Fate of monarchy linked to Nepal's poll

Dhruba Adhikary

KATHMANDU - Nepal on Monday appeared like a country finally heading towards an election of historical significance later this week. There is visible enthusiasm among voters - an atmosphere that was not to be found a week ago when candidates in the 601-strong Constituent Assembly conducted their campaigns amid fear and insecurity. Just days ago, uncertainty surrounded the poll, which is expected to pave the way for the Himalayan kingdom's transformation into a republic. After two postponements since last June, the interim government finally approved a date, April 10, and directed the Election Commission to make necessary preparations. Thousands of poll observers, including from Western countries, will be closely watching the voting for which over 17 million Nepalis are eligible. There are about nine thousand candidates for the election - to be based on a mixed system of first-past-the-post and proportional representation.

The men and women contesting the elections have had differing experiences, from disinterested crowds to candidates in far-flung districts being killed, abducted and intimidated, mainly by young militants associated with the Maoists. In April 2006, the Maoists agreed to be a political party - the Communist Party of Nepal - and joined electoral and competitive politics. The Maoists continue to draw widespread criticism for their cadres' crude and deadly behavior, ignoring their pledge to abide by provisions of the peace accord they signed to formally end a 10-year armed insurgency which claimed over 13,000 lives. Villagers in remote areas have complained that Maoist cadres routinely visit them and threaten retribution if they do not vote for their candidates and parties. Maoist cadres have made hundreds of villages inaccessible to other parties, forcing them to confine their campaigns to district centers. Responding to these complaints, the top Maoist leader publicly issued a directive for his group to behave like Indian non-violent spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi for the remaining days of the campaign. His cadres at the village level, however, do not appear to have been paying attention.

Threats and hurdles

What happened on March 29 in Biraatnagar, the home town of interim Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala located in the southeast, provided an example of how precarious the law and order situation is across Nepal. Within hours after Koirala addressing local authorities on enhancing security services in the region, powerful bombs exploded at a neighborhood mosque, instantly killing two persons and inflicting serious injuries on others. The incident added a communal dimension to the existing problems in the Hindu-majority country. In its pre-election report issued on April 6, the special United Nations mission in Nepal alluded to a "climate of fear in which candidates and voters function". While appreciating pledges by leaders of three parties - among the seven political parties in the interim alliance - to conduct the campaign in a peaceful manner, the UN report continued to express frustration, saying that "these commitments need to translate into reality on the ground - which has too often not been the case". As if to prove this perception, Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal (also known as Prachanda) last week canceled all of his public engagements outside the capital for security reasons.

Ironically, he is also the head of the "People's Liberation Army" and is usually surrounded by scores of armed personnel around the clock. It is odd to see the Maoist leadership scared to move around in a country in which they say is 80% under their control. "Death has come to haunt its greatest purveyor," wrote a newspaper columnist. Prachanda's decision came in the wake of threats from some two dozen armed groups in the Terai region, mainly bordering the Indian state of Bihar, which have said they would disrupt the April 10 polls by "eliminating" candidates. Some of these groups are said to have political agendas and demands that their regions be declared autonomous with a right to self-determination. It is a widely held belief that New Delhi is behind this separatist movement. Meanwhile, political rivalry between the main contesting parties remains acrimonious.

Both the Maoists and the Communist Party of Nepal (UML), the more moderate of the two, depict the Nepali Congress, the party with centrist credentials, as a supporter of the status quo (meaning support for the monarchy) , even if the Congress leadership has agreed to their republican agenda. The Congress sees the Maoists as a party of anarchists. But the dual between the UML and the Maoists has been strikingly bitter, with each accusing the other of being royalist. Nobody knows what Gyanendra, whose days even as a "suspended" king are numbered, would have said about these verbal battles. But is Gyanendra still in a position to move or shake Nepal's political course at this decisive phase? Apparently not.

The country's army has ceased to be "royal" and there are no other visible domestic forces to salvage the monarchy, even in a ceremonial form. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, a former prime minister and Koirala's rival while he was still in the Nepali Congress, is the only political personality of any standing to say that the monarchy is still needed. But since Bhattarai is no longer politically active, it is unlikely his statements will make any direct impact on the ongoing political process. Two of the 54 political parties in the fray have said openly they are in favor of a ceremonial monarchy. One of them is the Nepal National Development Party, which is headed by a Nepali citizen of Japanese origin, Takashi Miyahara. He thinks Nepal can take Japan as a role model and stresses that people forgave their emperor despite the loss of 2 million lives during World War II.

Some of the world's top 10 countries, he contends, are monarchies, such as Japan and in Scandinavia. Gyanendra has publicly said he has no plans to leave Nepal. Instead, the palace last week sent out customary cards with New Year's greetings from "Their Majesties the King and Queen". Nepal's new year, 2065, begins on April 13. Nepal's interim constitution and concomitant agreements between the seven political parties that make up the ruling coalition stipulate that the first meeting of the newly-elected assembly will "implement" a proposal to declare Nepal a republic. And the assembly has to meet for its maiden session within 21 days after the announcement of the last election result.

In election commissioner Neelkantha Upreti's estimation, all results will be out within three weeks of the poll, provided no re-polls are required. In other words, the 240-year-old monarchy which has remained a symbol of Nepal's stability will be relegated to the history books in a matter of weeks. Will Gyanendra quietly wait for that day without making a final attempt, be it overt or covert, to save his throne? Some politicians in the coalition have said they suspect the palace is behind the recent spate of violence. In private conversations, very few prominent politicians, including the Maoists, see the monarchy disappearing easily. They know they themselves are primarily responsible for the anarchy and chaos the country has witnessed since the successful pro-democracy movement of April 2006.

They are also aware they have alienated a large section of the population by declaring Nepal a secular state without putting the issue to a popular test. Similarly, leaders in the coalition hurriedly pushed through a citizenship law in the interim legislature, subsequently granting Nepali citizenship to about 4 million aliens, mainly Indians. Even the Maoists, who always claimed to be more nationalist than others, did not raise any objection while the "liberal" law was being enacted. "Maoists, too, showed that they are no different from others when it comes to vying for New Delhi's favor," said Somnath Ghimire, editor of Yugsambad, a Nepali language weekly. Widespread fear and indifference could lead to an unexpectedly low turnout of voters, with some estimates claiming it could be as low as 25%.

In the absence of a law requiring a minimum percentage of voters, even such an election could be declared valid by Nepal's election officials and endorsed by international observers. But will it achieve the political legitimacy needed to complete the current transitional process? This is a question that might be asked, among others, by Gyanendra, who earlier told the media the people alone had the right to decide the fate of the monarchy. Additionally, it is as yet unclear which of three main parties is likely to emerge as the winner. Some analysts say that despite splits and mergers, the Nepali Congress stands a chance to lead the other parties. Others believe the UML has brighter prospects.

The Maoists are not being viewed as the main winners. However, this is a prediction the Maoist leadership refuses to accept. Prachanda has publicly thundered that the Maoists will not accept the results if his party is denied victory, and thereby a chance to introduce revolutionary reforms. According to Prachanda, his party will take such a result as a conspiracy, compelling it to restart the armed insurgency. One senior Nepali Congress leader told Asia Times Online that the Maoists want to be in a win-win situation - either winning the majority and accomplishing the dream of "taking over" the country, or staying out of election without being seen as the main villain. Worrying trendsInstitutions tasked with analyzing emerging trends have made no secret of their concern. The latest report by the International Crisis Group predicts the post-poll period will be more "difficult and dangerous". In the words of the group's Asia program director, Robert Templer, "The turbulent aftermath would require cooperation and forward planning from the main parties." Will that be forthcoming if the Maoists decide to reject a defeating poll verdict and boycott the elected assembly thereafter? Recent events in Kenya and Zimbabwe do not offer encouraging messages. One school of thought has it that while communist slogans may be attractive to poor, illiterate and credulous people, the West-dominated international community would hate to see - or recognize - a Maoist regime in Nepal, which shares borders with Tibet, and thereby China. The US, for instance, has yet to remove Nepal's Maoists from its official list of terrorists. For the moment, the great electoral exercise remains on the threshold, although a section of Nepal's intelligentsia continues to view the mission as an enigma.

Source: Asia Times Online, April 8, 2008

King Gyanendra breaks long silence

Paul Soren

Finally, emerging from a long isolation, King Gyanendra spoke out his mind. He said his silence was not a sign of withdrawal or defeat but action. He argued that he remained silent so that the peace accord signed between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) government and Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-Maoist) could succeed. Last year, in a significant decision, the SPA government and Maoists had stripped the King of all his executive powers, privileges and seized all his royal properties.

On January 30, in an informal interview with Hari Lamsal, editor of a vernacular Nepali weekly Rastra Bani, the King said the Nepali people have a large heart and can accommodate all Nepalis including the monarchy. He also refuted rumors of fleeing the country and asserted that the Nepali people were aware of the significance of the institution of monarchy and will not undermine it. In his interview, King Gyanendra urged people to gauge the current political situation in the country and said they must peak out rather than keeping quiet.

