Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Special Parliament Session Extended In Nepal

Seven political parties in Nepal decided to extend the Special parliament session till October 28 in order to seek a political consensus. Although it is a judicious decision of the political parties to extend the parliamentary session, I don’t see any sign of consensus in near future. The parties haven’t yet reached consensus on whether to proclaim a republic through the parliament or to adopt the proportional electoral system. There is no question that the Maoists created hurdles by raising these issues on the eve of the Constituent Assembly poll. Although the Maoists had already agreed and was already written in the interim constitution that the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly will decide the fate of the monarchy and the parties will adopt the mixed electoral system for the CA poll, the Maoists, sensing that they will face a pathetic defeat in the poll, set 22-point demand including these two major issues. The parties were compelled to defer the November 22 poll. The Maoists must bear the blame because the poll was postponed due to them.
Now the political parties are trying to find a political consensus, after the Maoists registered the proposal at the Special Parliament session. At such a critical time, I think the Maoists must withdraw their proposal and express their readiness to go to the CA poll. In case the problem surges and it may invite a division in the seven-party unity, I think there is no harm in going to the proportional electoral system–but only for the CA poll. The CA poll is not for forming a government and the government to be formed following the polls should be a consensual one. The consensual government of all political parties will be much powerful to formulate a new constitution and restructure the state. If only one political party secures a majority, it may invite trouble because the concerned political party may not win the support from other parties and various other groups in the process of formulating a new constitution. But the proportional electoral system is good only for the CA poll not for the parliamentary poll.

So far as the issue of republic is concerned, there shouldn’t be any further debate as all political parties including the Nepali Congress have already decided for republic. The political parties can pass a commitment paper for a republic through the parliament and they can go to the CA poll to endorse it. Therefore, the current problem must be ended at the earliest. The parties should forge an understanding over the political issues as soon as possible.

Posted by at 13:56:53 | Permalink | Comments (1) »

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Read Martin Speaking With Press On Wednesday

Ian Martin Q and A

10 10 2007

Ian Martin, Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Nepal, talks to journalists in a press conference in Kathmandu today. Transcript by United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN)

 

Shirish Ballav Pradhan, Press Trust of India: Who do you blame for the postponement of the Constituent Assembly election? Do you think that the election would now be held within the end of the Nepali calendar of 2064 (mid-April 2008)?

 

Ian Martin: It’s not for the UN to blame anyone and indeed I hope that others, the political parties, will concentrate not so much on deciding who is to blame as on deciding what is to be done now, and as I said sustaining their alliance in order to go forward. Again, as I was implying, the prospects for holding a credible Constituent Assembly election at any particular date is not just the matter of fixing the date, it’s a matter of agreeing upon the steps that are necessary to make it possible. We said some of that when the June election was postponed, and unfortunately there wasn’t then a clear road-map towards November 22, though there were good technical preparations. This is a moment when the parties need to focus not just on the date but, as I have tried indicate, some of the key steps that are necessary for a good Constituent Assembly election.

 

Dhrubahari Adhikary, Asian News: There is a perception that UNMIN role so far has been limited, and therefore it cannot influence trends and events. As you are going to the briefing of the Security Council, is there a possibility of expanding the role to give UNMIN a wider mandate, so that it could play the role more effectively than it has been able to play so far?

 

Ian Martin: Well, the question of UNMIN’s future mandate doesn’t begin with the Security Council. It begins with the Government of Nepal, and what requests the Government makes for first of all extension in time of support from the United Nations to the process, and then in what areas it wishes to see that support.

Dhrubahari Adhikary, Asian News: A quick follow-up. Has there been an approach by the Government of Nepal in this regard, that UNMIN should continue its work?

Ian Martin: I think almost all actors were anticipating that if the election took place on the 22nd of November, then that of course would be the context in which a discussion of the future role of UNMIN and the United Nations would take place. So, really it’s only now with the postponement of the election, that one needs to review, and we need to discuss with the Government, what support it envisages. Clearly they have a number of political decisions to take first. So we are not yet at the point where we are in discussion with the Government about the future role of UNMIN and the extension of the mandate. But obviously Member States in New York will be very interested to know what the wishes of the Government are, especially when they consider further the report of the Secretary-General later this month.

