National 1 (Spotlight Weekly)

Strange Bedfellows

The ruling party's lack of a uniform code to discipline party workers undermines its image

By KESHAB POUDEL

Last week Nepali Congress president Girija Prasad Koirala issued a fervent appeal to party workers to back the security forces in their operations against the Maoist rebels. Addressing a program organized to unveil the statue of martyr Tej Bahadur Amatya, Koirala stressed the need for national unity to root out terrorism.

"While our security forces are waging a fight against the Maoists, we have to encourage them by supporting their activities," Koirala said. "All national parties represented in parliament have decided to reinforce their support for the security forces."

While Koirala was defending the security forces in Birgunj, the disciplinary committee of his party in Kathmandu took the drastic decision of suspending Minister of Information and Communication Jaya Prakash Gupta for his remarks defending the commander in chief's recent controversial speech. Gupta, who is also the spokesman of the council of ministers, was suspended for a year from the primary membership of the party for defending army chief General Prajwalla Sumshere JB Rana's speech berating the failure of politicians to support the security forces.

Koirala : Unruly party?

The disciplinary committee put Koirala in a difficult position. At a time when the ruling party chief is trying to unify his party and gain the confidence of traditional forces, the disciplinary panel —packed with Koirala loyalists —portrayed him as anti-army in the rank and file of the security forces. By raking up a petty issue, the ruling party also risks alienating it core supporters, who want Congress leaders to focus on the national agenda.

Gupta and co-general secretary of the ruling party Govinda Raj Joshi were on the same side a year ago in accusing the army of not assisting the police in the anti-Maoist operations. While Joshi issued a press statement criticising the army before being forced to step down as home minister, Gupta raised questions about the military's motives in public remarks. The statements of both men embarrassed Koirala.

"I don't think Koirala could have ordered his loyalists to take such absurd action against Gupta," says a political analyst. "If Koirala really wanted to ruin the political career of Gupta, he could do that any time without kicking up much dust."

Admittedly, Koirala knows every weakness and strength of Gupta, who until last year was a staunch loyalist of the party president.

Regardless of the intention of the disciplinary panel, the media hype generated by its action against Gupta has tarnished the image of the party and its president. At the cost of Koirala's stature, Gupta has gained short-term mileage.

Despite their closeness to Koirala, all three members on the disciplinary panel —Mahanta Thakur, Bal Dev Sharma Majgaiya and K.B. Gurung —have in the past expressed differences over Koirala's decisions. Majgaiya hadresigned as water resources minister last year in protest against Koirala's decision to appoint a controversial civil servant as the ministry's top bureaucrat without consulting him. Thakur was infuriated two years ago when Koirala promoted Gupta as minister of information and communications.

"The political leaders must draw a line before making any comments on security matters," says Professor Dhruba Kumar, of Tribhuvan University's Center for Nepal and Asian Studies. "There must be a clear demarcation between the military and civilian authority."

At a time when Koirala is making new moves to unseat Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, what prompted die-hard supporters of the party president to take disciplinary action against Gupta? "Some party leaders took revenge for my refusal to support moves against the present government," said Gupta. "I will appeal against the decision of the disciplinary committee."

But there is a broader issue here. If Gupta's support for the role of the security forces was objectionable in the view of the disciplinary panel, the contents of Koirala's speech in Birgunj should have prompted similar —if not greater —disapproval.