Interestingly, the King claimed to have reached a secret understanding with the political parties. He declined to provide full details about the deal but said the parties know about it and if it didn’t work out then he will come out in public. The King’s statement at this juncture is a calculative move; he is testing the waters and gauging people’s reactions. Interestingly, some section of the Nepali people, pro-monarchy parties and some political leaders are also in support of the institution of monarchy in some form or the other. Recently, the Interdisciplinary Analysts (IDA) group carried out a countrywide survey and reported that over 49.3 percent of Nepalis supported the continuation of the institution of monarchy in some form in the new set-up. Are these developments an indication that monarchy might just come to stay in Nepal, albeit only a shadow of the glorious past?

Source: South Asia Weekly, February 2, 2008

Can Nepal's Rebels Help Rebuild?

Ishaan Tharoor/Chitwan

Comrade Sandhya's voice trembles as she speaks of her father. "He was a major in the Royal Nepalese Army," she begins, cupping her chin with one hand while rearranging a neat schoolgirl plait with the other. "When he found out I had gone underground, he said I was no longer his daughter — only his enemy. The next time he wanted to meet me was on the battlefield."

That encounter, to Sandhya's relief, never came to pass. In 1996, as a 14-year-old student from a town north of the capital Kathmandu, she joined Nepal's Maoist cadres at the moment when their armed insurgency had just begun to take hold of this rugged Himalayan nation, long a magnet for foreign backpackers and adventurers. Her father's military income meant Sandhya did not grow up among the country's many poor, but she chafed under the rigid caste laws and gender norms that blunted her parents' ambitions and stripped her of the same opportunities as men. The Maoists, led by their talismanic leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, a.k.a. Prachanda, promised her and thousands of others nothing less than a complete reordering of society, and Sandhya gave herself to the struggle, fighting as a soldier in a decade-long civil war that claimed over 13,000 lives and displaced countless more.

Today, Sandhya sits batting away mosquitoes in a sparse wood cabin, part of a sprawling Maoist cantonment in the southern district of Chitwan. She believes victory is at hand. A peace process triggered by mass protests in April 2006 against the autocratic rule of Nepal's King Gyanendra brought the Maoists into the political mainstream, paving the way for the extraordinary transformation of a country ruled for two and a half centuries by Hindu kings into a secular republic. Both the Royal Nepalese Army and the Maoist guerrillas — the civil war's bitter foes — returned to their barracks and camps with the stated intention of eventually reforming into one new national force. "We all want democracy. No one here wants to fight again," Sandhya insists. Even her father, who has since retired, has reconciled with Sandhya. "He respects my decisions now," she says. "He realized I was a figure of change."

Change can bring uncertainty, however, not just for Nepal but for other countries. Nepal, a country of 28 million, is sandwiched between the world's rising giants, India and China, who both have cast their eye over the Himalayan nation as a buffer against the other. Any unrest in Nepal — hostilities have been suspended, not buried — could spill across into its restive borderlands, particularly Chinese Tibet and the troubled Indian state of Bihar — developments that Beijing and New Delhi would view with alarm. Nepal's Maoists, moreover, are still on the U.S. State Department's list of terror groups. They have traded their guerrilla hideouts for plush offices in the capital, but had a fearsome reputation for committing violence when the armed struggle raged.

Indeed, the hatreds that fueled the civil war threaten even now to bubble over. Elections for an assembly that would draft Nepal's new republican constitution are slated for April 10, but only after much bickering and dithering. Nepalis of all stripes are losing faith in the seven parties, including the Maoists, that make up the country's feuding interim government and see corruption and cynical power-politicking stifling the nation's slow reconstruction from the ashes of war. Over a third of the population still lives below the poverty line.

As the politicians fiddle in Kathmandu, a hundred mutinies burn around the country: vigilante gangs run rampant in the countryside, while ethnic groups long marginalized under the monarchy have taken to armed uprising, especially in the southern lowlands of the Tarai where over 40% of Nepal's population lives. A cocktail of anarchist elements, militant factions and a growing separatist movement hold sway there and prove a daunting challenge with elections coming in little more than two months. "What happened in Kenya could happen here," says Jayaraj Acharya, a former Nepalese ambassador to the U.N., speaking of the ongoing ethnic conflict in the African nation triggered by disputed elections, which has claimed hundreds of lives. "Only here," Acharya adds, "it will be worse."

A False Dawn

The security situation in a nepal under cease-fire is dismal. During the civil war, both the Maoists and the Royal Nepalese Army held brutal sway over segments of the country, but now, as they wait in their camps, law and order has deteriorated. Reports filter in every week of kidnappings for ransom. Last December, a Swiss trekker was beaten up after refusing to pay money to a few rogue Maoists, a worrying sign for a country heavily reliant on the money brought in by foreign tourists. Many in Kathmandu blame the Youth Communist League (YCL), created by the Maoists less than a year ago, for much of the disorder. Red YCL banners around parts of Kathmandu urge Nepalis to report "suspicious, reactionary activity" to cell-phone numbers emblazoned on the cloth. As soon as night falls in the capital — which, as a bastion for the King's army, had been safe during all of the years of the civil war — the usually teeming streets grow deserted. "The police have no motivation at all right now," complains Kanak Dixit, editor of Himal magazine and an outspoken advocate of democracy. "There is an alarming surge in crime."

Public safety isn't the only challenge the interim government has failed to negotiate. Fiscal mismanagement has led to chronic fuel shortages across the country; lines in Kathmandu extend for kilometers and prices have tripled in less than half a year. Last week, protests against rising fuel prices shut down the capital. Kathmandu residents face at least six hours of power cuts a day. The government has been unable to raise Nepal's middling growth rate, which hovers around 2%, and funds many of its programs on an IV drip of foreign aid. Trade-union activism and general strikes, some suspect spurred in part by the YCL, disrupt factories in outlying areas and basic services in the cities. During Christmastime around Kathmandu, sanitation workers had been agitating for over three months. Piles of garbage festered around every cobblestoned corner of the city, visceral reminders of a deeper rot seeping into the nation.

"We live in a broken state," says Mandira Sharma, a leading human-rights activist. For the past five years, she and her NGO, Advocacy Forum, have investigated hundreds of cases of disappearances that took place during the decade-long civil war. To Sharma, both the Maoists and the Nepal Army are guilty of a catalog of atrocities, from forced recruitment to extrajudicial killings. Attaining justice for the victims (and compensation for the nearly 200,000 displaced) ought to be as important to the country's push toward democracy as elections. "But human rights don't seem to be anyone's priorities here," she laments. "The problem is a failure of political leadership."

Elections for a Constituent Assembly, which have thus far been canceled twice, became the focal point of political squabbling. The first date, June 17 last year, was missed for mostly logistical reasons. Nepal simply wasn't ready at the time to hold a fair and efficient poll. But the Maoists scuppered the next date, November 22, much to the chagrin of many Nepalis as well as the international community. Reneging on earlier understandings, the Maoist leadership grandstanded on a set of demands that included the outright abolition of the monarchy before its fate could be determined by popular referendum. When the other parties — including the establishment Nepali Congress, the party of the country's current Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala — refused to accede to the Maoist agenda, the Maoists pulled out of the government and plunged the peace process into a rancorous impasse.

"It showed how unnatural the alliance is between all the interests in the interim government," says Kamal Thapa, a royalist politician who served as Home Minister under Gyanendra. Up till last year, the Congress Party had always defended the idea of constitutional monarchy, a commitment enshrined by their party following similar protests in 1990 that curbed royal power. But the need to assuage the Maoists changed the equation. "The Congress has had to understand the new political reality," says C.P. Gajurel, a top Maoist politician, "and it has been difficult for them."

The Maoists see themselves as the agents of democracy in Nepal, stifled by the objections of reactionary, status-quo forces, while many in the Congress, let alone in factions aligned still to the ancien régime of the monarchy, doubt the radical guerrillas' commitment to any political scenario where they may not retain complete control. Despite a compromise thrashed out at the end of last year, which set elections for this April, observers expect conflict to be inevitable. "What more must we give the Maoists?" asks R.S. Mahat, Nepal's Finance Minister and a Congress Party member. "Their strategy is simply to create crisis. They are not honest."

This distrust speaks volumes of Nepal's present predicament, where parties spar over everything from the distribution of ministries to the appointment of ambassadors. "There is no genuine consensus at all," says Rhoderick Chalmers, Nepal expert for the International Crisis Group. Continued discord only strengthens the hand of the weakened King. Though the throne has lost much of its credibility under Gyanendra, many Nepalis still look to the institution as a source of stability and unity. "You can't legislate away the emotional link of the people," says Thapa. Others, including journalist Dixit, fear further squabbling and political anarchy could lead to a more ominous "right-wing backlash ... where royalist elements in the army would step in on the pretext of stability." Further heightening tensions, Prachanda, the Maoist leader, made noises as recently as November about returning the people's war to the jungle if progress toward a republic wasn't made. "Either through [the Maoists] or through the army," warns royalist Thapa, "we are going to see some sort of authoritarian solution."