Dhrubahari Adhikary, Asian News: So the Security Council will be reviewing the performance so far, not taking any decision for the future?

Ian Martin: The timing of the decision for the future again depends upon the timing of a request.

Ghanshyam Ojha, The Kathmandu Post: UNMIN has verified four of the seven Maoist cantonments. Can you give us the figure, like how many of the Maoist combatants have been disqualified?

Ian Martin: No, I am still in the position, I am afraid, where I am not willing to give full figures. We are in discussion about the discharge arrangements. We have provided information to the Government that is necessary for their discussions about the payment of allowances that have just been agreed. But you will understand the sensitivities around this, and we want to arrive at good agreement on the discharge arrangements for those who are excluded by verification at the sites where we have completed, as we go forward to complete the process at the three further cantonment sites.

Sam Taylor, Agence France Presse: Mr Martin, there have been a lot of rumours and stories in newspapers, reporting a possibility of a military coup at some point in the future. Without involving you or UNMIN in that kind of speculation of that nature, what would your reaction be if something like that did happen, given that it is not outside the realms of possibility? UNMIN’s views?

Ian Martin: I am not going to answer hypothetical questions or speculate on that.

Arjun Kumal, Nepal Television: Mr Martin, do you think the election date to be announced soon? Or it seems like by the way your statement reads, it’s going to take a long time?

 

Ian Martin: I don’t know what decision the political parties are going to move towards, but what I am suggesting in the statement is that it is important that they don’t focus just on the question of the date, which was in a sense the only clear decision on which consensus was reached when 22nd of November was set, but focus on a roadmap towards a date. It is not for me to say what time period is then involved but I hope the political parties will consider very seriously what all the steps are that are necessary to create the climate for a good election.

 

Arjun Kumal, Nepal Television: Just a follow-up. Are you going to pull out your electoral personnel?

Ian Martin: We are discussing right now with the Election Commission the implications of the immediate situation for our electoral personnel. The Election Commission suspended its own preparations and we’ve had district electoral advisers out in the districts, but obviously their functions related very directly to the late stages of the electoral process. We are looking right now and discussing with the Election Commission what decisions we should make. I think that the only thing I would like to emphasize is that any withdrawal of electoral personal from the districts or indeed from the country does not mean that the UN is not willing to support the electoral process in future when a date is set and on whatever basis the Government and the Election Commission then request. But obviously we cannot keep personnel idle for too long if the functions they came here to perform are not going forward.

Gopal Sharma, Reuters: Would it be appropriate to say that the unpredictable nature of the process by the political parties is rendering the activities in Nepal uncertain or difficult?

Ian Martin: Well, that’s what you said, not what I said. It’s certainly true that United Nations planning is not easy in a context where the timetable is uncertain. But we will cope with whatever requests are made of the United Nations when they are made. The important thing is that the parties now take good decisions about the way forward to sustain the peace process and towards a Constituent Assembly election.

Shirish Ballav Pradhan, Press Trust of India: On the eve of the Dashain festival the Maoists have intensified extortion, in the name of supporting their fresh agitation. What is your view on this?

Ian Martin: Well, what is happening at the local level is something that is monitored very closely by OHCHR, as you know, and I will be watching their reports closely and expressing concerns of my own to the Maoists leadership according to what comes out of their monitoring.

Liam Cochran, Voice of America & ABC (Australia): You mentioned the necessity of a road-map? What are the essential ingredients that this road-map should have to take this process forward immediately?

Ian Martin: The elements that I mentioned in that part of the statement are a very brief summary of what we regard some of the key elements as being. So I won’t repeat that right now. But again, that’s not for the UN to lay down, that is something very much for the parties to discuss through amongst themselves. I do think it has to provide some answers to those key issues: regarding dialogue with marginalized groups; regarding the future of Maoist combatants in the security sector; regarding effective governance and public security at the local level; regarding an absolute commitment to non-violence and democracy. And I do think that a future roadmap would be greatly assisted by effective independent monitoring of how far those who make commitments are implementing them, which is, as some of you may recall, something we have called for for a long time, but hasn’t really been a feature of the process to date.

Liam Cochran, Voice of America & ABC (Australia): And should the UN play that role of observing and making sure that things in the road-map actually happen?

