ढुंगेललाई माफीको निर्णय सरकारले फिर्ता नलिने

 

•     
•     
•     
•     

शेखर अधिकारी

०

 

सम्बन्धित समाचार

• कार्तिक २२ , २०६८

  आवश्यक व्यवस्था गरी जग्गा फिर्ताः प्रधानमन्त्री

• कार्तिक २० , २०६८

  सात बुँदे सहमतिपछि पहिलोपटक राष्ट्रपति-प्रधानमन्त्री भेट

• कार्तिक २० , २०६८

  हिँड्दा हिँड्दै प्रधानमन्त्रीको निर्देशन

• कार्तिक १९ , २०६८

  प्रधानमन्त्री मुग्लिङका होटलको छड्केमा

• कार्तिक १४ , २०६८

  'गलत हर्कत गर्नेलाई उम्कन दिइन्न'

• कार्तिक १३ , २०६८

  'मंसिर १४ भित्र संविधानको प्रारम्भिक खाका आउँछ'

• कार्तिक १३ , २०६८

  शीर्ष नेताहरु भन्छन्- '५ वर्षयताकै नजिक पुगियो'

• कार्तिक १२ , २०६८

  घूस लिने विमानस्थल कर्मचारीलाई कारबाही गर्न प्रमको निर्देशन

• कार्तिक १२ , २०६८

  वैद्यपक्षीय नेतालाई मनाउँदै प्रधानमन्त्री

सहयोगी लिङ्कहरू

» एउटै पृष्ठबाट हाम्रा सबै इ-पेपरहरू पाउनुहोस् !

» हाम्रा चिरबिरे पारखीहरूका लागि !

» आफूलाई चाहिएको मितिको मात्र लेख/समाचार पाउनुहोस् !

» चाहिएको मिति/लेखक/वाक्यांश रोजी गर्नोहोस् लेख/समाचारको खोजी !

काठमाडौं, कार्तिक २६ - प्रधानमन्त्री बाबुराम भट्टराईले द्वन्द्वको खेती गर्ने समूहले सभासद् बालकृष्ण ढुङ्गेलको आममाफी प्रकरणलाई उचालेको आरोप लगाएका छन् । उनले आममाफीको निर्णय सोचविचार गरेर गरिएकाले फिर्ता नलिने अडान राखे ।

माल्दिभ्सको अड्डु टापुमा भएको दक्षिण एसियाली क्षेत्रीय सहयोग सङ्गठन (सार्क)को १७ औं शिखर सम्मेलनमा भाग लिएर शनिबार राति स्वदेश फर्किएका प्रधानमन्त्री भट्टराईले त्रिभूवन विमानस्थलमा पत्रकारहरुसँग यस्तो बताएका हुन् ।

‘द्वन्द्वको खेती गरेर डलर भित्र्याउने सानो समूहले यस विषयलाई उचालेको छ,’ सभासद् ढुङ्गेल प्रकरण चर्किएकोप्रति प्रधानमन्त्रीको भनाइ थियो, ‘जिम्मेवार राजनीतिक दल यसको पछि लाग्नुहुन्न ।’ 

ढुङ्गेलको आममाफी विशिष्ट प्रकारको भएको टिप्पणी गर्दै प्रधानमन्त्रीले व्यक्ति–व्यक्तिको मुद्दामा पछि नलाग्न आग्रह गरे । ‘द्वन्द्वमा १५ हजारले ज्यान गुमाएका छन्, व्यक्ति–व्यक्तिको मुद्दामा पछाडी लाग्ने र खोतलेर बदला लिने हो भने यो मुलुकमा कोही पनि बच्ने छैन,’ उनले भने ।

ओखलढुङ्गाका उज्जनकुमार श्रेष्ठको हत्या अभियोगमा सर्वोच्च अदालतले सर्वस्वसहित जन्मकैद सुनाएका सभासद् ढुङ्गेललाई आममाफी दिन सरकारले राष्ट्रपतिसमक्ष सिफारिस गरेपछि यसको चर्को विरोध भएको छ ।

