. King Birendra’s political legacy should act as a catalytic force to wake up our politicians to the people’s expectations with a view to getting rid the country of many ills, especially corruption, misadministration and petty factionalism that have not only vitiated the atmosphere but also endangered the democratic experiment started 11 years ago.

The LPG story

By C B Dahal

It’s neither possible to get nor be able to cook your meal on firewood. Coal is dirty to handle and, of course, difficult to get. Charcoal! You need to beg, grovel and shrivel to get a bag full even to have the electric earthing installed. Kerosene is the alternative, but its smell and smoke leaves a oily flavour on almost all the dish you make, unless you love to roll your culinary layouts in thick layers of masalas. And, I happen to be a little averse to the spicy kind.

Electric cooker is definitely a No! No! The daily cost of electricity for cooking meals would be enough to secure me a choice and permanent seat in a reasonably good hotel. Wouldn’t that be drab, boring and an unkindly thing to do at a cost to the power department. So after much thought, and weighing the pros and cons, I decided to add myself to the growing list of people who have no choice but to get a new LPG connections.

The day the new connection was got, my acquaintances wanted an ‘oven warming’ party. It was ‘flaming’ event with all inebriated souls (I failed to comprehend the connection between the liquor and the
LPG) blessings the new oven (and the cylinder too) at
the end of a much delightful evening.

The oven warming must have been truly memorable affair. Three weeks later, halfway through my meal cooking session, the LPG gas simply stopped to flow. Rolling and coaxing the cylinder did nothing to help. So, I had to run to the nearest dealer for a quick exchange.

The shopkeeper, on being asked if I could change the cylinder, looks at me as if I had insulted him once too often. "Don’t you know there is gas shortage for the last three weeks," he literally shouts at me.

"But! How can that be? I got my connection just three weeks ago," I say trying to get in my point. "What day, three weeks ago?" "Monday".

"Then the shortage began on Tuesday," he makes the formal announcement with a final air of authority around him.

I try to play it cool and choose to lure him aside for a quick desperate plea. He joins me with much reluctance. " Please, do something my meal is lying half cooked on the oven." An emotional three minutes silence follows. "Well! If you are in such need, let me call my friend." I am too excited to say anything and simply nod my consent.

He talks rapid-fire on the telephone, puts it down and turns to me, "You are in luck. But, you will need to pay Rs 150 extra."

"Fine with me, when do I get the cylinder."

"You pay, go home and wait. It will be delivered there. And, don’t forget to pay Rs 20 to the delivery boy." I am too happy to notice anything amiss. I reach home wait for the delivery boy, hoping that the meal prepared at extra cost should definitely have uncommonly luscious taste.

Should the court have grilled PM Koirala too ?

The Kathmandu Post and Mercantile Communications conducted a survey on the topic "Should the CIAA have filed a court case against Prime Minister Koirala for his role in the Lauda Air deal?" This was done on the net last week. Of the total 2874 respondents, 87.1 (2503) percent said "Yes", 10.1 (299) percent said "No" and 2.5 (72) percent said "Don’t know".

We regret the inconvenience, if any, caused due to the original names being held back by some of the respondents.

The CIAA has tried to cut down the leaves and branches but foolish and greedy leaders have left the root uncared for. Girija Prasad Koirala, the leader of the cabinet whose minister is accused, cannot and should not be spared. There is no logic behind giving the main culprit a clean chit. There must be something illegitimate pressure to oust Koirala. The coming days will counter attack the heinous attempts of Koirala. His days in office are now numbered.

- Raju Chhetri

No doubt Girija Prasad Koirala is a beneficiary of Lauda kickbacks. We have the most corrupt Prime Minister. The CIAA has clearly indicated that he is involved in the Lauda air deal. But it is foolish to believe that he would resign as a result of his involvement. We brought in democracy only to be led by such an egocentric person. He has no feelings for the country nor for the people. If people think that he should be sued directly to drag him out of power, they are wrong. He is so shameless that he would not resign even if he is proved guilty. But unfortunately, the CIAA has not won a single case of corruption since its inception. This is the mockery of our system and there is not point in filing a court case against Koirala. The CIAA has done a right thing by pointing an accusing finger at Koirala. If he had any sense of accountability, he would have resigned from his post.

- Manju Thapa

Girija Prasad Koirala is a man who single handedly institutionalized corruption after the restoration of democracy. Not only is he himself corrupt but he is also promoting corrupt practices in his party by protecting Govinda Raj Joshi. Lauda is not only one case that Koirala and Joshi are personally involved in. They were together in the similar mega "Dhamija" scam. The CIAA has belatedly shown some courage to prosecute these two corrupt leaders. The CIAA saw that the "Lauda Deal" originated from the decision of the Council of Ministers presided over by Girija Prasad Koirala, then why did it not "shake its limb" to bring Koirala to book? It is a sorry scenario to see only the persons who carried out the decision (Tarini Datta and others) are presented before the court and the person who made the decision (Koirala ) is spared. I want Koirala to be brought before the court for his involvement in Lauda. Similarly I want UML’s Rawal also to be brought to Court for his involvement in the China South West Air Leasing deal. If corruption at high places is not checked immediately, the day won’t be far away when the country "Nepal" ceases to exist and we will be stateless folks.

