Patan, I have long mentioned that I am in the West. Thats why I claim to have seen a civilized society. Went school in here so found how this society was formed and difficulties during the formation. Yes I am a capitalist. I have a big house, luxurious car and great lifestyle. I worked hard for it. And I want all the poor Nepalese people to have what I have( Well some of them are lot better than me). Or at least have a shot if they are willing to put the effort. But such opportunity does not exist in Nepal. Why?
  It has been twenty years since democracy. How long is this political drama going to last? When is it going to end? I don't want Nepal to be in this situation ten years from now. When I comment about Nepal's future, I am not commenting from the perspective of an American Capitalist, I am commenting from the perspective of a broke ass Nepali nigga who is having hard time making ends meet. Honestly, I personally don't need anything from the government. I have it all made. But some poor person from Nepali village might appreciate some help from the government. And I hope our government becomes healthy enough to help that person. 
  I admit I have had great opportunities in my life. Scholarship, good education, great family support. That doesn't make me an opportunist. I worked hard for it. I just hope any Nepali who works as hard as me gets the same opportunity that I had. I comment on these threads because of my unconditional love for Nepal and its people. Because I care.

Seems like Eastidaz knows more than supreme court.  When supreme court themselves has made a decision on the murder and why the murder was made he himself is advocating that it was political murder.

If it was a political murder there would not have been such hue and cry.  if it was not a personal matter then maoist should give a reason why it was political murder.  Remember there was not one but two murder. 

The brother of ujjan was merely killed because he give statmeent to police that  Dhungel killed his brother. That too after 4 years. Anybody with a little mind would know this was not a political murder.  his brother was merely killed as a personal revenge for his statement against police.

Just because you are  from different ideoogy congress, communist, RPP than maoist does not give enough ground for someone to kill and brand it as a political murder.

    No quiero, what about the legality of the decision to give presidential pardon to Dhungel. Let's not talk about murder nor the wisdom of reaching the decision to give presidential pardon. Let's not talk about Dhungel either. Let's not talk about me either. Lets talk about the decision to give presidential pardon to Dhungel in specific. Did the ministry act within its rights as vested by the constitution of Nepal by overriding the decision of the supreme court. Keep your judgements and emotions within yourself. Don't brand me anything. Try to answer my question according to its merit.
   Supreme court is supposed to uphold the constitution at all times but it's decision is not always final though it may be right. We have administrative branch( Ministry) and executive branch( President) within our constitution as well. I am not Mr. Know all. I am willing to learn.

he is such a ashwhole....he is the bad PM of nepal....

You claim yourself to be educated and willing to learn but it does not seem like you're a reasonable person when you accuse anyone not agreeing with you of being Sujata's paltu, or dragging someone father into the discussion.

You may be rich as you claim but your mentality is still cheap as long as you can't respect others opinions.

Eastsidaz,

There are first few things we need to clear about maoist, then only we can decide how to give economic stability to Nepal.

Do you remeber that one of the 40 points Maoist had asked to implement before starting so called civil war.Sixth point was "The domination of foreign capital in Nepali industries, business and finance should be stopped."Now suddennly how they think investing foreign capital (BIPPA) is good for the country. Do you still thnik that they will had same view for BIPPA, if was signed my UML, Congress government.

Same for Union related band in factories. When they are out of goverment, they think at it is okay to to do bandh in indrustries and with in first few months, their finance minster says there should agreement between unions that there should not be bandh for few more years.

Dont you think, it was civil war what made all our brother/sister to flee to middle east countries. So what's the point of making noise abt it.

And if we agree, because of political situation we should not dig at these cases. And why only Dhungel was aksed for pardoned, and still other acocomplices are still in Jail. So does that mean law will be different, if you are lower level party cadre and high level cadre. Okay we will try to forget all these issue, do you think maoist will abide the rules and bring Kali prasad kham and Prabu shah under the rules of law. If you think it was opposition who are trying to unsettle the goverment because of this issue. Did you realize that its BRB government, who choses this critical time for this pardon.