The End of Kings

The threat of a coup may be exaggerated, but it points to perhaps the single greatest achievement of the Maoist insurgency: the unraveling of a national myth. Nepal came into being through the 1768 military campaign of King Prithvi Narayan Shah and his army drawn from Gurkha tribes in the hills near Kathmandu. Ever since, Nepal's polity has remained largely unchanged: its borders an approximation of the land conquered, its political élites tied to old families close to both the monarchy and the army, and its princely rulers all descended from the same messianic line. Power and legitimacy radiated outward from the palaces of Kathmandu into a highly hierarchical society in the countryside, where feudal mores and caste discrimination still hold sway. Propped up first by the British, keen to have a client buffer to the north of its imperial heart, and later India, this arrangement rarely had to fear outside interference and had remained roughly intact for more than two centuries.

Nepal's monarchy hammered the nail in its own coffin in spectacular fashion in 2001, when Crown Prince Dipendra gunned down 10 members of the royal family, including the much beloved King Birendra, and then allegedly shot himself. The attack, clouded by conflicting reports and conspiracy theories, sent shock waves around the world and plunged Nepal into existential crisis. With a centuries-old dynasty virtually eliminated overnight, in stepped the reigning King's brother, Gyanendra. As the Maoist insurgency raged, Gyanendra declared a state of emergency in 2005, arresting mainstream political leaders and assuming absolute power. But he could not quash the Maoists, whose influence grew apace in rural areas around the country. Rumors swirled depicting Gyanendra as a man given to superstition and mysticism, who would sooner look to the stars or a coterie of tantric priests for counsel than his political advisers. "He wanted control, he wanted to be a heroic savior," says a source close to the court, "but he had few actual ideas, if any."

Gyanendra's power play worked to the advantage of the Maoists. Their urban cadres and activists played a prominent part in the 19 days of mass demonstrations in April 2006 that ended King Gyanendra's absolute rule and led to the reconvening of parliament. The surge of popular goodwill at the time catapulted the guerrillas out of their jungle redoubts and into the international limelight. Prachanda, whose very existence had been in doubt only a few years before, appeared on televisions regionwide, saluting crowds and pressing the flesh. A King had been toppled, a war ended, and change in Nepal looked very much on the way.

The Way Forward

Little has gone according to script since the people-power protests 22 months ago. In November 2006, the Maoists committed to a peace accord with other prominent pro-democracy parties in Nepal and joined the new interim government that would rule until elections for a Constituent Assembly could take place. But the acrimonious squabbling that followed has dispelled many of the hopes raised by the success of the mass demonstrations. "We just felt so proud being Nepali then," says Sanjog Rai, a college student in Kathmandu. "The protests showed us how united we were and that feeling of brotherhood gave us real hope for a better future. Now we're stuck with politicians who have no vision and only care about keeping power."

There is a broad consensus among Nepal's strife-worn people that parliamentary democracy must come sooner rather than later. "A functioning government can't be in a permanent state of transition," says Bojraj Pokhrel, chief of Nepal's Electoral Commission. Now, Pokhrel will have to manage a staff of over 230,000 election workers spread across the mountainous country, some in polling stations miles away from local roads. Highways and bridges were routinely bombed during the civil war, making transportation in a nation with woeful infrastructure difficult at the best of the times. Still, Pokhrel is confident Nepal has the means to carry the elections out. "The people are all hungry for this," he says.

But they'll remain disappointed as long as the interim government's leaders fail to forge any meaningful political unity. "It's a testing time for them," says Acharya, the former ambassador to the U.N. "One wonders if they'll prove their statesmanship." The only indication that they will, most observers drily point out, is that neither the Maoists nor the Congress Party have any better alternative other than sorting out their differences and calming the many fractious forces that might undermine April's polls.

If they don't, the international community must do more to safeguard elections and move the peace process forward. Nepal's giant neighbors, India and China, both backed the monarchy during the civil war, supplying it with weapons and aid. India, which has close ties with virtually every faction in Nepal, eventually shepherded the peace process along, forcing the main political parties to come to terms with the Maoists. China has remained a bit more circumspect, letting India flex its geopolitical muscle while building bridges with the Nepali Maoists it shunned until not long ago and beefing up its hydropower investments along Nepal's glacial rivers. As the budding superpowers expand in influence and ambition, many see Nepal falling into the crosshairs of a new "Great Game" for the 21st century.

Beyond the turmoil and political intrigue looms the very real chance that Nepal might join the region's sorry list of failing states — populated already by Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Besides forging alliances and staging elections, the country and its politicians need to steel themselves for the thorny task of drafting a constitution that reconciles its feuding factions and enfranchises all its kaleidoscope of ethnic groups. "This is a crisis hundreds of years in the making," says S.D. Muni, a Nepal scholar formerly at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. "Whole groups have never been in the political structure. You have to in effect create a new Nepal."

Back in Sandhya's Chitwan camp, the commander, named Biwidh, clings to such hope. From a poor, indigenous-minority family, he speaks urgently of peace and of the need for a competitive, multiparty democracy. A slight man with a scarred, weathered face, Biwidh looks much older than his 34 years, and describes his time spent warring in the jungle with primitive rifles and stones in hushed, quick breaths, as if he would rather forget about it. As Nepal lurches from one crisis to another, Biwidh says the soldiers in his camp are in a permanent state of readiness. "If the revolution must be fought again," he sighs, turning his head to the setting sun, "it will be."
— with reporting by Yubaraj Ghimire and Santosh Shah/Kathmandu

Source: Time Magazine, January 31, 2008

NEPAL: ROYALISTS APPEASE NC LEADERS, REPORTS

The Nepali Congress leaders who have of late become a sharp critic of the Maoists proposals that were recently passed in the interim parliament have been trying to establish close links with the known royalists, reports Naya Patrika Daily dated 26th November, 2007.
The report further says that those NC leaders have made up their mind for voting against the party whip if the proposals were brought into the parliament for its ratification through the 2/3rd majority votes.
The Maoists proposals for the declaration of a republic and full proportional system of voting were accepted by the special session of the interim parliament through majority votes.

The NC leaders who have been in close contacts with the royalists are none other than Govinda Raj Joshi, Laxman Ghimire, Chakra Bastola, Sunil Kumar Bhandari, ex-speaker of the parliament, Mr. Tara Nath Rana Bhat and ex-NC leader Mr. Daman Nath Dhungana, Omkar Shrestha and Shiva Bahadur Khadka, says the vernacular daily.
A regular meeting between the above mentioned NC leaders and the royalists such as Rabindra Nath Sharma, Kamal Thapa is being organized at the house of ex-prime minister of Nepal Mr. Surya Bahadur Thapa. Thapa is a declared Royalist with India bend.
In the meeting that was held last week for more than four hours, Mr. Dhungana was also present however, he remained quiet says reports.

The report further says that an intense debate took place on how to tackle the rising communist strength in the country who then finally agreed to neutralize the swelling left forces by creating a democratic alliance.
The Naya Patrika Daily quoting NC leader Arjun Nar Singh KC says that the party was unaware of if such meetings took place between its party leaders with the royalists?
However, Mr. KC confirmed that he was also invited by Surya Bahadur Thapa.
To recall, Mr. K.C is a NC leader but groomed by Thapa during the heyday of the erstwhile Panchayati regime.
Analysts claim that if this meeting takes a shape, the liberal in the country will converge together.

Source: The Telegraph Nepal, November 26, 2007

Nepal revolutionaries call on mass support to end monarchy

David Hoskins

Nepal’s communist revolutionaries walked out of that country’s interim government in mid-September and announced immediate plans to launch street protests. The walkout followed the government’s rejection of a 22-point set of demands by the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M) that were meant to ensure free and transparent polls for planned Constituent Assembly elections in November.

Three weeks later, on Oct. 5, the government announced the November elections would be postponed.

The Nepali Congress Party and other reformist parties objected to two key points in particular. These basic points would have declared Nepal a republic before the polls, to ensure that the monarchy does not interfere with elections, and would have established a proportional representation-based election system. Nepal still has a king, despite massive protests against the monarchy last year.

The government’s rejection of these demands, say the revolutionaries, risks providing cover to the criminal supporters of King Gyanendra in the army and among underground terrorist units, allowing them to disrupt elections, and has created an unnecessary crisis in election preparations.

Other organizations have voiced support for the CPN-M’s electoral demands. Amik Sherchan, chair of the People’s Front Nepal, has stated that the 22 prerequisites were legitimate and that “the Maoists were left with no option but to launch a program of strong protests to establish a republic.” People’s Front Nepal is a semiunderground leftist organization and a member of Nepal’s interim government.