Ian Martin: If one goes back to the original request to the UN, it included to assist in monitoring the Ceasefire Code of Conduct, and the Ceasefire Code of Conduct obviously was then overtaken by the Comprehensive Peace Accord. One of our difficulties has been that there hasn’t been a national monitoring mechanism to assist. We are very ready to assist in that process of monitoring. The Cabinet did take a decision in principle a few weeks back to establish a high-level monitoring committee. It isn’t yet in existence and now there is a lot that needs to be reviewed on the path ahead. But I hope that effective national monitoring, which the UN can assist, will be part of it.

All India Radio: Did you say that the people, the election monitors, in the regions and districts, they will be called back? That you will suspending that part of your operations? And how many personnel? How many people are you pulling out from the districts?

Ian Martin: Firstly, I am talking only about electoral personnel. Other UNMIN personnel outside of Kathmandu are arms monitors, civil affairs officers and so on. So I was referring specifically to our electoral personnel. And in the districts we have deployed district electoral advisers - not strictly observers - whose function was to work closely with the District Electoral Officers. Now the Election Commission has suspended the activities of the District Electoral Officers so clearly in that context, the job that those people came to do cannot be done. So we are looking right now at whether and when to bring them back from the districts. This is a discussion where we are going through right now and one which we naturally want to do in full consultation with the Election Commission.

All India Radio: How many are they in number?

Ian Martin: I don’t have the number absolutely at the tip of my tongue. We were bringing them in three cohorts or three tranches: two had been deployed and the third in fact was about to come but we have not brought them to Nepal. But Kieran can subsequently give you the correct number for the number of DEAs that we do have in the country.

[Kieran Dwyer, Spokesperson: I have a ballpark figure, but I would rather send you the exact number by email this afternoon.]

Shirish Ballav Pradhan, Press Trust of India: Do you have any plans to meet the Indian special envoy who is coming to Nepal today?

Ian Martin: No, I haven’t been asked to meet him.

Dhrubahari Adhikary, Asian News: To quote again from your statement, you say that the parties should “focus on sustaining and deepening the peace process as a whole and develop a road-map of measures that are necessary to create the conditions for a credible election.” Well, could these two aspects go simultaneously? One looks like more of a longer term thing, whereas considering a new date could go quite quickly. How could that go simultaneously?

Ian Martin: I do think they are completely related to each other. The Constituent Assembly election was agreed upon, as a key part of a peace process to consolidate peace and restructure the State. It’s not just another election according to some regular schedule, it’s not just a contest for political power. It’s a once in a era establishment of Constituent Assembly to take crucial decisions about the future of the country. I think it is very important to see it as that and to see therefore that it is a body that will need to be inclusive of all political forces, all social forces, to reach decisions as far as possible by consensus. I think it’s mistake if it gets focused on simply as a question of which political party comes out on top in a more normal electoral context.

Usha Titichhu, Freelance: In a press meet there were comments from a retired general from India, coming from the Indian army, about a question of a military coup. So if you look at these comments, would you be looking for a greater mandate from the Government?

Ian Martin: I haven’t seen even the full quotation of what has been reported. All I can assure you is that there is no discussion in United Nations circles, at any level, of such matters. We have a very clear job to do within an agreed peace process and that’s what we are focusing on. Any other kind of speculation, I don’t think is helpful.

Usha Titichhu, Freelance: That is why, are you looking for a further mandate for UNMIN?

Ian Martin: I have already tried to say that the question of either the extension or the expansion of UNMIN’s mandate has to begin with the Government. And I think the Government, which I am sure would want to take such a decision in consultation with all political parties, including the Maoists, if in that stage they haven’t come back into the government, needs a bit of time in this new situation to consider the path forward and what role to request of the UN.

Ram Prasad Humagain, Gorkhapatra: You met Mr Prachanda after the suspension of the Constitution Assembly election. What was his reaction? And you might have heard some reaction from the international community – what is their reaction?

Ian Martin: So far as the Maoist leadership is concerned, they have consistently reiterated their commitment to the peace process and their continued cooperation with UNMIN in verification, eventual discharge and other matters that are central to the monitoring of arms and armies. And it is extremely important that that commitment is indeed sustained. So far as the international community is concerned, you have seen from the many statements from the international community what disappointment there is, but I think the general reaction from the international community is the same as the one I have conveyed from the Secretary-General and from the Security Council: still a commitment to want to support Nepal in its peace process, notwithstanding the current difficulties.