And if they are able to get pardon for Dhungel, then you know how justice is done in Nepal, it will be "Najir" for all political crime.

Also Please go through the Geneva convenntions porotocols and compare was it followed in Nepal Civil Wars ( I still not call it as civil). As I am not affilated with aby political party, I dont give damn that Gyanedra, Prachanda, Nepal, Oli, BRB, Kattuwal will go to international court.

And for your " this decision was singlehandedly done by BRB, it was done by the party ". Copying from Ojaswi "A  Leader is one who leads not one who follows"

And this is not the way, we can provide economic stability

'काम गर्नै नदिएपछि' राजीनामा

रामचन्द्र भट्ट, काठमाडौं, कात्तिक ३०- सुधार गर्न नदिने समूहको दबाबमा परेर राजीनामा गरेका विद्युत प्राधिकरणका कार्यकारी निर्देशक दीपेन्द्रनाथ शर्मालाई सरकारले पदमुक्त गरेको छ। उनलाई पदमुक्तसँगै सरकारले कार्यकारी निर्देशक नियुक्त गर्न फेरि पनि खुला प्रक्रिया रोजेको छ।

घाटामा गएको संस्थान सुधार्न उच्च व्यवस्थापक मात्र खुला प्रतिस्पर्धाबाट छानेर हँुँदो रहेनछ भन्ने पछिल्लो उदाहरण प्राधिकरण बनेको छ। कर्मचारीको मनोवृत्ति नफेरिने हो भने सरकारी संस्थान सुध्रन नसक्ने गरी भासिसकेका रहेछन् भन्ने पुष्टि प्राधिकरणले गरेको छ।

प्राधिकरण सुधार्ने आँट र योजना बोकेर छिरेका कार्यकारी निर्देशक शर्माले साढे तीन महिनासम्म बलबुता लगाउँदा पनि पार लगाउन सकेनन्। सुधार गर्नुको बदला सुविधाका लागि कर्मचारीको दबाब आइरहेपछि उनी आफैं मासिक साढे तीन लाख रुपैयाँको जागिर छाडेर साढे २० हजार तलब पाइने सहसचिवमै फर्केका छन्।

'संस्था सुधार्न पहिलेदेखि अनियमित रूपमा दिइँदै आएको भत्तासुविधा कटौती गर्न सुरु गरेदेखि नै म कर्मचारीको आँखामा तारो भएजस्तो लागेको थियो,' शर्माले भने। सबैभन्दा बढी प्रहार उनीमाथि दसैंमा गाडीपूजाको नाममा भइरहेको फजुल खर्च रोक्न खोज्दा ड्राइभरहरूकै असहयोगबाट सुरु भयो।

युनियनहरूमा कर्मचारीप्रति को प्रतिबद्ध भन्ने प्रतिस्पर्धा रहेको गुनासो उनले उच्च व्यवस्थापन बैठकमा पहिलेदेखि नै गर्थे। कर्मचारीलाई अनुचित काजभत्ता, फिल्डमै नगई टिएडिए लिने पद्धतिलाई उनले सुधार्ने प्रयास गरे।

अघिल्ला ऊर्जामन्त्री गोकर्ण विष्टको समयमा नियुक्त भएको हुँदा त्यतिखेर मन्त्रालयका तर्फबाट उनले निकै ठूलो भरथेग र सहयोग पाएका थिए। नयाँ सरकार गठनसँगै पहिलेजस्तो मन्त्रालयबाट उनले सहयोग पाउन सकेनन्।

'अहिलेका मन्त्रीबाट अप्ठेरो हुनेगरी अनुचित दबाब त आएको होइन, तर मैले काम गर्ने वातावरण प्राधिकरणभित्रैबाट पाइनँ,' उनले भने। ऊर्जामन्त्री पोष्टबहादुर बोगटीले प्रत्यक्ष केही नगरे माओवादी निकट कर्मचारी संगठनको उनीमाथि ठूलो दबाब थियो। त्यस्तै अघिल्ला सरकारहरूले नियुक्त गरेका ज्यालादारी कर्मचारीको आन्दोलन घोषणाले समेत प्राधिकरणभित्र समस्या ल्याएको थियो।

