I just read that Rishi Dhamala has been released after the government withdrew the case against him. What follows is what came into my mind as afterthought. Before I start this piece talking about the rule of the law I want to declare that I do not have a degree in law. And still I am venturing to write this up because I believe the rule of law is something that affects everyone and therefore everyone should have the right to express his or her opinion on it.
State of the state
Right now our state is in a real chaotic state. Nepal is in fact an endangered nation as of now and if you call Nepal a failed state, I believe the only ones who would not agree are those who are in state power right now. Not unexpectedly!
Why is it like this? Well obviously there are problems at more than one level. the lethargy of the power hungry people ruling the country is clear to see in the lack of enthusiasm in the website of the National Planning Commission, where the last update seems to be the news that a new blah blah blah has been appointed the vice-chairman. And that's some months now. Anyway enthusiasm is either in the streets or in the dias where the political players of the country can talk non-stop about how bad the other politician is, and how wrong the other political parties are in hampering the peace process. Shameful is the word that comes to mind but the sense feels not strong enough. The direction of shameful but way beyond, perhaps towards the end of the scale.
Anyway, because policy makers are the way they are and politicians are not different, hope has transformed itself into the swastika stamp we are allowed to put by the side of a name or an election symbol. And there too they literally buy our votes thus buying our hopes and playing with them, hurting them, at times killing them, making out of us frustrated, desperate humans who have nothing to lose and so would do naything for anything- including killing someone for a couple of thousand rupees etc...It hurts!
And that is the state of the state in terms of civic sense that has emerged as the predominant mentality.
Is there a starting point?
Bettering the state of the state to allow hope to flourish and live, and rights to bloom, enthusiasm to colour life to the brilliance it is worth is still a dream. And then one could ask is there a way we could walk towards the dream? That demands disentangling the complexity of the state of the state and trying to resolve into pieces that could be dealt with. And the one thing that we should perhaps start with is the establishment of the rule of law. Easier said than done, but it is simple, well if we were to be honest and true to ourselves.
The rule of law
In an ideal world where humans rise up to super consciousness, we would perhaps all achieve the higher state and perhaps the ultimate truth is the same such that all of us in the higher state would believe in the same truths. As a corollary, we would thus believe in the same principles to be the governing principles and would therefore possibly not need the laws to be written. But in a world of limited resources and competition everywhere, life becomes a game, a war. And then we need laws and a referee. It sounds simple and it really is simple. Looking at the way Western Europe has tranformed itself from a war-torn, valueless, brutal society to one of the ebst social systems in the world in a span of around fifty years since the second world war time speaks volumes for what can be achieved. We just need to stick to the basic and the basic is that we let the law rule. We need to accept this because in a world struggling to secure the basic needs of life, individual values may differ, which is fine, but to an extent where clashes emerge between inviduals, and groups of individuals. And for survival curiously seems to be the goal for even the most desperate of souls (with exceptions that are almost negligible), desperate heads fail to see reason and logic and naturally give in to the temptations of crime. And thus crimes happen and then to cover them more crimes, and guilt and crime...the cycle never stops.
Where do we stop the cycle and how? There are two things here. The first is that we stop the cycle in the present, wherever it is. We just stop the cycle of crime, guilt, anger, desperation. And to stop it we use two things- one written the other not. The unwritten one is forgiveness on the part of all of us. We will not keep grudges and we shall try to forget the bitterness of the past and try to keep ourselves focussed for the now. For we live in the now. Getting stuck in the past makes us stale and we start stinking of death...
The written one is going to be the law. We will use the rule of law to restrain ourselves, whatever our past.
Getting there
Tough ask it is. For how can I forget what that Maoist did to my grandfather? Or how can I forgive that guy who almost killed me? Well we can try. For if we want to get out of it we have to start at some point. Else we will be living our lives for revenge. Pity it would be.
The rule of the law demands simply that we write the law down and follow it. That's it. Writing the law is no big deal really. For there are plenty of examples of laws that work. And we could just take one of them, start working with that one and change it in due course of course so that our law lives in the now. Once we have the law written we need to follow it. And that is where we have to work very hard too.