The CPN-M remains in Nepal’s interim parliament, where it has become the second-largest party since pulling out of the government. Three other groups, including the militant Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist), have merged with the CPN-M since it withdrew from the cabinet. The CPN-M has emphasized the need for a single revolutionary communist party to fulfill the aspirations of Nepal’s workers and oppressed.

Maoists call street protests; student organizations join

After all four Maoist ministers announced their resignations from the government, the CPN-M called for street agitation to begin on Sept. 25. Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, a leading party official, declared that, “Efforts to declare a republic from the parliament have failed. Now we will declare a republic from the streets.” The CPN-M has promised to hold actions in all of Nepal’s 4,000 villages and at every district administration office in order to advance their people’s agenda. The actions are being unrolled in carefully crafted phases. The first phase was held from Sept. 19 to 21, when the Maoists held a door-to-door public awareness campaign surrounding their demands. A week of rallies began in the capital on Sept. 22 and was planned to spread geographically. The revolutionaries are preparing to launch an exposure campaign to reveal corrupt government officials and business people.

Students, too, vowed mass participation in the street protests. The All Nepal National Independent Student Union-Revolutionary (ANNISU-R) laid out its own protest agenda. Public hearings in schools and universities began on Sept. 19 and were expected to continue until Oct. 3. Motorcycle rallies across the country began Sept. 29 and torch-lit rallies were to follow. More than 4,000 soldiers in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) had earlier walked out of their cantonments to protest in favor of the 22 demands raised by the revolutionaries. The PLA is the armed wing of the CPN-M and has voluntarily confined itself to a U.N.-monitored cantonment during the peace process initiated by the revolutionaries. More than 30,000 PLA soldiers are stationed in 28 cantonments around the country.

Revolutionaries champion people’s needs

Many of the government’s ruling parties fear an embarrassing setback in the polls at the hands of the revolutionaries. The popular program advocated by the Maoists and the revolutionary student and youth organizations has done much to earn the support of Nepal’s oppressed workers and peasants. The revolutionaries have consistently exposed corrupt landlords and held them accountable in People’s Courts set up around the country. For many of Nepal’s poor, this is the only system of justice available to them.

The revolutionaries have been in the vanguard of the fight to abolish Nepal’s brutal feudal monarchy. The CPN-M initiated 10 years of armed struggle which, combined with the street protests it helped coordinate, brought an end to King Gyanendra’s absolute rule late last year. He had clung to power with the support of the U.S., Britain and India. The revolutionaries continue to be the most consistent force advocating the total abolition of Nepal’s monarchy and the establishment of democratic republicanism with fair elections. Additional campaigns have established free health care in poor districts and the creation of a Health Team Project coordinated by the PLA’s medical department to create units of medical specialists and support staff in rural areas. In August the Young Communist League (YCL) mobilized 600 cadres over a course of three days to collect tons of garbage from the streets of Kathmandu.

Nepal’s poverty cries out for revolutionary change

Nepal is an impoverished country of 29 million people that until recently was ruled by a feudal monarchy dominated by the huge capitalist state of India to its south. Only 10 percent of Nepal’s population has access to electric power. More than 85 percent of the people live in rural areas without running water or basic sanitation. Malnutrition is rampant among children and at least one-third of the population lives below the official poverty line. While literacy runs a little less than 50 percent, it is only 39 percent among women. Meanwhile, Nepal’s infant mortality rate currently exceeds 63 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Nepal ranks among the 50 poorest countries in the world. The poor living conditions have fueled the militant consciousness of the masses and paved the way for revolutionary forces to enjoy a mass base of support for the armed struggle launched by the CPN-M in 1996. In light of the accomplishments of the revolutionary forces in providing for the basic needs of Nepal’s suffering people, it comes as no surprise that many in Nepal’s ruling parties are hesitant to compete with the CPN-M at the polls on a level playing field.

Source: Workers World, October 14, 2007

Nepal debates monarchy's future

The interim parliament in Nepal is holding an emergency debate on the future of King Gyanendra.

The meeting is being held at the instigation of former Maoist rebels, who pulled out of the coalition government last month. The Maoists are demanding the immediate abolition of the monarchy. But the governing Nepali Congress party is insisting that a new parliament should first be elected which will decide the future of the royal family. Elections, which were earlier scheduled for 22 November, have now been postponed and no new date has been set for the vote.

Deadlock

"We are confident that our proposal will be adopted by the parliament. We are negotiating with other parties to persuade them to back our proposal," Maoist spokesman Dev Gurung said. Nepal's Home Minister Krishna Prasad Situala said that the government was confident that the crisis will be resolved through the debate in parliament. He said that talks would be held with all parties to reach an agreement. The two sides have been trying to find a solution to the deadlock since the Maoists withdrew from the government. Elections to the constituent assembly were delayed earlier this month after the two sides failed to come to an agreement on the fate of the monarchy. The elections are a key element of a peace deal signed in 2006 that ended 10 years of Maoist insurgency. One of the first tasks facing the new constituent assembly when it is elected is to decide the monarchy's future. But the former rebels now demand a republic be announced before elections are held. Last week, the Nepali Congress announced its support for a republic - but only once elections had been held.

Source: BBC NEWS: October 11, 2007

Prime Minister Who Would Be King

Yubaraj Ghimire

G.P. koirala was arguably the most powerful prime minister the country ever had, going by the powers vested in him. For the past 16 months, he has been acting not only as the country's prime minister, but also discharging all the roles of the head of state. And King Gyanendra has become a political recluse.

Koirala has of late come in for sharp criticism for representing the state in various Hindu religious functions like the kings have been doing for a century in 'Hindu Nepal'. With the country declared secular in May 2007, it was expected that the government or head of state would maintain no direct link with such activities. On September 30, about half an hour after Koirala offered puja to Kumari, known as living Goddess, as head of the state and left the durbar square area, King Gyanendra arrived there without fanfare. He offered puja to Kumari, a tradition the kings have been maintaining for the past 250 years, and returned home. The crowd that booed Prime Minister Koirala when he visited there, greeted the king — something Gyanendra perhaps did not anticipate.

That clearly irked PM Koirala who not only sought an explanation from the chief of army staff a day later, but also ordered that half the army personnel currently deployed in the palace be removed. But many who supported the pro-democracy movement when King Gyanendra assumed absolute power are now fed up with Koirala and refuse to support him on the issue.

In fact, the crowd that hooted him delivered a simple message — Koirala is a prime minister and he should not be acting like a king, at least during religious functions. Nepali society with more than 80 per cent Hindu population, and the rest being Buddhists, Muslims and Christians, still remains a religious society and favours the king or any other individual's right to religion, something that the interim constitution guarantees as a fundamental right. Koirala has been denying that right to King Gyanendra of late.

Gyanendra, despite his unpopularity at the peak with absolute powers, was able to secure lots of sympathy, if not support from the people, when he was literally put under quarantine since February 18 when he issued a customary message in the name of the people on the occasion of Democracy Day. Since then, thrice in the past, the king was denied permission by the prime minister when he expressed his desire to be part of the tradition of the kings. Instead, Koirala took the king's role unto himself.

But what he apparently heard from the chief of army staff on the morning of October 1 must have added to that insecurity. COAS Katawal made it clear that while the Nepal army was a disciplined institution and willing to carry every order of a democratically elected government, it was worried about the complete surrender that the prime minister had made to the Maoists. He also made it clear that the army would honour each and every provision of the interim constitution and the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), the basis of Maoists joining the interim government, parliament and announcing that they had renounced the politics of violence. The army is unhappy with initiating a deal with the Maoists to become a republic even before the election to the constituent assembly takes place, against the pledge in the interim constitution that the first CA meeting will decide the fate of the monarchy.

With elections unlikely in November given the present political impasse, Koirala not only loses the political but also the mass support that he enjoyed only 16 months ago. His imminent fall now seems triggered by the army's likely non-cooperation as well.

Source: The Indian Experss, October 4, 2007

Why the king must go

Billy Briggs

In an exclusive interview, Billy Briggs talks to the Maoist commander who may soon determine his country’s fate

Chairman Prachanda sits on a leather sofa and glances out at the torrential rain of Nepal's monsoon season. We are in his office at the Maoist headquarters in the capital, Kathmandu. On the wall above his head are framed photographs of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Chairman Mao. "They were all great men, but I particularly admire Lenin's political dynamism," says the leader of Nepal's Maoists and commander of a rebel army that waged war in the Himalayan nation for more than a decade.

The insurgency, an attempt to establish a communist republic, claimed 13,000 lives, ending only last year after protests forced King Gyanendra to end his dictatorship and restore democracy.
Prachanda, a nom de guerre that translates as "the fierce one", was the man who signed a historic peace deal last November. He agreed to return 30,000 People's Liberation Army fighters to the jungle in camps monitored by the UN, a move that took the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) - CPN (Maoist) - into a transition coalition government. The Maoists joined the interim parliament in January, gaining 83 seats out of 330, and in April secured cabinet posts. "The rebellion was justified and we have embraced democracy," says Prachanda, whose real name is Pushpa Kamal Dahal.