आधिकारिक ट्रेड युनियनको निर्वाचन तोकिसकेको अवस्थामा सरुवा, बढुवा, नयाँ नियुक्ति गर्न नमिल्ने अवस्थामा केही कर्मचारी युनियनले त्यसका लागि दबाब दिएका थिए। यो दबाब पूरा नहुने भएपछि दुईवटा कर्मचारी युनियनले चुनाव गर्नै नदिने घोषणा गरेर उनलाई अप्ठेरो पारेका थिए।

'अरु युनियनबाट चुनाव हुन नदिने घोषणा गरेको भए त्यति अप्ठेरो हुने थिएन होला,' प्राधिकरण स्रोतले भन्यो। प्रधानमन्त्रीकै पार्टीनिकट कर्मचारी युनियनले चुनाव गराउनै नहुने अडान राख्दै 'जे पनि हुने' धम्की दिएपछि उनी राजीनामा दिने मनस्थितिमा पुगेका हुन्।

यो समस्या उनले ऊर्जामन्त्री बोगटीसँग राखेका थिए। मन्त्रीले 'सबैलाई विश्वासमा लिएर मिलाएर जानुस्' भनेपछि शर्मा निरास भए।

प्राधिकरणमा कांग्रेस, माओवदी, एमाले र राप्रपा निकट कर्मचारी युनियन छन्। यीमध्ये कांग्रेस र एमाले निकट युनियनले मंसिर २६ गते चुनाव नभए विरोध कार्यक्रम ल्याउने घोषणा गरेका थिए भने माओवादी र राप्रपा निकट युनियनले चुनाव सार्न दबाब दिँदै आएका थिए।

प्राधिकरणका कर्मचारी युनियनको प्रवृत्तिदेखि ऊर्जामन्त्री बोगटीसमेत सन्तुष्ट छैनन्। कर्मचारी युनियनहरूले काममा सहयोग गर्नेभन्दा आकर्षक ठाउँमा सरुवा, ज्यालादारीमा नियुक्ति गर्नेतर्फ धेरै चासो देखाएपछि ऊर्जामन्त्री पनि चिढिएका थिए। मन्त्रालय स्रोतका अनुसार विवादमा नआउने स्वभाव भएका मन्त्री बोगटीले पछिल्लो समयमा प्राधिकरणका कर्मचारी युनियनका पदाधिकारीलाई भेट्नै छाडेका थिए। (A  Leader is one who convinces and leads not the one who follows)

प्रतिस्पर्धाबाट आएका कार्यकारी निर्देशकलाई अर्को असहयोग प्राधिकरणकै उच्च अधिकारीबाट भयो। उनीसँगै कार्यकारी निर्देशकका निम्ति प्रतिस्पर्धा गरेका महाप्रबन्धक रामेश्वर यादवले भदौ १ गते भएको वार्षिक उत्सव कार्यक्रममा आफू कार्यकारी निर्देशक हुन नपाएको तीतो पोख्दै असहयोग गर्ने संकेत दिएका थिए।

'बिष्ट मन्त्री हुँदासम्म प्राधिकरणका माथिल्लादेखि तल्ला तहका कर्मचारीले मुन्टो उठाउन सकेका थिएनन्,' एक उच्च अधिकारीले भने, 'बोगटी मन्त्री भएर आएपछि उनलाई असहयोग गर्ने अधिकारीको हुलै बन्यो।'

स्रोतका अनुसार यही जमातले आधिकारिक ट्रेड युनियनको चुनाव गराउने र नगराउने दुवै पक्षका कर्मचारीलाई उचालेको थियो। यही आधिकारिक ट्रेड युनियनको निर्वाचनको विवादै उनको राजीनामाको कारण भयो।