Liam Cochran, Voice of America & ABC (Australia): Has this been the biggest crisis for Nepal’s peace process since the CPA was signed last year?

Ian Martin: Well, perhaps it is. But I think crisis is also an opportunity. Crisis is also an opportunity to examine weaknesses in the process that have been there for some time, and I have tried to point to some of them, which need to be overcome for the peace process to be taken forward effectively. So, I don’t want to talk about it in terms of talking up the crisis, or saying that this is a disaster. It certainly doesn’t have to be a disaster if the political parties approach it in the spirit of reflecting on lessons on what has happened so far, re-committing themselves to the peace process and the need for cooperation despite their differences in working out how to take it forward.

All India Radio: Mr Martin, would you agree that the postponement of the poll has complicated the peace process?

Ian Martin: I think the peace process was already complicated. I think the postponement of the polls has perhaps highlighted, or exposed, some of the complications of the peace process. I go back to what I said previously: the Constituent Assembly election is a key part of the peace process, and it needs to happen in a way that genuinely serves the peace process and consolidates the peace. This is a moment for analysis and reflection on how to do that.

Indian press journalist: Mr Martin, I hope you remember that one year back you were here in the same building for the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. [Ian Martin: I remember it well.] During the last one year, as you said, the peace process has been complicated. Could you slightly elaborate how complicated the peace process was, One. And number Two, can you give us some figures of the violations of the ceasefire agreement, by the Maoists and by the Government side. We have always reported that Maoist PLA cadres are leaving the camps, coming on the streets, blocking the highways, protesting at different places at different times. Don’t you think that these are violations of the ceasefire conditions? How many such cases have been reported in the past one year?

Ian Martin: Well, we don’t quantify the violations of the arms monitoring agreement, and the total ceasefire and Comprehensive Peace Accord is a larger question. We don’t quantify those because they are very different in kind and nature. So it’s not really susceptible to quantification. What is useful is that they are addressed in the Joint Monitoring Coordination Committee and addressed in general in a very constructive spirit there by Nepal Army and Maoist army representatives. So no, we don’t keep a quantitative catalogue of the violations. There are indeed violations on both sides of the agreement, but they are very different in nature.

On the question of how the situation has become more complicated, one of the major complexities that we have pointed to you before, including, for example, in the last report of the Secretary-General, is that the process that began very much as a peace process between one ideological armed movement, the Maoists, and the State, has become complicated by the insistence of traditionally marginalised groups that they need to have a central part in a process that is to restructure the State in accordance with general commitments to inclusion. And there is no question that the situation in the Terai, the Madhesi movement, as well as the claims of the Janajati, Dalits and other groups, has made the management of the process more complicated. But in ways, again, that I think it can be seen as bringing to the fore important issues that need to be addressed. I think, again, the Constituent Assembly is an important step forward towards their being addressed, because only some of these are issues can be addressed before there is a more comprehensive consensus reached on the future of a federal Nepal, and I say that because the parties have now committed themselves to a federal Nepal.

Arjun Kumal, Nepal Television: Mr Martin, you have been very much in touch with Maoist and Seven-Party, let’s say Six-Party leaders. You know how strong they are in arguments and bargaining, their arguments. At the same time, if this process prolongs, how long can you wait for this process to end? Have you, let’s say, something in your mind, you know, by this time it should come to an end, and until this moment we can go on with this peace process of Nepal?

Ian Martin: Peace processes, very often, take a long time to be negotiated and consolidated, and indeed Nepal’s peace process moved very quickly at the beginning. I don’t think what matters is so much the time that it takes, as to how far there is a commitment to maintain the process and work through difficult issues. And I think, although you refer to the positions of the political leaders, they have shown as this process has gone forward considerable capacity to compromise, as is essential in any process, even if right now we are at a moment where compromise has become extremely difficult on certain key issues. But so long as the political leaders keep in mind the mandate that they were given by the people of Nepal to take this peace process forward, I trust that they can work through these continuing difficulties and bring the process back on track.

Arjun Kumal, Nepal Television: You mean to say that you can go as long as Nepalese leaders are committed to the peace process?