Nepal's nascent peace process has been fragile, however. The Maoists continue to demand the abolition of the monarchy and that a republic be declared ahead of constituent assembly elections due to be held on 22 November. The poll is designed to elect a body that will rewrite Nepal's constitution and decide if the monarchy should stay or go, part of the peace deal agreed last year. But despite signing up to this, the Maoists recently stormed out of the coalition after the government refused to bow to their demands, throwing the process into crisis. I ask Prachanda why he reneged on the accord and will not allow the Nepalese people to vote on the future of the king.

"The masses took part in a rebellion against the king, so they have already given their mandate for Nepal to be a republic," he says. He claims that supporters of Gyanendra, and the king, already stripped of direct power and his status as head of state, would probably sabotage any election. Prachanda's critics say the Maoists are scared of a vote because popular support for the party has fallen in recent months as a result of rising violence across Nepal, much of it blamed on the youth wing of CPN (Maoist) - the Young Communist League, which appears to have embarked on a campaign of terror. At least 60 people have died in fighting between various political factions, but Prachanda denies Maoist involvement. "There have been problems with armed groups, and this is why we feel the environment is not conducive for an election at the moment. But we are not organising the violence."

The Maoists' strategy, he says, will be to appeal to the masses to demonstrate peacefully, adding that his party will not prevent the vote taking place and will fully respect the outcome. Although many in Nepal feel Prachanda is holding the nation to ransom, with a ballot box in one hand and a rifle in the other, he insists his party will not break the ceasefire. "We will not resort to violence . . . unless the demonstrations are forcibly put down." The US ambassador, James Moriarty, has reiterated America's position that the Maoists remain on Washington's list of terrorist organisations. The EU and the UN have also condemned the recent violence. Prachanda laughs. "How can the US accuse anyone of being terrorists when it is they who export violence to places like Iraq and Afghanistan? Who are they to talk about morals?" he says.
Ethics are certainly a concern for Prachanda, who is puritanical in his determination to outlaw alcohol, gambling and "vulgar literature" from India and the US.

Let's talk morals, then: what about the recruitment by the People's Liberation Army of thousands of child soldiers, many of whom have not yet been returned to their families? He denies that any such policy ever existed, despite strong evidence to the contrary, presented in February by Human Rights Watch. "I do not know why people are afraid of us," he says. I point out that a stated aim of the Maoists is to export communism to the world through a global revolution. Prachanda nods, and says he looks forward to an ideological debate with the west.
"Would the revolution you envisage involve an armed struggle?" I ask. "That would depend on the masses," he replies.

Prachanda admits there are direct links between Nepal's Maoists and the Indian Naxalites fighting for communism in impoverished states such as Andhra Pradesh. He also supports the repatriation of more than 100,000 refugees from Bhutan who have languished in camps in eastern Nepal for 17 years. Bhutanese Maoists, with whom he says local groups "may have a relationship", are active in the camps. There have been rumblings about an armed struggle in emulation of the Nepalese Maoists.

Does he still advocate the execution of the king? Prachanda replies that a "people's court" should decide the monarch's fate, adding that his adversary is responsible for the deaths of many innocent people. I counter that the Maoists tortured and summarily executed many people during the conflict and that as leader, pursuing his own logic, Prachanda is surely as guilty as the king. "Ours was a mass movement, a mass rebellion of the people," he says. "So it was all completely justified."

Source: New Statesman, September 27, 2007

Hindu righteousness

Not this king, but India’s religious right still wants the monarchyc

Prashant Jha

India’s Hindu right which has been traditionally sympathetic to the monarchy and opposed to Nepal going secular is split about Nepal policy. There are differences in approach between the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). about the political approach to Nepal. The RSS is reassessing its past policy on the future of the monarchy and say putting all their eggs in the royal basket was not a wise move. Besides being a Hindu king, they believed only the king could fight the Maoists. Now, senior RSS leaders admit the erosion of the king’s credibility in Nepal has damaged them as well.

We depended on proximity with the king for our influence, now with the king gone we have lost our strength on the ground,” one senior RSS leader told us. Despite this, the RSS would like the institution of monarchy to remain. While more radical groups in the Vishwa Hindu Parishad still hope for an active monarchy, most in the Hindu right in India know that the days of an assertive king are gone.

"We would be quite happy if the institution remains, it is a symbol of unity and is the only Hindu monarchy in the world. We know Gyanendra and Paras are unacceptable but then the grandson formula could work,” says an RSS leader who has tracked Nepal for decades. BJP leaders, including Atal Bihari Vajpayee, have said they will not actively push for retention of monarchy, and will decide on their stance based on the public mood in Nepal. The rightwing in India has kept the channels of communication open with king Gyanendra who has met three intermediaries in the past few months: a former minister from Tamil Nadu close to the RSS, a journalist with a Delhi-based pro-BJP paper, and a former intelligence official. All have returned with the impression that the king is relatively calm but at a loss about what steps to take. It appears he has been advised that a four month retreat, possibly a pilgrimage to India, would be in his interest as this would take the sting off criticism that he is obstructing elections.

More than saving the monarchy, the RSS wants to contain and curb Maoist influence and begin a political campaign in favour of reverting to a Hindu state. It is on these two issues they are willing to invest energy and capital, not on the monarchy. Utterly convinced of Maoist insincerity, the Indian right is, contrary to popular perception, keen on constituent assembly elections. The RSS is convinced that the Maoists would fare miserably and see the polls as the right way to expose them. They believe that Maoists are keen on derailing polls and using the ensuing uncertainty to organise violent street agitations. Like many others in India, the RSS was happy with the madhesi movement because it eroded Maoist support along the border. On the ground, especially in Raxaul and Gorakhpur, some RSS activists provided support (political, logistical, and possibly, limited financial help) during the movement through the Seema Jagaran Manch, a front organisation. Upendra Yadav has met senior BJP leaders in Delhi through RSS interlocutors.

But this support is limited and they neither have the will nor capacity to drive the movement. “We realise there is limited benefit for us out of the madhesi agitation. There is a crisis of leadership. Upendra Yadav is playing too many games with too many people and can’t be trusted. No madhesi group is willing to boldly say they are for a Hindu state. "What’s in it for us?” asks an RSS activist. The RSS’ opponents tend to over-estimate its strength, and even the RSS leaders know their capacity to influence domestic politics in Nepal is limited. But its leaders are aware there is strong sentiment in Nepal opposed to secularism. For now, the Hindu right in India is waiting for a strong anti-Maoist leader with a popular base who can publicly declare he is for a Hindu rastra.

Source: Nepali Times, Issue No. 363, August 24-30, 2007

Nepal's monarch awaits his fate

Damakant Jayshi

Nepal's monarch awaits his fateBy Damakant Jayshi KATHMANDU - The republican wind that swept King Gyanendra from power last year continues to blow strongly through Nepal. The king has been publicly humiliated three times in the past two weeks. His highly publicized three-day diamond-jubilee birthday celebration on July 7 fell flat, with the government, top bureaucrats, even the once loyal Nepali army, and diplomatic corps staying away. Some 700 well-wishers did turn up, most of them loyalists. But it was a far cry from the days when thousands of people lined up outside the palace gates to salute their king. The next day, nearly everyone who had been invited was present at the traditional bhoto jatra function for the Rato Machhindranath deity presided over by Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala as head of state. Until this year the duty had always been the privilege of the Nepali king.

Last week, outgoing US Ambassador to Nepal James F Moriarty appealed to Gyanendra to abdicate if he wished to save the monarchy. During the pro-democracy struggle, the US ambassador was openly pro-king. He had put pressure on Nepal's political parties to work with Gyanendra although the king had usurped absolute power in February 2005. Addressing his last press conference in Kathmandu on July 13, Moriarty said: "If he wants to save the institution of monarchy, he has to take a dramatic step." This was within days of Koirala's call for the king to abdicate in favor of his grandson, who turns five years old on Monday. Nepal's influential military also supports the idea as Gyanendra's son, the unpopular Crown Prince Paras, has a reputation for drunken, angry behavior. Only two years ago, with the army behind him, the king and Nepal's monarchy seemed invincible. Now hardly a day passes without media reports calling for an end to monarchy. Not all of them are from Maoist supporters. According to a recent survey, those who want monarchy in some form - constitutional, ceremonial, or "reformed" - are currently outnumbered.