Consistency is key
If we want to establish a rule of the law, consistency is key. And that has to start at the government level. Governments may change but the way the rule of law is interpreted should not. We should not be calling someone a culprit and then the next day he buys us a lollypop and we start calling him a saint. We should stop doing this. Once we call someone a culprit a channel should start where the accused comes into the hands of the law and the law shall decide in courts of the law as to whether the accusation was justified. This has to start. And we the people should tell our governments that they should do this. They must.
Now Rishi Dhamala was accused of possessing arms and was held. The government took back the charges and has released him. This is a case of the government stepping into the territory of the judiciary. Once the government charges someone the case should be dealt with in the court. And even if the government wants to withdraw the charges that should be done in the court of justice. Imagine the cost of arresting someone. The cost of maintaining a cell.
How mercilessly they play with our money, these politicians, and how shamelessly we turn our faces away and keep mum if it was a political party we voted for. This is what has to change. We need ourselves to be objective. Else we can all apply for DV visas or the like and leave our country to rot.
raktim.nepali@gmail.com
Monday 21 September 2009
Tuesday 15 September 2009
Who said federalism?
The erasure of monarchy in Nepal was quite a surprise for a number of reasons.
For one it was the lineage of someone who had united petty kingdoms of largely feudalistic nature into a national identity. Not to forget Prithvi Narayan Shah is even now still talked of and we Nepalis like to talk of his statement of Nepal being a yam between two boulders.
Secondly, monarchy was at the top of the nation for most of the last near three hundred years, and in the least had a firm base in the bureaucracy and a strong influence in the military institution of the country. Moreover the king had the status of the Hindu lord Vishnu not only in formal announcements but also in the mentality of the majority of the rural masses.
Thirdly the Nepali monarchy being the only Hindu king (thus making Nepal the only Hindu kingdom in the world) Nepal was and still is at the centre of attention of radical and non-radical Hindu organisations worldwide who believe in strengthening religious identity in a world dominated more and more by silent growths of religious polarisation. For an emerging superpower India, still largely dominated at the political leadership by people calling themselves Hindus and declaring muslim Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. as the cause of the all worldly problems, the existence of a Hindu monarchy under it's shades was a symbolic representation of power in South Asia.
...and still monarchy was erased from Nepal.
Fair enough. The issue of deleting monarchy was brought in and pushed by the Maoists who in their own words succeeded in bringing the then establishment on its knees and even won popular elections. So if one adds these up, one could say that the monarchy was released with the voice of the majority of the population. That said, a much fairer approach would have been to ask the people individually and let them decide. Frankly asking them- "Should we keep the king or kick him out of the system?" and collecting the opinions of people rather than letting the constituent assembly that appears more and more like a herd of untrustworthy, ambiguously-speaking, power-hungry people decide for the people.
Anyway, it is conceivable that many people (at least among those who were lucky enough to make their voices heard) were not happy with the king and his ways. Especially the latest king. The news of his son driving wildly in congested streets and killing someone, the mysteries behind the palace massacre and the failure of the king to make a believable statement to the incidents, past history of his being involved in the Namita-Sumita case, and other cases of smuggling etc...all these had added up to a bitter feeling of the people towards the institution of monarchy itself. With the Maoists wanting to see something palpable as a result of their decade long war, and with the corrupt political faces and structures also riding on the anti-monarchy waves of time, erasure of monarchy became inevitable. All problems in Nepal till then were declared to be because of the monarchy and monarchy was erased. We all celebrated with enthusiasm and were made to believe that now the monarchy is gone everything will automatically get better.
Whether things have gotten better or not is a different issue and not the topic of this discussion. But as if removal of monarchy and therewith its social and political influences were not a big deal to gett o terms with, the same old politicians (most of whose records of corruption are not difficult to find) and the governance-inexperienced Maoist leadership which for a positive did in fact lead people in desperation, but on the negative side was very ineffective (ten years and over ten thousand dead, the country full of weapons, the chaos afterwards- an absolute political failure unless they declare their aim was to bring about this state of anarchy) brought about the idea of a federal structure in Nepal without asking the people, without even talking to them, without holding enough discussions. This is a fatal blow to democracy.
Here is why.
No I am not saying federalism would be a fatal blow to democracy in our country. But the way it has been brought out as an issue is. If we go back to the basics, democracy simply means giving major issues to the people to decide. And nowhere do I feel that we have been asked if we want federalism. Rather the political centres in cooperation with their "intellectual circles" came up with the idea and each one of them has actually in their mind frame split the country into federal units. Oh what fantasy is this? Now let's be honest. We all know what these intellectuals have contributed to our failed nation, don't we?