Ian Martin: It’s not for the UN to dictate timing. That’s again a matter for Nepal’s political leaders but also for the people of Nepal to have their say as well as to what their expectations are of their political leaders. The UN has never wanted to prolong its presence here anymore than was necessary. UNMIN was established with the objective of being a mission of limited duration to assist in the holding of an early Constituent Assembly election. But I am confident that what’s being said by the Secretary-General and the Security Council indicates the willingness that the UN shows in other parts of the world, to support a process in whatever ways are requested for whatever period is necessary to help ensure its success.

Posted by at 04:30:03 | Permalink | Comments (1) »

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

There Is A Serious Doubt Over Maoist’s Intention

Maoist Chairman Prachanda’s remarks in western Nepal has raised serious question over the Maoists’ intention to continuing with the peace process. He warned that the seven-party unity would break down if there was no consensus over their demands. Talking to journalists in Dipayal, the headquarters of Doti district, Prachanda said the special session of the interim parliament, which is scheduled for October 12 must address the Maoists’ two of the 22-point pre-conditions for the Constituent Assembly elections. The Maoists have demanded that the special session of the parliament proclaim a republic and a mixed electoral system be adopted for the CA poll. It has raised doubt over the Maoists’ commitment to democracy and election because Prachanda means to say that the parties must accept their pre-conditions. It never happens in a democracy. A political party has its right to put demands but it has to accept the majority decision. The Maoists however refused to accept the majority decision this time and vowed to disrupt the CA poll, scheduled for November 22. It was the major reason the political parties had to postpone the poll.

The rumour in the air is that the ultra-leftist force is becoming more powerful in the Maoist party. The ultra-leftist line, led by Maoist senior leader Mohan Baidhya ‘Kiran’ and Ram Bahadur Thapa ‘Badal’ don’t believe in elections. It still believes in bullets and wants to capture power. If it is the reality, the Maoists will never go to poll rather they will launch urban revolt and will try to capture power by force. The political parties should be much cautious in advance and the Nepali Congress and the UML should forge strong unity to foil any such attempt by the Maoist. The NC and the UML should cement up all their differences and stand united for a common cause of democracy and human rights. If the UML or the NC logs their horns for their petty interests, we all Nepalese people may plunge into the Maoists’ autocracy. The unity of the NC and the UML can challenge the Maoists both at the parliament and in the streets. 

Posted by at 14:26:38 | Permalink | Comments (1) »

Security Problem Increasing In Kathmandu

The latest news that a schoolboy was killed by a neighbor due to family feud. This is the second murder of a schoolboy in Kathmandu though the objective of the murder is different. But both the cases have raised a serious question-Can anyone can anybody any time in Kathmandu? Are children safe? Is anybody safe?

These are many questions anybody asks in Kathmandu these days because bombs, which were unheard of, go off quite frequently. Shops and individuals are looted in the evening. People are stabbed anytime. Apart from the criminals, the Maoists’ youth wing (Young Communist League) has been spreading terrorism in Kathmandu. The YCL targets anyone who doesn’t obey to their orders. Kathmandu is gradually becoming unsafe. However, the tourists can make free move, they are not targeted by any such groups.

Read the following news, which triggered strikes in Kathmandu on Monday.

A schoolboy, missing from Sainbu area of Lalitpur for the last five days, was found dead under Manahara Bridge near Koteshwor, Monday morning.

The body of eight-year-old Dhiraj Adhikari, a student at Shahid Dharma Bhakta Memorial School at Nakkhu, was found in a sack with tape over the mouth, at about 8 am.

Adhikari, a grade-two student, was abducted Thursday afternoon while he was on his way home from school.

According to Madhav Prasad Nepal, chief of Metropolitan Police Range Office, Lalitpur, the body was recovered as per details provided by the accused, Nabin Shrestha, 21, who was arrested Sunday night. He had confessed to police that the boy was strangled and thrown into the Manahara the same day of the kidnapping.

SP Nepal said they have arrested three other persons including Nabin’s brother Raj Kumar Shrestha, 23. Tika Ram Shrestha, 23, a bouncer working at Liza Club, Sundhara and a taxi driver Bhoj Bahadur Lama are also among those held in connection with the incident.