And Nepal's 240-year-old monarchy has not recovered from the tragic massacre in the royal palace in June 2001. A majority of people do not believe the verdict of a government-appointed probe team that the then-heir to the throne, Gyanendra's nephew, killed nine members of his family before shooting himself. Krishna Khanal, professor of political science at Tribhuvan University, said the reasons are very obvious: "Monarchy and democracy can never go together in Nepal, and our history post-1950 is proof of that." Krishna Pahadi, a respected human-rights defender, minces no words when it comes to expressing his views on monarchy. The monarchy has no place at all in new Nepal, he insisted. Pahadi, who was named a prisoner of conscience by the international human-rights group Amnesty International during the king's absolute rule, said: "The Parliament, which has been reinstated on the strength of the popular movement against monarchy, should set up a tribunal to try King Gyanendra for his crimes against the people as the head of the government." Pahadi argued that this would result in the king (and his family) either fleeing or being convicted, and would give Parliament an opportunity to abolish the monarchy.

The Nepali army, which privately spoke of holding a referendum on the monarchy, has now grudgingly accepted the idea of a Constituent Assembly, chosen in a free and fair election (without intimidation by Maoists), deciding the fate of the institution. A Constituent Assembly election is scheduled for November 22. But right-wing Hindu groups and parties close to the royal palace insist that only a referendum, if required, can decide the future of Nepal's monarchy. "Since there is such a concerted and calculated hate campaign against monarchy, let us go for a referendum," said Kamal Thapa, leader of the pro-palace Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP-Nepal). However, Pahadi, who is against the idea of a referendum, calling it a meaningless exercise, feels that as long as the king remains unpunished there cannot be a Constituent Assembly election, "let alone a free and fair one". "The mood of the nation is for a democratic republic, and unless the king is punished for his obvious crimes against people, this will not be possible. Moreover, he will try to prevent the Constituent Assembly election," he warned. Like Pahadi, Thapa does not believe that an election of the Constituent Assembly could be impartial because of threats from Nepal's powerful Maoists. The RPP-Nepal leader has put his weight behind a "reformed" monarchy. He has argued that it would serve as a cushion for democracy against the ultra-left and provide unity and stability in the country. Significantly, the army, still suspicious of Maoist intentions, would also be happy to have a monarchy in some form, according to most political commentators. While the debate on monarchy rages on, all eyes are now on the Constituent Assembly election. That is, if it is held as scheduled. Or held at all.

Source: Asia Times, July 27, 2007

That’s why

The three-day celebration of King Gyanendra’s birthday that concluded yesterday was hardly a smooth affair. It was not unnatural for the palace to want to celebrate the diamond jubilee, even though the King has no constitutional status or authority. Everybody has a right to celebrate his or her birthday, so the King’s right to observe his birthday is beyond dispute. If the three-day gala had been made a private and quiet affair within the palace, it would hardly have given any provocation to the political parties. It was less the dinners and teas the palace hosted than the attempt to turn the occasion into a public event in some sort of a ‘show of strength’ that riled the political parties. The programme included a procession of royalists to the palace and presentation of a letter of felicitation to the King. The contents of the scroll went against the spirit of Jana Andolan-2 and the Interim Constitution and seemed to support the King’s controversial Democracy Day message.

Both the circumstances and timing helped bring both event and intention into sharp focus. At a time when the eight parties and the general public hold deep doubts about royal attitude towards the constituent assembly (CA) elections, the manner of celebration was ill advised. Obviously, the wide perception, including that of the political parties that the palace was engaged or likely to be engaged in conspiracy against the CA polls, led to the incorporation into the Interim Constitution an amendment that empowers the Interim Legislature-Parliament to abolish the monarchy even before the polls if the palace were deemed to be involved in any ‘serious’ conspiracy against the CA elections. The diamond jubilee controversy may strengthen the contention of those who want a republic right away.

It is too late for anybody, even the palace, now to try to reverse the political course the country has taken. While every move of the palace is under public glare, it would only prove to be counterproductive for the monarchy if it were seen to be going against popular will. The best thing would be to be resigned to the upcoming verdict of the CA. The birthday celebration also brought one thing to the fore — the government, the political parties, and the diplomats based in the capital stayed away from the functions at the palace, declining invitations. In yet another significant move, the King has been relieved of his age-old cultural role of gracing the bhoto at Bhotojatra. These speak volumes. The royalists could not take out the procession amid protests, and they had to enter the palace gate individually. Low turnout marked both the functions and the parties at the palace. Sadly, clashes erupted between YCL activists and royalists at some places, and several of the royalists were beaten up. It was an overreaction on the YCL’s part and it was wrong. Physical violence must be checked. But the mindset that betrays great difficulty in accepting the changed situation and the people’s verdict poses a greater danger to the political and peace process that has been set in motion.

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 9, 2007

A Much Maligned Plan

King Gyanendra's birthday celebration plan said to be organized by his adherents and conformists has drawn flak from different quarters. Soon after the envoys from the European Union disclosed that they would not attend the King's so called birthday celebration event, the political parties, professional groups and civil society organizations have come down heavily upon it. The student wings of the political parties organized protest rallies, the other day, and asked the government through a written note to ban the so called plan as this was aimed at hatching conspiracy against the election to the constituent assembly. Moreover, political party leaders speaking at a function, the other day, pressed on the government to prohibit the King from organizing the so called show in defiance of the national law and democratic values as allowing this event would amount to acquiescing into autocracy and feudalism.

The wrath demonstrated and the anger expressed against the King and his birthday celebration plan indicates that the monarchy in Nepal has been disputed as an institution . The Interim Constitution has not left any room for the King to exercise authority and seek any role. It would not be legal from his part to overstep the boundaries set by the basic law of the land. The position of the King, according to the constitution, is suspended and deactivated . As the prime minister is enjoined with power both of the head of the state and the government, the position of the monarchy is under severe scrutiny. The first meeting of the constituent assembly will discuss and decide about the fate of monarchy in Nepal, according to the Interim Constitution. What is crucial for Nepal right now is to create a congenial atmosphere for conducting the polls to the constituent assembly so that the delicate political and social issues were addressed and tackled properly . No forces in the country should seek to create controversies and disturb the situation. The King should refrain himself from nursing any ambition and abide by the law of the land as no institutions in the democratic Nepal is above the law. Any attempt to transgress the limits of the rule of law and democracy would be resisted by the people.

Source: The Rising Nepal, July 9, 2007

King's Birthday Fiasco

King Gyanendra is the luckiest king of Shah dynasty to have lived for sixty years. Since King Prithvi Narayan Shah, no king has lived so long (and you thought Nepal's low life expectancy is due to poverty only?) Whether or not King Gyanendra will remain as the king is still in the hands of Constituent Assembly, but even as a general citizen he enjoys the right to celebrate his diamond-jubilee birthday and throw a party as per his wish. When the news about the king throwing party for over thousand people at a hotel in the capital spread like a wildfire, not many raised their brows. However, when all the "who's who of the society" started receiving invitations, some on behalf of Queen Aishwarya and some on behalf of Crown Prince Paras, the people got alarmed. The birthday party was suddenly considered as a royal ploy to taste the political clout of the king. Hence, rejection.

Diplomatic corps have proved their talent to sniff the political connotation of the king's invitation. The European ambassadors expressed their opinion collectively through British Ambassador Dr Andrew Hall that at this particular time their participation does not "send a helpful signal". Outgoing US ambassador James F Moriarty said his attendance "would not serve any useful purpose". Similarly, Indian ambassador Shiv Shankar Mukherjee had plain "not going" message to the king. These statements send a very powerful message in favor of Nepal's democracy and the Nepali people. The democratic world deserves a standing ovation from all those who embrace plural values and foster democracy. It is now almost certain that except for some exceptions, all other diplomatic missions will be busy sending RSVP to the royal palace.

The message is loud and clear. The king's resurgence is not possible in Nepal. Neither political party nor foreign forces nor the general public is ready to accept the king who imposed autocratic rule for over a year before bowing out to the pressure of people's movement on April 24th, 2006. The birthday party also exposed king's henchmen Swami Prapannacharya, Dr Durga Pokharel and others who have shamelessly drafted a citation terming King Gyanendra as the one who awarded democracy to this country, and as the only source of national integrity and stability. People certainly feel pity on such apologists. It is also an opportunity for the parties in the government to prove their stance on monarchy. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has rightfully and tacitly urged the king to quit, respecting the people's demand. He has also urged all the feudal fiats to support the constituent assembly election that would draft the constitution for a new Nepal. So, it is almost certain that the king's birthday party is going to be a fiasco.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, July 6, 2007

Nepal Maoists step up pressure to abolish monarchy

KATHMANDU: Nepal’s Maoists stepped up demands Monday for the immediate abolition of the Himalayan nation’s monarchy, rejecting a new proposal to replace an unpopular king with a four-year-old prince.Nepal’s prime minister, a political moderate seen as sympathetic to the idea of keeping the throne, said King Gyanendra and his equally unpopular son, Crown Prince Paras, should step aside and make way for young Prince Hridayendra, the next in line. The new infant king would therefore have a strictly ceremonial role, and this could also reconcile ordinary Nepalis with an institution that has been badly damaged by Gyanendra’s failed attempt to cling to absolute power.