- Sashi Sharma

I think the cases brought by the CIAA should be on such solid grounds that it will not lose the case in court. Thus, wait and watch till it gets all possible supporting proof. Though I am not well versed with the findings of CIAA, if it has not filed the case against the sitting PM fearing the lack of evidence, then it is a good act. The content of the letter sent to the PM is ample enough to pave a path for a moral exit for the sitting PM. I am just shocked to find G P Koirala being such a nonsense leader who has a history of fighting for people’s rights, but, now I think, it is only for the power to be in mainstream politics. I think the King was wise enough to sense the stupidity of these kinds of leaders, but it would have been better if the King had opened the society up gradually, so that every one could have felt they were in the mainstream of society. As it was happening in the last decade of Panchayat regime, people were finding themselves out of mainstream. How can GP Koirala bring all the national forces in the mainstream when people without any strong political leanings are finding it hard to live because everything has been politicized in Nepal. One thing we should be able to harness is the morale of the citizens, who can use their talent to their conscience without political leanings, then only will we have an open and respectful society. So it is good for the nation, GP himself, and for political forces in Nepal, if GP will find a way to leave his post. If not then the days are not far away when we will lose democracy again. But even if the present political system dies due to the short-sightedness of the present leaders, we can not say the new system could be bad if we have belief in the new leader. What would happen to the souls and the families of those who gave their lives for the cause of a politically open society? I have respect for them and believe in their sincerity. So for the good of the country, Koirala, could you kindly leave the scene.

- Dr Pramod Aryal

Moral and ethical values rule the reality. I mean these values should be given priority and it is the trend everywhere. If anyone who has amassed public wealth or is involved in irregularities, he or she should step down on moral grounds. Similarly, Girija Prasad Koirala does not have any authority or right to remain in power when he is facing several corruption charges. Sooner or later, he will be out.
But when, is in question now. The questionnaire sent by the CIAA to the Prime Minister itself is enough to point out that he was behind the decision on Lauda Air. Even if Koirala denies it, it will not help him now. Because he has turned out to be a corrupt leader. So the CIAA should not allow corrupt Koirala to remain in power.

- Sanjog

Girija Prasad Koirala is so immoral and passionate for "the chair" that we are shameful for this. He is leading this country towards a hell. The CIAA failed to file a case against such a corrupt leader because of fear of Koirala who may well retaliate against the CIAA chief.

- Pragya

The end result is that the public and country are made to suffer. How corrupt politicians make fast bucks. Since 1990, Nepali Congress or UML leaders have rampantly engaged themselves in emptying the state’s coffers and pushing the country deeper into recession. Over the years, cases of government related corruption have skyrocketed. The role of Koirala in the Lauda Air scandal does not surprise anybody. Undisputably, he was involved and had a lion’s share of the deal. It would have been a good job, had the CIAA taken Koirala to the court. No one is above the constitution after all. But what an irony! The CIAA gave him a clean chit and instead held some Koirala’s subordinates accountable, thus converting them into scapegoats. The CIAA, packed with Koirala loyalists, seemed aggressive initially but ultimately buckled under pressure to rescue their god father. By doing so, they have made a mockery of the system. However, the damage control is not going to help Koirala who is under intense pressure within his own party to vacate the chair.

- Sushil Thapa

The chief of CIAA has not cleaned himself. Koirala must have shared the loot with the members of CIAA. I am also sure that the people, who are being accused in the court, will also be freed soon like DB Lama and Bharat Gurung. The Judge in the court will receive his share and give all the accused a clean sheet. Koirala will cling to the chair since he is looking for another opportunity to loot. His daughter will not have the next chance to plunder the country, even if Koirala resigns now.

- Rajesh Pun

The CIAA must have sufficient evidence to file a case against the Prime Minister. It must gain confidence that the evidence, which it produces, will definitely prove that the Prime Minister is directly involved in the Lauda Air deal. If it fails to prove that, then the case will backfire. Or if the officials heading the case are too weak to file a case, then it will also backfire. I believe the latter one is true in the Lauda Air deal. So Koirala has taken advantage of the situation.

- Chhiring Sherpa

Since the CIAA has blamed the Cabinet headed by PM Koirala, indirectly Koirala is made responsible for the entire incident. There seems to have been sufficient evidence to blame PM Koirala on this matter. I don’t know what has made the CIAA behave unprofessionally. May be some confidence problem. The CIAA should have been bold in this matter and filed a court case against PM Koirala for his role in the Lauda Air deal.

- Deepak Dhakal