NATIONAL 3 -(Spotlight Weekly)

Mysterious Attack

The national flag carrier finds itself under full-blown attack from all quarters

By KESHAB POUDEL

RNAC is no stranger to controversy, but this time it is different. For the first time, the corporation is confronting opposition from all conceivable quarters.

Internally, it is three employee unions that are dead-set against its deal to lease an aircraft from Lauda Air. Externally, the Public Accounts Committee of parliament and newspapers are leading the crusade.

Lawyers are not far from debate either. A public interest litigation has been filed in the apex court by advocate Gopal Chintan Shivakoti.

The Commission of Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) is also said to be involved in probing the deal.

Why is everybody ganging up against the RNAC management? "Our aim is just to protect the interests of RNAC," says D.B. Rai, president of RNAC Employees Union. "We will take all necessary steps to prevent this deal from going through."

Whenever RNAC proceeds with a tender to buy or lease an aircraft, the PAC and other agencies raise a volley of questions as if it is the sole item of business for them.

Although the RNAC Act of 1964 recognizes the corporation as an autonomous body, it faces frequent interference and disruptions from different state organs whenever it tries to expand its operations.

Clause 7 (1) and (2) and Clause 13 and 15 of the Act clearly give full authority to the RNAC management to take decisions on its own.

Undermining this right to autonomy, the PAC and other institutions intervene whenever RNAC makes policy decisions.

In some cases, the PAC's decisions have saved RNAC from imminent bankruptcy. In the Dhamija scandal, for instance, it was the PAC which pointed out the rampant mismanagement in the national flag carrier. In the Chase Air scam, the corporation lost millions of rupees.

"It is our jurisdiction to see the whether the decisions are taken under the law and regulations. There is no question of halting the process," says MP Shiva Bahadur Deuja, who chairs the sub-committee on the Lauda Air deal.

Deuja's views are contradicted by other observers of the controversy. "Parliamentary committees do not have the right to dictate to the executive on what decisions to take," says senior advocate Mukunda Regmi.

"Committees doing that are working against the principle of parliamentary democracy and the rules of the House of Representatives," he says. "A committee has the right to investigate and study the issues and present its report to the parliament."

External intervention has not always been good for the future of RNAC. Often, such interference has helped to tarnish the image of the corporation.

The RNAC-Lauda Air deal has once again exposed the weaknesses of different institutions, including the PAC and the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation.

Unlike previous occasions, even the PAC sub-committee on Lauda Air has come under the pall of controversy: all members belong to the main opposition CPN-UML.

The sub-committee cited very weak arguments in its effort to prove that the deal is unfair.

When the three member sub-committee started looking into the deal, it said it had received a letter from Hong Kong that said the aircraft RNAC had contracted to bring in did not belong to Lauda Air.

It later said that Lauda Air's chairman had resigned following internal disputes. These arguments sidestepped the question whether the plane should be brought in or not.

The RNAC management, too, is not clear on the deal. The Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation has not been able to direct RNAC on what it needs to do.

Clause 7 of the RNAC Act clearly guarantees the right of the airlines to take its own decision and function on its own.

But in the last seven years, no management has been able to exercise this autonomy. The government can issue directives to RNAC in matters concerning national interests, which the corporation is required to follow.

Under the clause and Sub-clause 2 of the Act, the RNAC board of directors takes all decisions related to day-to-day activities.

When the country's executive is weak and incapable, other state organs like the judiciary and legislature will start to interfere.

The tendency of the legislature and the judiciary to intervene in the jurisdiction of the executive is understandable because they are on the lookout for an opportunity to censure the government.

When a parliamentary committee starts to clip the wings of the executive, however, the trouble that creates could have no end.