The Maoists, however, angrily rejected Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala’s proposal. “Our party will not accept any form of monarchy, whether that is a child king or his grandfather,” Ananta, the deputy commander of the Maoist’s People’s Liberation Army, told AFP. “Our party totally rejects the prime minister’s remarks, and this goes against the spirit of the eight-party alliance,” said the official, who like many of the ultra-leftists only uses one name.Other partners in Nepal’s coalition government were also wary about the proposal. “Koirala’s attempt to save the monarchy is unacceptable for our party,” said Jhala Nath Khanal, a senior leader of Communist Party of Nepal. “Our party has always been in favour of abolition of the monarchy and will not review our decision in the future,” said Khanal whose party, like the Maoists, has 83 MPs in the 330-seat interim parliament. Palace officials refused to comment on the prime minister’s remarks.

Meanwhile, about 300 relatives of people who disappeared during Nepal’s decade-long Maoist conflict protested in Kathmandu on Monday demanding to know the fate of their loved ones. Protesters carrying placards bearing photographs of their relatives sat outside Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala’s official residence demanding the whereabouts of family members detained by troops in the civil war. The International Committee of the Red Cross says it has received reports of 943 people who went missing - presumed kidnapped and murdered - in the war. Nepal’s Supreme Court asked the government this month to pay compensation to dozens of families of the missing people and investigate disappearances. Last week, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists said Nepal’s interim government should quickly investigate thousands of disappearances. agencies

Source: The Daily Times, June 19, 2007

Nepal budget to cut Gyanendra's funds

KATHMANDU: A year after his fall from power, Gyanendra's fortunes continue to decline with the new budget set to drastically reduce the allowances of the palace. On the other hand, the Maoists' red star is touching new heights with chief Prachanda readying for his maiden trip abroad. On Saturday, the 51-year-old rebel chief heads for Switzerland for a week-long sojourn when he will interact with Swiss government representatives, intellectuals and members of the public.

The rebel leader's interaction with European officials comes after ex-US president and Nobel peace laureate Jimmy Carter met them in Kathmandu and urged the US to engage them in dialogue. The Maoists' diplomatic blitzkrieg in the West comes after Gyanendra's overtures abroad failed. During his 15-month regime, Gyanendra was snubbed by US president George Bush, which resulted in his not attending the UN General Assembly in New York while Nelson Mandela pleaded other engagements and declined to meet him in South Africa. A fresh blow will befall the palace on July 13, when finance minister Ram Sharan Mahat announces the budget for 2007-08. A local daily, Annapurna Post, on Thursday carried an interview with the minister, quoting him as saying that the new budget will allocate just about NRS 30 million for the royal family. Last year, the palace was allocated about NRS 210 million, substantially down from the nearly NRS 6600 million that Gyanendra spent during his own reign.

The Maoists and the Marxist-Leninists had been putting pressure on the government to reduce the royal allowances in the new budget, pointing out that according to the new constitution, promulgated in January, Gyanendra has no official role and therefore, should not have allowances too. The budgetary allocation is meant for “administrative” costs - which means paying the palace staff, maintenance and power and water bills. The palace has been treating the cuts with disdain. So far, it hasn't given the government an account of its properties, so that they can come under the tax bracket.

Source: The Times of India, June 30, 2007

Parliament can now abolish monarchy

Ananta Raj Luitel

King can be removed if he conspires against the Constituent Assembly polls and assumes ‘executive powers’

For the first time in the history of Nepal, the Parliament today adopted a provision in the Constitution that will allow the House to abolish the monarchy if the King is found to be conspiring against the Constituent Assembly elections.Inserting the provision in Article 159 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2007, the House passed the second amendment bill of the Interim Constitution by two-thirds majority. A total of 281 members of the 329 seats of parliament had cast their votes favouring the amendment while only two members cast their votes against the bill. Jana Morcha Nepal’s MPs Pari Thapa and Nava Raj Subedi cast their votes against the amendment. The bill came into force immediately after Speaker Subas Nembang announced the amendment at 10.30 PM and authenticated the Bill.

Though Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala was not present in the House, he has taken the amendment as a historic move contributing to the “strengthening of loktantra and the way of holding Constituent Assembly elections.” Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula read out the PM’s letter to the House.Earlier, the parliamentary special committee passed the Interim Constitution second amendment bill after slightly changing the bill introduced by the government some few days ago in parliament.While addressing the Special Committee, Speaker Nembang termed the authority to abolish monarchy “unlimited power of the parliament and a blank cheque.” “We can remove him (the king) if he acts against the Constitution, if he assumes executive powers unconstitutionally and against the wishes of the people,” Nembang said.

As per the provision, a two-thirds majority of parliamentarians can decide on removing the king in case he tries to scuttle the CA polls. The Council of Ministers would bring in such a proposal in the Parliament.However, one-fourth strength of the parliament cannot initiate action against the king on its own, but the government has to forward the proposal first.Several MPs had proposed amendments in the provision. They demanded such an action could be initiated with political consent, but withdrew the provision after such an idea was criticised.Home Minister Sitaula said he is ready to accept the amendment.MPs today questioned why the government does not want to take action against the king on other grounds — for going against the spirit of the Constitution, people’s wish or loktantra.

Lawmaker Radheshyam Adhikari said the new parliamentary power is a “sword above the king’s head” and that it would stop monarchy from going against the people.Another amendment in Article 33 (a) said the CA polls would be held by mid-November. The earlier provision for holding the polls by mid-June was amended.Another important provision included in the statute is that the Parliamentary Public Hearing Committee would conduct hearings on the appointment of Supreme Court judges,ambassadors and heads and members of constitutional bodies. This provision is important as it would make the authorities accountable to the parliament and the public.The House also adopted a provision of an opposition party and an opposition leader in the Parliament.Amending Article 154, the parliament granted authority to the Constitution Delimitation Commission to review its earlier report as per the request of the government.

Amending Article 55, the parliament adopted the power to remove the Prime Minister by a two-third majority of the House with no-confidence motion. According to the provision, a no-confidence motion can be filed against the prime minister only two times in a year. One-fourth of the members of parliament can summon a special session of the House and the PM can call the session within 15 days.

Salient features

• CA polls to be held by mid-November

• Public Hearing Committee to oversee appointment of SC judges, envoys, heads and members of constitutional bodies

• House to have an opposition party and an opposition leader

• House also gets power to remove PM by two-thirds majority

• 281 MPs voted in favour of the second amendment out of 329

• Two MPs of Jana Morcha Nepal opposed the amendment

• One-fourth of parliamentarians can demand a special session

Source: The Himalayan Times, June 14, 2007

Nepal seeks to abolish monarchy through parliamentary vote

Kathmandu, June 07: Nepal has introduced a bill in the interim Parliament that seeks to abolish the monarchy thugh a parliamentary vote incase the king obstructs the holding of the constituent assembly polls to frame a new constitution for the Himalayan nation. The government registered the bill to amend the constitution after a cabinet decision yesterday that sought to abolish the monarchy through two-third vote in case the king obstrus the process of holding the constituent assembly elections pnned at the end of this year.

The Maoists have warned of a massive agitation if the parliament fails to end the monarchy. Maoists chief Prachanda has said the former rebels would launch a movement from both within parliament and outside to declare Nepal a republic if the parliament fails to end the monarchy in the Himalayan state.

The bill also seeksrovision for the ouster of the Prime Minister by a similar majority vote of the Parliament, review of the delineation of the electoral constituencies and to fix a new date for the crucial constituent assembly polls. The government also decided to debar persons found guilty by the high-level probe commission formed to punish those involved in violently crushing the April 2006 agitation from the Constituent Assembly polls.

Source: Zee News, June 7, 2007

One Year After King's Rule, Nepal Media Still Under Fire

More than a year after the fall of King Gyanendra's absolute regime, Nepal's press continues to be under fire from armed groups, media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said.The attacks have intensified in the Terai plains in the south, the epicentre of fresh unrest in a kingdom bedevilled by a 10-year communist uprising and decades of political instability, where at least 72 journalists have been assaulted or threatened since January, the Brussels-based watchdog said in a statement issued late Wednesday.

Expressing alarm at the continued attacks on the media, especially with elections scheduled for November, the press freedom organisation urged the eight-party government to ensure security for journalists.'This is alarming,' it said. 'Armed militants are harassing journalists with the aim of silencing them or turning them into propagandists. The authorities, especially the interior and information ministries, must do everything possible to put an end to this climate of open hostility. 'The government has a duty to ensure that the press is able to work, especially in the run-up to elections.'

Though the Maoists signed a peace pact with the government last year and joined the ruling alliance in April, formally signalling an end to their armed revolt that has killed over 11,000 people, their success with the gun has inspired the emergence of new armed groups in the Terai, some of whom are led by their former comrades.Nearly nine armed groups have become active in the plains, continuing the extortion, abduction and killings once started by the Maoists.Journalists are especially vulnerable in the plains where the government has little control.'Death threats have become commonplace in the southern provinces,' the media organisation said.