उनले राजीनामा गरेको भोलिपल्टै ट्रेड युनियनको चुनाव माघमा गर्न चारै युनियन सहमत भएका छन्। भोलिपल्टै यस्तो सहमति हुनुले उनलाई असफल गराउन प्राधिकरणका युनियनदेखि व्यवस्थापनका उच्च अधिकारी नै संलग्न थिए भन्ने आरोप पुष्टि भएको छ।
बिजुली चुहावट विरुद्ध सुरु राष्ट्रिय अभियान समेत रोकिएको थियो। यो अभियानले अहिले २९ प्रतिशतको चुहावट आउँदो पुसभित्र २० प्रतिशतमा सीमित पार्ने लक्ष्य राखेको थियो। प्राधिकरणकै उच्च अधिकारीदेखि लिएर तल्ला तहका कर्मचारीको समेत यसमा सक्रियता छैन।

मन्त्रिपरिषद्ले शर्माको राजीनामा स्वीकृत गरी प्रतिस्पर्धाबाट फेरि कार्यकारी निर्देशक छनौट गर्न ऊर्जा मन्त्रालयलाई निर्देशन दिएको छ। ऊर्जामन्त्री बोगटीले सोमबार संसदीय समितिमा उपस्थित भएर प्रतिस्पर्धाबाट नियुक्त गर्ने पद्धतिबाट पछि नहट्ने बताए। प्राधिकरणको अहिलेको अवस्थाले प्रतिस्पर्धाबाट कार्यकारी निर्देशक ल्याएर मात्र समस्या समाधान नहुने स्पष्ट भएको छ।

पूर्व ऊर्जा राज्यमन्त्री रामजी शर्माले आइतबार महसुल निर्धारण आयोगको छलफलमा भनेका थिए, 'प्राधिकरण सुधार्न कर्मचारीले पनि त्याग गर्न जरुरी छ।' साढे २७ अर्ब नोक्सानी भएको, टाट पल्टने अवस्थामा पुगेको विद्युत प्राधिकरणमा कर्मचारीको सुविधाभोगी प्रवृत्ति, युनियनको चलखेललगायत नहट्दा नयाँ कार्यकारी निर्देशक पनि सफल हुने सम्भावना छैन।

   Collegefoot and Patan, I have resorted to namecalling only after the other person did it first. You can peruse this thread and others and find out. Patan called me maobadi and in return I called him Sujata ko paltu. Tit for tat aka Eye for an Eye.
   Patan, I have requested participants in this thread to keep their judgement of character to themselves. Still you call me having a cheap mentality. My mentality and character has nothing to do with the topic in discussion. This topic is not about me. Let that be understood. I am not Maobadi's Attorney nor Sujata's so I can't defend all of their actions. I am just expressing my two cents on the topic that this thread pinpoints to - Ministerial decision to give presidential pardon to Dhungel. Collegefoot judged me as being conservative. But I think all my posts confirms my practicality in real life. Let's be adults and discuss like adults.
   Back to the topic, my question to Patan and others is: Do you question the legality of the ministerial decision to override Supreme Court decision and grant prestidential pardon to Dhungel? Has our constitution been violated in this case?Is Supreme court's decision alway final? Let it be clear that the question doesn't address the righteousness of the decision just its validity. Let's not get involved emotionally. I have put forward the questions clearly. Read word per word and come up with an answer. Let's not resort to mudslingling anymore.
  Khoik, yes law is not same for everyone( though as much as I wish it to be equal). That's the practical part of it. Though theoretically it claims equality for all. We live in a real world and it's not ideal. Yes presidential pardon is not meant for everyone. It is usually awarded to friends and family. It happens in the US too. The BIPPA thing, I think Baburam did the right thing by moving away from his stance. In the 40 points treaty, they did reject foreign investment. But when you are in the government, you know how it works. He may have concluded that FDI is vital to Nepal's economy. Well like any educated person, one should be able to adapt according to time and needs. In this case, I think he changed his stance for the better. 