प्रधानमन्त्रीले भने विरोधलाई अन्यथा नलिएको बताए । ‘बहुदलीय प्रक्रियामा सरकारले सोच विचार राखेर निर्णय गर्दछ,’ प्रतिपक्षीको विरोधप्रति उनले भने, ‘प्रतिपक्षीले पनि आलोचना जाहेर गर्नुलाई मैले अन्यथा लिएको छैन ।’

विस्तृत शान्ति सम्झौता र पछिल्लोपटक भएको सात बुँदे सम्झौतामा पनि द्वन्द्वकालका घटनाबारे छानबिन गर्न सत्य निरुपण तथा मेलमिलाप गठन गर्ने खुलाइएको प्रधानमन्त्रीले बताए । यस विषयलाई बढी नगिज्ल्याउन उनले आग्रह गरे ।

प्रधानमन्त्रीले सार्क सम्मेलन आपसी सम्बन्ध विस्तारका लागि फलदायी भएको जानकारी दिए । उनले यसअघि भारत भ्रमणमा भएका सहमतिलाई अगाडि बढाउन भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्रीसँग वार्ता भएको बताए । 

भूटानी प्रधानमन्त्रीसँग शरणार्थी समस्या समाधानबारे मंसिरमै बैठक गर्ने, श्रीलंका र माल्दिभ्समा हवाई सेवा सञ्चालन गर्न, बंगलादेशसँग फुलबारी बन्दरगाह सञ्चालन, पाकिस्तानसँग बन्द व्यापार सुचारु गर्न र अफगानिस्तानसँग नयाँ सम्बन्ध सुरुवात गर्नेबारे छलफल भएको उनले बताए ।

११ सदस्यीय नेपाली टोलीको नेतृत्व गर्दै प्रधानमन्त्री मङ्गलबार माल्दिभ्स गएका थिए । सम्मेलन शुक्रबार १० बुँदे अड्डु घोषणापत्र तथा चार सम्झौता गर्दै सम्पन्न भएको थियो । सम्मेलनले आगामी १८ औं शिखर सम्मेलन नेपालमा गर्ने निधो गरेको छ ।

'ढुंगेलको निर्णयमा पुनर्विचार हुँदैन’

Days of reckoning   
  DAMAKANT JAYSHI Myrepublica

The outcome of the murder-convict Bal Krishna Dhungel pardon plea will soon be known. This case also offers some inescapable lessons for all concerned, including Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai. Let me first examine how and why we arrived at this point.

Whether he likes it or not Bhattarai comes across as someone who enjoys the company of murder-convict and murder-accused. So far four people with murder taints have been spotted in his circle. There could be more as media digs into the past record of those in Nepal´s largest-ever cabinet.

Bhattarai inducted three murder-accused in his cabinet (one of them, Prabhu Sah, has already been forced to resign) and is defending party colleague and parliamentarian Dhungel.

The prime minister seems not to have learned any lesson from the Sah fiasco since he has subsequently inducted two more murder-tainted politicians--Suryaman Dong and Om Prakash Yadav Guljari--in the last two cabinet expansions. Is this just his gung-ho attitude or an attempt at a political hara-kiri?

Defending his move to recommend pardon for Dhungel, the PM termed it a right one taken at a right time. I am afraid it is just the opposite. The decision to pardon Dhungel who is yet to honor courts´ orders is wrong on moral as well as legal grounds. It also further entrenches the culture of impunity. Dhungel has been convicted of murdering Ujjan Shrestha in Okhaldhunga district in 1998, just two years after the Maoist ´People´s war´ began.

A letter to the editor in Kantipur daily on Monday claims Dhungel had not even joined the Maoist party at the time. The Okhaldhunga wing of the Maoist party says that since Shrestha had been found "spying" for Nepali Congress, he was "eliminated". If Bhattarai, Dhungel and the party get away with this, expect more "spy" logic behind murders during decade-long insurgency. This is certainly a test case.

Shrestha´s sister and parents say that he was murdered because he married a Brahmin woman whose relatives then sought Dhungel´s help in killing him. The PM doesn´t want Dhungel to serve the prison term that the court has slapped on him. Hence the attempted cover up by terming the case "politically motivated".