In one of the most recent cases on June 1, members of the Jantantrik Terai Mukti Morchha (JTMM), a band of former Maoists, threatened the employees of two private radio stations -- Narayani FM and Radio Birgunj -- for not broadcasting any reports about a closure enforced by them.Earlier, the faction took under their control two journalists of the Auzzar National Daily, Rajendra Rai and Dewaan Rai.'In some cases, they criticise journalists for producing reports that highlight their abuses,' Reporters Without Borders said. 'In other cases, their motive for attacking journalist is the lack of coverage of their activities.'

The Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, a group that calls itself unarmed and this month began talks with the government, has been branded as the most aggressive towards journalists. 'It alone has been responsible for at least 16 cases of threats or violence against journalists since the start of the year,' the statement said.'Its members attacked reporters Ram Sarraf, Dhruba Sah, Bhuwan Jha and Kiran Pande in January and threatened to kill any journalists who tried to cover the rioting then taking place.'The Forum, however, says it is a victim of biased reporting by the Nepali press dominated by people from the hill community, who have been exploiting the plains people and ignoring their plight.

The media watchdog has also come down on the Maoists, now part of the government, saying their youth wing, the controversial Young Communist League, has been reported to be involved in harassing a journalist working for the Indian TV channel, Nepal1, last month.It also cited at least three instances of journalists being harassed without any group taking responsibility.'Journalists think they bear the hallmarks of Maoist groups,' Reporters Without Borders said.The statement comes at a time Nepal's Information And Communications Minister Krishna Bahadur, who is also the government spokesperson, belongs to the Maoist party.

The group said it was particularly calling on the minister to 'quickly intercede with all affiliated organisations in order to get them to stop the attacks and threats against journalists'.For 15 months from 2005, when King Gyanendra seized power with army backing, Reporters Without Borders had marked Nepal as one of the bleakest places for journalists with a high incidence of arbitrary arrests, closure of critical media organisations and a draconian ban that prevented journalists from criticising the royal family or the royal government.Though the royal regime ended due to a public uprising and the new government pledged to restore media freedom, the emergence of new dissenting groups now poses a fresh threat to the media.

Source: News Post India, June 7, 2007

NEPAL:KOIRALA SAYS, MONARCHY A VITAL PART OF THE SOCIETY

Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala was expected any day to disseminate words for the rescue of the Monarchy in Nepal. He visited the eastern region twice within two-month period but both the time he had bitter words for Monarchy. Third time Girija said what he really had in his mind, he said “Monarchy can exist within a republican order”. He said this in Birtamod, Jhapa District in Nepal amid a party mass meet.

In our endeavor to transform the society and the country as a whole, the monarchy can take a new form too, Koirala added. “The Monarchy too is a vital part of this society”, PM Koirala said.
He said if a republican order is established, the King may not be abdicated.
He said, but to declare Nepal a republic needs a process, we all have to follow. He however, confused the mass when he said the “Monarchy will slowly transform itself into a republic”; it’s just a matter of time.

Violence may not establish monarchy, even if it is established through violent means it may not last long, PM said further.
He said in the process of taking responsibility of the country he can take any bold decisions. He almost in a threatening tone targeting other political parties said they must now remain prepared to face such decisions. “Without creating favorable atmosphere, CA polls can’t be held”, he added. Prime Minister said further, to conduct the CA polls I can go to any extent. He alleged the rest of the parties in the alliance for creating hullabaloo in the name of CA polls. Making unnecessary noise won’t transform the society, a CA poll is the only legitimate way to do it, he continued.

He said, now other leaders in the alliance are treating me like an old tree that does not give fruits, thus they are trying to cut it. I know what I am, so I am not afraid of any one, I talk what my heart says. “After I successfully conduct the CA polls my importance will be finished” PM concluded. June 3, 2007

Source: The Telegraph, June 4, 2007

Koirala's Stand On Monarchy : Republic, But Gradually

Geja Sharma Wagle

At a time when the leaders of the political parties have been engaging on contentious issue whether or not the interim legislature declare a republic state, Prime Minister and President of the Nepali Congress (NC) Girija Prasad Koirala has cautiously revealed that Nepal has already moved into a republic setup and the republic would be established gradually. Prime Minister Koirala has opined that receiving the credential of the foreign ambassadors by the prime minister is a historic event and a strong philosophical foundation for establishing a democratic republic. Addressing the party men in the capital, Koirala had divulged that the Eight-Party Alliance (EPA) should gradually strip away all the powers of the King and finally declare a republic. As per his analysis, the democratic republic is inevitable but it will take some more time.

Expectation

The Nepali people, all the political parties, and civil society had expected a clear policy regarding the monarchy, restructuring of the state, and the federal structure of the nation. But the-much-media-hyped meetings of the NC presidents did not take any significant political decision, especially regarding the monarchy and federalism. However, Prime Minister Koirala made an ambiguous but strategic statement regarding the monarchy and establishing a republic. He neither turned down the republic proposal as proposed by the prominent cadres nor advocated in favor of 'ceremonial King' as he did in the past. In fact, he strategically opined that the democratic republic should be established gradually rather than hurriedly probably considering the future election strategy. But he outrightly rejected the proposal that has demanded to declare the republic by the interim legislature by the communist parties.

Probably, considering the implication of the declaration, international opinions, and the legitimacy of the declaration, he turned down the controversial proposal of the communist parties. Referring to the interim constitution, he argued that the much-awaited constituent assembly (CA) elections will decide all the centuries-old controversial political, social, and constitutional issues of Nepal including the fate of the monarchy permanently. And the constituent assembly will draft a democratic and inclusive constitution and a complete democracy will be established as per the wishes of the Nepali people. Underlining the historical contributions of the NC for establishing democracy and people's supremacy since 1950, he has expressed the firm commitment to hold the CA elections in November at any cost and which would draft a new democratic constitution respecting the wishes of the people. Considering the political sensitivity in the given situation, he answered both ceremonial monarchists and republicans by the very ambiguous statement. It seems he is trying to follow a centrist policy to defuse the extreme polarization between the monarchists and republicans for democracy and the party to survive. Had the NC decided either for ceremonial monarch or republic, there might be extreme polarization between the ceremonial monarchists and republicans. And the possible polarization might have been harmful for the NC politically as well as strategically because an extreme polarization between the extreme left and extreme right is always detrimental for the centrist.

Not only strategically but ideologically as well, the NC would not be in favor of monarchy and would be in favor of establishing democratic republic, people's supremacy, and rule of law. It is the NC that has been fighting against the monarchy and in favor of democracy since 1950. It is the NC that has overthrown the tyrannical Rana regime and established democracy in 1950 through popular movement. Similarly, the NC has established democracy in 1990. Likewise, under the leadership of the NC the historic people's peaceful movement 2006 had put an end to the despotic regime of King Gyanendra and established democracy. Therefore, it is the NC which has been fighting against the authoritarian monarchy for establishing democracy and people's supremacy since a long time. However, the NC has been following a multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchical policy since its inception. Due to its constitutional monarchical policy, it did not bring an end to monarchy and did not establish a democratic republic in 1950 and 1990 terming it as a symbol of national unity. The NC did believe in the past that a democracy and monarchy could go together and it would not pose any harm to democracy. Had the NC decided against the monarchy, a democratic republic would have been established in 1950 or 1990. But the NC did not decide against the monarchy and the out-dated monarchy had been given a rebirth. But the power hungry kings proved the NC wrong and whenever they got a chance they attacked democracy and the NC, time and again, and they took over power.

In fact, the NC fought against, the then Rana authoritarian regime, despotic and autocratic kings, tyrannical Panchayat, and totalitarian dictator Gyanendra. But the NC never compromised against the democratic principles. Realizing these very realities, the NC deleted its out-dated constitutional monarchical policy from its preamble for the first time in its history. In fact, it is the considerable policy shift towards the democratic republic. Analyzing the evolution to the policy towards the democratic republic gradually and the given political situation, the NC would not be back and it will gradually move towards the republic era as outlined by Koirala. The NC has understood that the monarchy is a past and the republic is the future because the interim constitution has already suspended King Gyanendra. The NC will not be a captive of the past but will be a herald of the future.Whether the NC should declare that it is in favor of republic or not, it is a most controversial debate within the NC at the moment. But, as a responsible political party that has the faith and trust of the Nepali people and the entire international community, NC should take a responsible political decision considering the volatile political situation and the international concerns. Therefore, the NC and the interim government should take a less risky and more acceptable decision to the people. Therefore, as defined by Koirala, the gradual evolution of republic might be the best strategy at the moment for the survival of democracy.

Question

The declaration of the republic from the Interim Legislature might be a controversial decision. There might raise the question over the legitimacy of the proclamation and international community might be divided. Considering the implication of the proclamation, the government should take a legitimate decision. Democracy is not only a declaration; it is a system, people's mandate, and the due process of law.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 15, 2007