Police said two other accomplices - Raj Kumar Magar and Raju Magar - are still at large. Main culprit Nabin is learnt to have hired Tika Ram to carry out the killing.

According to people close to the victim’s family, the newly-built house of the Adhikari family borders the house of Navin Shrestha. The two families are learnt to have been having disputes over land.

Meanwhile, hundreds of locals at Nakkhu, including students of Shahid Dharma Bhakta Memorial School staged demonstrations at Jawalakhel Monday afternoon demanding that police disclose the guilty and take strong action against them. They also burnt tires in various parts of Lalitpur, throwing vehicular movement, including along the ring road, out of gear for over three hours Monday afternoon.

Police intervened in the demonstration as the agitating crowd started pelting stones and bricks at the Metropolitan Police Range Office at Jawalakhel, leaving a few protestors injured.

Irate locals, at about noon, also set ablaze the house of the arrested Nabin Shrestha at Nakkhu. The two-storied building was completely destroyed by the fire. Police rescued family members from the house.

Last year also, an eight-year boy, Bibek Sharma Luintel was similarly kidnapped, from Koteshwor, and subsequently found dead in the Dhobikhola, near Chabahil after a week.

Posted by at 05:07:59 | Permalink | Comments (1) »

Friday, October 5, 2007

Worse, CA poll Postponed Second Time In Nepal

Finally, the political parties in Nepal failed to conduct the Constituent Assembly (CA) poll on November 22 also. It’s ridiculous that they decided to postpone the poll but don’t say when and how it will be held. The parties on Friday morning decided to ask the government to write a letter to the Election Commission requesting the latter to suspend the election programs. This is the second time the parties are postponing the CA poll after they deferred it on June.

The Maoists are the most responsible for the current situation because the poll is postponed as the parties couldn’t reach consensus over the Maoists’ preconditions for the poll. Although the Maoists had already agreed and signed in a agreement and a mixed electoral system will be adopted for the CA poll and the issue of monarchy will be decided by the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly, the Maoists later changed their tune and set pre-conditions for the poll. After the Maoists’ extended meeting, which was held on September in Kathmandu, the Maoists introduced their pre-conditions for the poll. It’s much obvious that the Maoists received reports from their country-wide cadres that they will pitiably lose the CA poll. They then decided not to allow the CA poll happen on the scheduled date. The parties had no option but to postpone the poll. Worse, they didn’t fix a new for the poll–further complicating the political situation.

I think the political parties have no right to seize the people’s right to vote. People across the country want election and they want to choose their candidates but the parties for their individual interest are not holding the poll. Who takes responsibility for such situation. The people must resort to streets demanding poll and must boycott the parties who dont’ want poll. 

 

 

 

Posted by at 06:56:18 | Permalink | Comments (3)

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Read Maoist Atrocity On Free Press In Nepal

The Maoists used its trade union at Kantipur Publications to close down the publications. The Maoists’ Young Communist League has looted and burnt the copies of the Kantipur daily and its sister publication The Kathmandu Post. The Maoists attacked the printing press of the Kantipur Publications and disrupted the regular publication of the newspapers. The Maoist lawmaker Salikram Jamkattel has threatened to close down the Kantipur television also in four days. He also threatened to abduct journalists of Kantipur Publications. He said his cadres will beseize the Kantipur Publications and will close down the media house permanently. The Maoists today also surrounded the Kantipur Publications and stopped the entrance of journalists into the publications.

Today the Federation of Nepalese Journalists took out a rally against the Maoists’ attack on Kantipur Publications. Read the reactions from various persons present on the occasion.

 

“    Yesterday, the king misused army and police to suppress press freedom and now monarchy is counting its last days; now the Maoists are following Gyanendrapath and will meet the same fate - Bishnu Nishthuri, FNJ president

“    I have not given the right to anyone to prevent me from reading Kantipur…Don’t the Maoists know that a party has to digest its criticism in a democracy? - Raghuji Pant, CPN-UML leader

“Do we have democratic political parties in the country? If so, where are they? - Shambhu Thapa, ex-NBA president

“We’ve been fighting to end autocracy for the last 30 years. It seems the fight is not over yet - Dr Kedar Narshingh KC, president of Nepal Medical Association

“    This is not just right of Kantipur or journalists; now the readers and viewers and listeners must come out to protect their right to information - Taranath Dahal, ex-FNJ president

“    What the Maoists have done is not only condemnable, but punishable as well - Shyam Shrestha, civil society stalwart

POST REPORT
KATHMANDU, OCT 2
Journalists and civil society leaders on Tuesday strongly charged that the Maoists’ attack on Kantipur Publications is tantamount to an attack on loktantra.