Eastsidaz supporters of maoists are called maobadis so I called you that. So it was a valid context.

If one does not support maoist one does not become a congressi. That's the fallacy of your reasoning and logic.

Patan, so you admit that you resorted to namecalling first instead of answering my question? As anti-maobadi as you are it makes me believe that you have internal agenda of yourself that will benefit from if Sujata or Oli heads the government.
Finally, what part of 'This thread is not about me' don't you understand and what is your response to the questions I asked you before? Now don't try to hijack the topic and stay within it's scope.
Regarding your theorem, supporter of maobadi are maobadi, here is the corollary: anyone who denigrates maobadi's decision no matter how practical it may be, he/she is either a Sujata's Paltu, Oli's jholabokua or an Indian dalaal.

Eastsidaz you are so stupid and narrow minded.

Why don't you take a minute to think. If someone is anti-maoist, what other sides can he be supporting? 

In your brain the only one who's anti-maoist is Sujata supporter? you make me laugh at your stupidity.

Mero gulo choos mooooog Patan bhatuwa. Personal naban bhanyo manne hoina. Laatko bhoot baatle mandaina bhanya yehi ho.
Maobadile ramro garepani napachne, naramro garda ta kurai chhadau. 

Bhadau ma ankha futeko goru le sadhai hariyo dekchha bhanya yehi ho. Talai goru.

Re-read the corollary, and let me know which category you belong to.

If you don't have the brains to know that anti-maoist is not same as pro congress then you are technically stupid. That is nothing personal or namecalling.

Anyways you resorting to foul mouthing like the murderers you are supporting. Keep it up chump.

 You still don't have answers to my questions, do you? So you acknowledge that the decision to give presidential pardon to Dhungel was within the limits of our constitution. If so, then I rest my case.

This thread is about Baburam's involvement in the ministerial decision to ask for presidential pardon for Dhungel. It is Baburam who chose to be involved in this case by asking for amnesty of criminal who has already been handed verdict by Supreme court. It is not shrestha family who is dragging Baburam to this issue. Do you have any basic idea about cause and effect?


   I find Baburam's retraction from the decision very unlikely hence I hesitate to insist on that. That's the practical side of me. About the politicization of murder during the civil war era, I dont think a full justification was needed to murder an opponent, just a small excuse was enough. And the two wives could have been the very excuse in Ujjan's case.  

I think it is in best interest of everyone including Baburam to retract on this decision. Wow, you think it is okie to murder people and politicize these murder? So having two wives is good excuse to murder someone ?(or intercaste marriage)..who at that time had not even joined Maoist party. It is only later he joined Maoist party.

How can you justify PM decisiot to ask for amnesty for this murder?

Vasudev, finally you are talking. 'I think it is in best interest of everyone including Baburam to retract on this decision' - was the most cognitive answer I could get in this thread. However, you are yet to address the legality of the decision. My question was not about conflict of interest or what action would benefit which interest. I never claimed that the decision was right. A murderer should be punished.  My question was about the legality of the way the decision was reached. Was Nepalese constitution(please do not confuse this with Nepalese Sentiments)  violated? Could you care to respond?

U.N. warns Nepal clemency move will "entrench impunity

"Such decisions will establish a trend to entrench impunity and send the wrong message at the wrong time," said Jyoti Sanghera, head of the U.N. Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner in Nepal (OHCHR-N), in a statement on Friday. "The government should respect Nepal’s judiciary and the rule of law."

source: TrustLaw
http://www.trust.org/trustlaw/news/un-warns-nepal-clemency-move-will-entrench-impunity/


The implications of this decision for the rule of law in Nepal are equally of serious concern. The Interim Constitution specifically mandated that the Government of Nepal is bound by the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, it seems that a cabinet decision is sufficient to overturn a decision rendered by the highest judicial authority, questioning the reality of the independence of judiciary and the balance of power in Nepal.