It so happens that Dhungel belongs to the Bhattarai camp in the Maoist party, the smallest of the three factions. The support of every single member of this camp is crucial for Bhattarai for present and future battles in the party. This also explains the rationale behind the creation of the largest cabinet ever.

As for the timing of the pardon recommendation, it comes before the formation of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) for which less than two weeks are left as per the recently signed seven-point agreement. (In fact this and the Commission on the Disappeared People have been due for over five years.)
Bhattarai seems to be enjoying the company of murder-accused and convicts. The Dhungel controversy is a wake-up call to put in place safeguards to thwart subversion of justice and protect independence of judiciary.

The rush to protect Dhungel despite pleas from the victim´s family and the two orders from SC asking the government to arrest and send him to prison is not difficult to understand. Bhattarai seems to be forgetting that he is the prime minister of all Nepalis, not just for a select few people who happen to be members of his party.

Party chief Pushpa Kamal Dahal has tried to bail out his beleaguered deputy, claiming the pardon decision had been originally taken when CPN-UML´s Madhav Kumar Nepal was the prime minister. Nepal wasted no time in shooting down the claim.

Even if Dahal were speaking the truth (it is his words against Nepal´s), Nepal apparently backed out later. That was the right thing to do. The president, Dr Ram Baran Yadav, is believed to have asked him and his successor, Jhalanath Khanal, not to proceed. It is very likely that the president gave the same suggestion to Bhattarai who apparently refused to heed it.

Call it power-drunk arrogance, his fondness for Dhungel or his helplessness, the prime minister has no one else to blame for the soup he is in. (Of course, there are suggestions that his party chairman tricked Bhattarai into recommending the pardon.)

One can draw several conclusions from this episode but I will limit my analysis to issues of justice, judiciary and Bhattarai himself. So far as Bhattarai is concerned, none of his recent moves reflect well on him. The PM, who prides himself on responding to people´s concerns, has clearly lost the public pulse. Letters to editor space in major newspapers, the vox pop on TV channels and scathing editorials have all condemned the move.

His reputation for being different from past prime ministers is in tatters and unless he engages in some serious damage-control, he would find it extremely difficult to recover his erstwhile popularity. For this, the Maoist party vice-chairman has to overcome his customary stubbornness in accepting that he could ever be wrong. I am sure he is aware, given his nature to read a lot, that there are already insinuations that he is indeed different from his predecessors—only much worse. Bhattarai better heed this before it is too late.

The Nepal Army top brass is very happy at the turn of events. They have tried to defend their actions during the insurgency, arguing they had acted under Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Control and Punishment) Ordinance (TADO), the anti-terrorism ordinance which, in 2004, replaced the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Punishment and Control) Act or TADA of 2002. Army officials are claiming immunity from prosecution under TADO´s cover, just like the Maoists are seeking the same under "politically motivated" angle. As a result victims would be denied justice.

Since we are in the midst of writing a new constitution, the Bhattarai-Dhungel fiasco is a timely reminder of what we ought to do regarding independence of the judiciary. In the new constitution, the parties—which believe in supremacy of law and natural justice—should incorporate provisions that guarantee and protect the independence of the courts. There should also be a provision that calls for suspension of charge-sheeted public servants (besides bureaucrats), and expulsion from their posts if convicted. It is a disgrace that Dhungel still sits in the Constituent Assembly and the prime minister continues to defend the indefensible.

On Sunday, the Supreme Court issued a stay order on the cabinet recommendation to pardon Dhungel. For the time being, it has prevented a confrontation between the prime minister and the president who has made known through various means that he is not too pleased by the cabinet´s action. Bhattarai should count himself lucky that the SC has provided him a safe-landing option. He should grab it with both hands and withdraw the recommendation to the president.

In case he doesn´t, what should President Yadav do? He must do everything he can to uphold justice. Delay acting on the recommendation or hold it or even refer it to the Supreme Court as lawyers have suggested. Advocate Swagat Nepal has written a brilliant piece in Monday´s edition of Nagarik daily on the history of pardon and what options the president has. Both the president and the prime minister should read that and decide the next course of action.