Not only did they not ask people about the issue but are now making people fight against each other in support of this or the other way of dividing the country. And guess what? We have been thrown dust in the face and we have in fact started advocating for this or the other party's model of dividing the country depending on which political party we sympathise or which one would give my son or your uncle a job. Now this is a terribly undemocratic practice. And I would like to urge all of us to please seriously think about the issue. We need to learn to stand up above individual and family interests in order to preserve democracy in the country. If I decide to follow Mr. Parmananda Jha's anti-supreme court activity because he is from the Madhes, and you decide to continue protesting in the streets saying the president needs to be removed, I don't suppose we will be going much longer as a nation. What do we think?
Let us discuss issues. Let us talk about issues based on our understanding and not based on what political parties that we "have been supporting since generations" say. Let us be objective and ask our leaders to be objective.
And for now, for all the seriousness behind the issue, let us ask ourselves- who said federalism? Should the people not be explained what federalism is, and asked whether they want it?
raktim.nepali@gmail.com
For one it was the lineage of someone who had united petty kingdoms of largely feudalistic nature into a national identity. Not to forget Prithvi Narayan Shah is even now still talked of and we Nepalis like to talk of his statement of Nepal being a yam between two boulders.
Secondly, monarchy was at the top of the nation for most of the last near three hundred years, and in the least had a firm base in the bureaucracy and a strong influence in the military institution of the country. Moreover the king had the status of the Hindu lord Vishnu not only in formal announcements but also in the mentality of the majority of the rural masses.
Thirdly the Nepali monarchy being the only Hindu king (thus making Nepal the only Hindu kingdom in the world) Nepal was and still is at the centre of attention of radical and non-radical Hindu organisations worldwide who believe in strengthening religious identity in a world dominated more and more by silent growths of religious polarisation. For an emerging superpower India, still largely dominated at the political leadership by people calling themselves Hindus and declaring muslim Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. as the cause of the all worldly problems, the existence of a Hindu monarchy under it's shades was a symbolic representation of power in South Asia.
...and still monarchy was erased from Nepal.
Fair enough. The issue of deleting monarchy was brought in and pushed by the Maoists who in their own words succeeded in bringing the then establishment on its knees and even won popular elections. So if one adds these up, one could say that the monarchy was released with the voice of the majority of the population. That said, a much fairer approach would have been to ask the people individually and let them decide. Frankly asking them- "Should we keep the king or kick him out of the system?" and collecting the opinions of people rather than letting the constituent assembly that appears more and more like a herd of untrustworthy, ambiguously-speaking, power-hungry people decide for the people.
Anyway, it is conceivable that many people (at least among those who were lucky enough to make their voices heard) were not happy with the king and his ways. Especially the latest king. The news of his son driving wildly in congested streets and killing someone, the mysteries behind the palace massacre and the failure of the king to make a believable statement to the incidents, past history of his being involved in the Namita-Sumita case, and other cases of smuggling etc...all these had added up to a bitter feeling of the people towards the institution of monarchy itself. With the Maoists wanting to see something palpable as a result of their decade long war, and with the corrupt political faces and structures also riding on the anti-monarchy waves of time, erasure of monarchy became inevitable. All problems in Nepal till then were declared to be because of the monarchy and monarchy was erased. We all celebrated with enthusiasm and were made to believe that now the monarchy is gone everything will automatically get better.
Whether things have gotten better or not is a different issue and not the topic of this discussion. But as if removal of monarchy and therewith its social and political influences were not a big deal to gett o terms with, the same old politicians (most of whose records of corruption are not difficult to find) and the governance-inexperienced Maoist leadership which for a positive did in fact lead people in desperation, but on the negative side was very ineffective (ten years and over ten thousand dead, the country full of weapons, the chaos afterwards- an absolute political failure unless they declare their aim was to bring about this state of anarchy) brought about the idea of a federal structure in Nepal without asking the people, without even talking to them, without holding enough discussions. This is a fatal blow to democracy.
Here is why.