Needless to say, that decision is also an additional blow to the fundamental democratic principle of equality of all before the law as belonging to a certain political party is sufficient to be cleared from accusations of having committed human rights violations.

source: Asian Human Rights Commission
http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-STM-172-2011

If we go on pardoning those involved in serious crimes in the name of their affiliation in any particular political party, it will raise question on the essence of the would-be formed Truth and Reconciliation Commission," the release said, adding that this act of government will open way to grant amnesty to those involved in gross violation of human rights.    

 

Stating that the Article 2 (3) of the ICCPR 1966 to which Nepal is a state party, there is the right to effective action if civil and political rights of an individual are violated, the release said that it is the right of the State to ensure effective remedy if the state and non-state party involves in the violation and abuse of human rights. Such remedy should identify the violator and take action against him/her and deliver justice to the victim.

 

"Though Article 151 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal states that the Council of Ministers may grant pardons to persons convicted, and suspend, commute or reduce any sentence imposed by any court, special court, military court or by any other judicial or quasi-judicial, or administrative authority or institution, this very provision cannot be interpreted as unlimited and discretionary, the release said, adding," If the provision is interpreted as unlimited discretionary power, there is the risk that perpetrators involved serious crimes under national and international law like extra judicial killing, involuntary disappearance, torture and rape could be pardoned and the perpetrators can escape without punishment."

source:INSEConline.org (the first human rights news portal in Nepal)
http://www.inseconline.org/index.php?type=news&id=9241&lang=en

So here, the provision of amnesty is  the right to effective action if civil and political rights of an individual are violated, the release said that it is the right of the State to ensure effective remedy if the state and non-state party involves in the violation and abuse of human rights which is not the case here. It is actually Shrestha family whose human rights have been violoated as stated by various human rights watchdogs...

Do did u understand the legality of the issue now?

EastSidaz, I am ignorant about these legality issue. I heard that whatever Hitler did was legal too. All holocaust was legal. So, it means that all the nazis should not be persecuted since it was political. And also I think there is a reason behind not letting any felons vote in US, let alone becoming a minister.

 "Though Article 151 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal states that the Council of Ministers may grant pardons to persons convicted, and suspend, commute or reduce any sentence imposed by any court, special court, military court or by any other judicial or quasi-judicial, or administrative authority or institution, this very provision cannot be interpreted as unlimited and discretionary, the release said, adding," If the provision is interpreted as unlimited discretionary power, there is the risk that perpetrators involved serious crimes under national and international law like extra judicial killing, involuntary disappearance, torture and rape could be pardoned and the perpetrators can escape without punishment."
  The highlighted text proves my point. The decision was in no way illegal, though it may be not be in the best interest of Baburam and may not be righteous and definitely not fair to the victim's family. Now interpretators may interpret it in any way so as to serve their interest. I do not want to get into that since I am not a constitutional law expert. Human rights group will never accept this decision because it lets a murderer walk free. Hence I understand the way they have interpreted Article 151 of our Interim Constitution. Moreover, do they have the final say on how our constitution should be interpreted? Do they have the highest authority on how our constitution can be and can not be interpreted?
  Vasudev, anyways I appreciate your cognitive style. This was the kind of response I was expecting from the participants of this thread. My understanding is this move is complicated but legal.

   Goddamn, we are at least 100yrs behind US civilization so I am not sure how we can refer to US Laws. Still US laws are not 100% perfect. So they amend the law every year. Have you heard about the Personhood law lately?
   Everyone knew that OJ Simpson killed his wife, but he went free because he could not be convicted. There was just not enough evidence = OJ Simpson hired the best(most expensive) lawyers in the US who could interpret law like no other. So we both can give examples for each side.
  Well I am not saying Nepal's constitution is perfect. But it is the living and breathing document that we Nepalese must live by for the moment. If we don't like it, we can amend it. I think they are going to write a new Constitution pretty soon by the way. That's where the power of Execeutive, Legislative and Judicial branch gets allotted. If you want something to appear in that constitution, make your voice heard to your representative.