 |
|
| Kathmandu, Wednesday May 15, 2002 Jestha 01, 2059. |
|
Crucial decision
The current spell of emergency rule in the
country is going to be over on May 25. But the purpose for which the extraordinary step
was taken is far from being achieved. The country still reels under terror, killing and
destruction caused by the Maoists. State retaliation at places is no less agonising,
although the government has rightly pledged to seriously look into any deliberate
violation of Human Rights by the security forces.
But what is equally important, if not more, is
that the government should be able to take a harsh and unpopular measure if that is in the
collective interest of the nation and its people. However, for that the government should
look serious and capable enough to take the people and various spectrum of national life
behind it. It’s the duty of the government to protect the life of people and national
property from being the target of Maoists as well as forces inimical to nation’s
progress – with or without emergency. But the government looks confused and still
undecided about what it is going to do after May 25.
Of course, the emergency cannot be a permanent
measure even in the name of curbing terrorism. It has to be tackled in multiple ways and
exercising state’s authority is one of them. But no measure will succeed unless it
gets the backing of the people. The government has neither tried to assess people’s
mood nor has the government solicited opposition involvement in its future plan. Prime
Minister’s arrival from London a day before the schedule may activate the already
delayed process of consultation on the issue, but that would be nothing more than a fire
brigade approach. Not to have considered alternatives in advance when the emergency lapses
was criminal negligence on the part of the government and major political parties.
What would be the role of and mandate for the
security forces in the post May 25 scenario if serious peace process does not begin by
then? At a time when the Maoists are continuing with mayhem and destruction of the
national property, it will be difficult for the ruling as well as the opposition parties
to come to the conclusion that security forces should be withdrawn altogether. So how will
the role and responsibility of the forces be different in the context of their
responsibility to curb terrorism if the emergency rule ceases? These are the questions
that the government and the opposition need to ponder over and tell the nation
collectively. Those who believe in democratic norms and governance would always want the
provision of emergency rule to be a dead letter in the constitution. But in the present
context those who forced it are the ones who have proved that they do not believe in
democracy and right to life and liberty. Yet, the constitution needs to be protected by
those who have faith in it, including the government and the opposition. The nation’s
and its sovereign people’s interests should be kept uppermost in mind when the
government and the opposition sit together to take a decision. |