No I am not saying federalism would be a fatal blow to democracy in our country. But the way it has been brought out as an issue is. If we go back to the basics, democracy simply means giving major issues to the people to decide. And nowhere do I feel that we have been asked if we want federalism. Rather the political centres in cooperation with their "intellectual circles" came up with the idea and each one of them has actually in their mind frame split the country into federal units. Oh what fantasy is this? Now let's be honest. We all know what these intellectuals have contributed to our failed nation, don't we?
Not only did they not ask people about the issue but are now making people fight against each other in support of this or the other way of dividing the country. And guess what? We have been thrown dust in the face and we have in fact started advocating for this or the other party's model of dividing the country depending on which political party we sympathise or which one would give my son or your uncle a job. Now this is a terribly undemocratic practice. And I would like to urge all of us to please seriously think about the issue. We need to learn to stand up above individual and family interests in order to preserve democracy in the country. If I decide to follow Mr. Parmananda Jha's anti-supreme court activity because he is from the Madhes, and you decide to continue protesting in the streets saying the president needs to be removed, I don't suppose we will be going much longer as a nation. What do we think?
Let us discuss issues. Let us talk about issues based on our understanding and not based on what political parties that we "have been supporting since generations" say. Let us be objective and ask our leaders to be objective.
And for now, for all the seriousness behind the issue, let us ask ourselves- who said federalism? Should the people not be explained what federalism is, and asked whether they want it?
raktim.nepali@gmail.com
Wednesday 9 September 2009
Thinking of Children
Everyday the sun rises. Some children in my country wake up and go to school
1. some go to private boarding school and their parents get the money back from their employers
2. some go to a government school where hopefully teachers are there to tell them something
Those who don't:
1. have to take care of their younger siblings while their parents go to work hoping someday to be able to send their children to school OR
2. are lying in their death bed waiting for an Armyman or a Maoist health worker, or just anyone with some knowledge of health before this dehydrated, undernourished body is left by the soul OR
3. hope mother will cook some food so they can put something in their tummy before they go to work with their parents, sometimes in fields that are a couple of hours of barefooted walk though raw mountains, sometimes at the bend on a busy uphill street where buses and trucks generously let loose of their exhausts making the stones they have beaten appear black OR
4. are alone at home, knowing not what to do, wiating for a couple of their friends to come to them ,hopefully one of them with a ball made of old socks or a dandi-biyo set. Lord life is no fun sitting alone at home having nothing to do OR
5. are trying to put some of the few sukas and mohars into their pocket with the remaining left hand (how many of these would I need to buy a rasbari?), lest their master comes and picks up all the money and leaves them with the empty plate to beg for the midday meal and threaten to cut the tongue off too if the complaining continued OR
6. are falling asleep waiting at some of the public steps near Hanumandhoka, flies savouring on the cuts and bruises that they have collected through their day's work in the city OR
7. are busy selling ground nuts at a bus stop or newspapers inside a bus OR
8. are working at a huge construction site waiting for the next karahi of sand and cement, or bending the rods or filtering the sand, hoping some day they will be able to build a house for themselves OR
9. are playing horses with a similarly aged son in the master household (have to be serious, a bad horse gets a beating- of course) while the masters are at work and their son doesn't go to school because of an morning-only stomachache OR
10. are walking from the back of a tyampoo to the front, crying, telling the driver that the two men running there in that direction, just beat him up and looted all the money that had been collected as fares OR
11. are exploring their body (what's that hole you got and what's this stick i got?) in a dark corner in a carpet factory they work and live in that has been running almost idle OR
12. are wondering at the shiny, slippery walls with colorful flowers as they take a shower with fine foam (not eye-burning dallo sabun this time) in a hotel room where a very kind lady lives of whom friends said she gave a shower, then massaged you with oil, you massaged her too, fed you with good food and even gave you some money at the end of it. And yes, she even took pictures of yours alone and together with her OR
13. are sitting with seniors rolling gaanja on a leaf and learning the skills of becoming a fighter for the new Nepal OR
14. are searching for plastic inside rotten overspilled waste containers, plastic to sell and make some money with OR
15....
