Date of publication: 08-05-2013
The appointment of controversial figure as chief of Nepal Mohan Singh Sameer anti-graft body, Commission for the investigation of abuse of authority (CIAA), it appears that the gap between reality and rhetoric espoused by the four parties such that the natural reaction when they claim to be protectors of loktantra (democracy) a bout of laughter is. By the appointment procedure and standing by Sameer, who was actively involved in extension of Gyanendra Shah regime and suppressing Janaandolan 2 (2006 people's Movement), the parties have a political blunder of enormous proportions. They are effective tell the Nepalese people: look, we know you have come to power through the Janandolan but that was then; now, we don't care about what you think. In politics, where symbolism means a lot, this is a decidedly regressive turn in Nepal after 2006.
Not surprisingly, S of appointment as head of the CIAA General sentenced because this goes against the very foundations of what has come to be the term democracy (in its purity) post-2006 embody people traffic. For the record, the Rayamajhi Commission found that Sameer, chief Minister of the absolutist Royal Government, directly was involved in suppressing the 2006 mass movement. In addition, the Commission Lamsal, formed to investigate people who have gathered outside their property resources has also stated that Sameer should come under control. Constitution, the person at the head of the CIAA supposed "high moral character".
The perseverance with which the four parties have stuck to their guns in the face of overwhelming opposition from the Nepalese people that want a better political culture-not to mention middle management politicians their own parties — suggests a disturbing case of cronyism, status quoism and's duplicity. The current political elite has become so corrupt that it the idea for the appointment of a person with integrity at the head of the constitutional anti-corruption body dreads? It seems that they prefer someone get on the CIAA which corrupt, ambiguous and of questionable moral character itself. S fit the Bill almost perfectly. "As the chief of administrative head during the Jana Andolan, he [S] is responsible for what happened during the movement," the venerable Krishna Jung Rayamajhi told this newspaper (Monday Interview, may 6, page 6). "In addition, Sameer was also sued by the CIAA, making him ineligible to hold a Government Office."
Here is a larger irony. For parties that Nepalese people have failed in their cardinal responsibility to the new Constitution because of their differences, they agree to come on surprisingly fast Sameer the appointment. After taking the lead role himself in screening S designation by the Constitutional Council has sworn-in yesterday, new head of Government President Khil Raj Ra blood on its hands. Although we have a Government headed by the Chief Justice to hinder elections supported parties, us was always conditional support: that the Ra Government was an election Government and its presence was justified, as long as it stuck to its primary responsibility to hold early elections. Unfortunately, at this time, we have every reason to share the feeling expressed by a number of Nepali opinion leaders that are non-separation of powers between the Executive and the judiciary the Nepali democracy can damage beyond repair. We only hope that there are no larger designs on the Supreme Court failure yesterday to entertain the public-interest litigation against S the designation. A lifelong technocrat, Ra, by his action, the fear of a great deal of thought that he surprisingly out of touch with the public and could drag the country rightward wrist Nepalese is justified.
But it is the political parties, which are bound to invite greater public anger in the next few days. Despite progressive politics, praised the high proclamations UCPN (Maoist), it seems, is quite comfortable with a regressive figure as head of the CIAA; the Nepali Congress, which never tires of projecting itself as a bastion of democracy, is fine with someone who against the democracy during the regime of the Shah worked. The position of the CPN-UML and Madhesi Morcha is at best hypocritical. While some of their politicians to oppose their party leaders happy, ratified Sameer Farouq sworn in closed door meetings. Not speaking up when the majority means that you blatantly believe in nothing is important.
The heavy political symbolism in S of recovery should not be lost. While using the "barriers" provision amending the Interim Constitution plunged Nepal into a constitutional vacuum that signals, means Sameer the appointment, in practice, that the parties the moral ground so claims as guardians of the people's Movement 2006 have lost. This raises a disturbing question: If no longer wish to be the four parties of the vehicles for change called for by people of traffic 2006, how long must we keep calling them legitimate claimants of that revolt?
We want to give the last word again to the venerable former Supreme Court Justice Rayamajhi: "it takes time to find the right course. We can expect something of the new generation. All parties have good people, but they have not had a chance as the old generals still dominant. " Indeed, is the alternative to the current parties are not a return to the party-less system but reformed parties that will embody the aspirations of the Nepalese people. That's why their response to the saga Lokman Singh Sameer strong political symbolism that far, far outside a appointment of the head of a constitutional body carries.
Post a Comment
Post a Comment