For Responsible Dissent

NOBODY will disagree that dissension is a part and parcel of democracy. The Nepalese ushered in multi-party democracy in the spring of 1990 toppling the then "dissent-proof" political order precisely because they were chafing at the fetters that brooked no opposition. But unfortunately over these years of full-fledged democracy, some political as well as non-political players took the right to disagree with the policies and programmes of the government of the day and with any other contentious issue, to levels that went beyond the accepted norms of discord. A regrettable culture of dissent thus has got to a point where political as well as purely apolitical scores are settled in the streets rather than in the existing legislative, executive and judicial institutions established by the 1990 constitution. Bandhs, demonstrations, strikes and protests have become the order of the day with the general people finding themselves a complete hostage to the protest proponents. Public security has been buffeted by these regular eruption of unruly street performance called at the drop of a topi resulting in people living in fear and uncertainty. The Nepalese economy has bled on account of these bandhs with losses to the tune of tens of millions of rupees. That’s not all. These instances of closure of national life invariably come with not only threats of, but actual, violence. Tens of millions of rupees worth of public property are damaged when bands of bandh supporters run amok destroying public, private, industrial and educational properties. Acts of vandalism and terror are perpetrated to ensure "success" of such bandhs. As concomitant to this new culture of violence has come a arson and sometimes extortion. The latest instance of the latter has been destruction of private school properties. Something had to be done, and the government has acted.

It is in this light that all should see the implementation of the Public Security Regulations-2058 B.S. which replaces the older version of regulations of 2019 B.S. and which gives the requisite teeth to the Public Security Act-2046 B.S. The new regulations, brought into effect from June 3, 2001, can take preventive as well as curative measures to control lawlessness. It forbids acts to instigate destruction, violence and looting; bans looting and damage of public properties, prohibits extortion; proscribes acts that inflame religious and communal passions; and so on. It’s not only the entrepreneurs and businessmen, who had long demanded such a measure, who have heaved a sigh of relief. The long-suffering members of the public are also bound to welcome the step. All political parties, their affiliated organisations and other organised groups should take this move as an effort to give back to the people a sense of public security, prevent damage to public property, allow wage-earners to work and thwart unwelcome blows to the national economy. Equally importantly, it should be seen as a way to encourage responsible dissent instead of disruptive, wild and riotous methods of disagreement.

Other Story

• Migrant Workers’ Woes