...and I stand here in front of my warderobe wondering what dress I should be wearing today. As I think of chidlren I can't help being proud of my sense of social responsibility (In fact I have given a village boy work, he lives with us and we send him to school too. We have even given him a separate space. He has his own room under the stairs and unlike most other miserly, nasty people, we have even put a glass window on the outer wall so he can have some daylight). He is not good at cooking, he is not good at washing clothes clean, he is very bad at cleaning the toilet (leaves stains) and the bathroom (slips and falls once in a while- last time we even paid the costs of the fracture of his arm he caused by falling), he is not good at brushing our shoes, he is not good at ironing our clothes (my wife sometimes has to redo some of hers herself), and still we are keeping him because we want to contribute something to help children in need in our country. He doesn't seem to acknowledge our sense of social responsibility but we are giving him a chance. Hopefully he will learn and not waste this golden opportunity he has been given by our generosity.
Are you a proud person with a sense of social responsibility like mine? Is our minister of child welfare a proud person, like me, helping children in need?
Let's hope not...
raktim.nepali@gmail.com
1. some go to private boarding school and their parents get the money back from their employers
2. some go to a government school where hopefully teachers are there to tell them something
Those who don't:
1. have to take care of their younger siblings while their parents go to work hoping someday to be able to send their children to school OR
2. are lying in their death bed waiting for an Armyman or a Maoist health worker, or just anyone with some knowledge of health before this dehydrated, undernourished body is left by the soul OR
3. hope mother will cook some food so they can put something in their tummy before they go to work with their parents, sometimes in fields that are a couple of hours of barefooted walk though raw mountains, sometimes at the bend on a busy uphill street where buses and trucks generously let loose of their exhausts making the stones they have beaten appear black OR
4. are alone at home, knowing not what to do, wiating for a couple of their friends to come to them ,hopefully one of them with a ball made of old socks or a dandi-biyo set. Lord life is no fun sitting alone at home having nothing to do OR
5. are trying to put some of the few sukas and mohars into their pocket with the remaining left hand (how many of these would I need to buy a rasbari?), lest their master comes and picks up all the money and leaves them with the empty plate to beg for the midday meal and threaten to cut the tongue off too if the complaining continued OR
6. are falling asleep waiting at some of the public steps near Hanumandhoka, flies savouring on the cuts and bruises that they have collected through their day's work in the city OR
7. are busy selling ground nuts at a bus stop or newspapers inside a bus OR
8. are working at a huge construction site waiting for the next karahi of sand and cement, or bending the rods or filtering the sand, hoping some day they will be able to build a house for themselves OR
9. are playing horses with a similarly aged son in the master household (have to be serious, a bad horse gets a beating- of course) while the masters are at work and their son doesn't go to school because of an morning-only stomachache OR
10. are walking from the back of a tyampoo to the front, crying, telling the driver that the two men running there in that direction, just beat him up and looted all the money that had been collected as fares OR
11. are exploring their body (what's that hole you got and what's this stick i got?) in a dark corner in a carpet factory they work and live in that has been running almost idle OR
12. are wondering at the shiny, slippery walls with colorful flowers as they take a shower with fine foam (not eye-burning dallo sabun this time) in a hotel room where a very kind lady lives of whom friends said she gave a shower, then massaged you with oil, you massaged her too, fed you with good food and even gave you some money at the end of it. And yes, she even took pictures of yours alone and together with her OR
13. are sitting with seniors rolling gaanja on a leaf and learning the skills of becoming a fighter for the new Nepal OR
14. are searching for plastic inside rotten overspilled waste containers, plastic to sell and make some money with OR
15....
...and I stand here in front of my warderobe wondering what dress I should be wearing today. As I think of chidlren I can't help being proud of my sense of social responsibility (In fact I have given a village boy work, he lives with us and we send him to school too. We have even given him a separate space. He has his own room under the stairs and unlike most other miserly, nasty people, we have even put a glass window on the outer wall so he can have some daylight). He is not good at cooking, he is not good at washing clothes clean, he is very bad at cleaning the toilet (leaves stains) and the bathroom (slips and falls once in a while- last time we even paid the costs of the fracture of his arm he caused by falling), he is not good at brushing our shoes, he is not good at ironing our clothes (my wife sometimes has to redo some of hers herself), and still we are keeping him because we want to contribute something to help children in need in our country. He doesn't seem to acknowledge our sense of social responsibility but we are giving him a chance. Hopefully he will learn and not waste this golden opportunity he has been given by our generosity.
Are you a proud person with a sense of social responsibility like mine? Is our minister of child welfare a proud person, like me, helping children in need?
Let's hope not...
raktim.nepali@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)