Addressing a mass meeting, following a rally, organized by Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ) here, its President Bishnu Nisthuri said, “Maoists are forcefully trying to cease press freedom.”

He said the Maoists are copying the formula of the king, who, he said, used more than 90,000 armies and police to finish off the freedom of the press. “Maoists’ activities are no any different from the kings who eventually saw his own collapse,” he said.

Speaking on the occasion, UML Central leader Raghuji Panta said, “Maoists’ activities have clearly shown that they are against press freedom.”

He strongly charged that the Maoists are maintaining double standards and are flouting the democratic norms and values. “They (Maoists) are in the parliament and the government, there are legal ways and forums to raise the issues.”

He said the loktantra can’t exist without free press. “We (parties) fought for a complete loktantra where free press exists perennially,” he said.

While stating that the press has its right to criticize the wrongdoings of any political parties and any leaders, he said any political party which can’t tolerate criticism can’t claim to be a political party.

Former President of the Nepal Bar Association (NBA) Shambhu Thapa said those who try to finish off press will get destroyed ultimately. “Attack on Kantipur is an attack on the free press of the world,” he said, adding, “All should strongly fight against such autocracy.”

He urged the alliance of professionals to immediately resort to protests to protect freedom of the press.

Civil society leader Shyam Shrestha said, “Attack on Kantipur is not only condemnable but it is also punishable.”

He urged the Maoist leadership to immediately stop the anti-press activity and take action against those involved in the disruption of Kantipur publications.

While strongly condemning the Maoists’ act of seizing and burning the copies of Kantipur and the Kathmandu Post, he said, “The act of looting the newspapers doesn’t stop the voice. It is the most condemnable act.”

Tara Nath Dahal, former president of the FNJ appealed to all readers of newspapers to resort to protests against the Maoists. “The Maoists have seized the readers’ right to read newspapers and they all have to resort to protests to protect their right,” he said.

Bal Krishna Chapagai, president of Press Chautari, said, “The attack on Kantipur publications is an attack on all other media.”

He said other media including FMs may come under Maoist attacks after the Kantipur if it is not immediately checked. “Maoists are attacking media in various pretexts and we must condemn them,” he said.

Prateek Pradhan, editor of the Post said the Maoists are scared of the voice of loktantra. He also claimed that the journalists at Kantipur Publications will continue fighting for their professional rights. “Maoists may bomb the publications, they may destroy the press but the voice for loktantra will never cease,” he said.

Gopal Thapalia, president of the South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA), Dr Kedar Narshingh KC, general secretary of the Doctors’ Association, Samir Jung Shaha, president of Press Union, Babita Basnet of Sancharika Samuha, Sunil Pokharel, an artist, Kiran Manandhar and president of Lalitkala Loktantrik Abhiyan condemned the Maoists’ attack on Kantipur Publications.

BOX
Intervention of 7-party sought
Journalists on Tuesday demanded that the seven political parties immediately hold a meeting to address the attack on free press.

Speaking at a gathering of journos and civil society leaders today, former President of NBA Shambhu Thapa said, “Seven political parties should immediately hold a meeting and address the issue of attack on media.”

He charged that the political parties haven’t taken the issue seriously. “My question is to Girija Prasad Koirala, my question is to Prachanda and other political parties. If you call a meeting for your political interests, why you can’t sit to address the issue of attack on press,” he said, adding, “If they fail to immediately settle the problem, we will be compelled to say that there are not loktantrik parties, there is no loktantrik government.”

Similarly, President of FNJ Bishnu Nisthuri said, “We regret that the political parties haven’t yet addressed the issue of attack on press. Words only don’t work. They need to take action.”

Speaking on the occasion, UML Central leader Raghuji Panta said he would take initiative to raise the issue of attack on free press at the upcoming meeting of seven political parties.

Posted by at 15:38:18 | Permalink | Comments (1) »