Dear sons and daughters of Nepal,

We do not really know what the situation is like in our country. We have heard more rumours and less facts; and we have made our own judgement based on those rumours. Our opinions have been divided into almost two halves. One half supporting the King's move and the other half opposing the action. Almost all of us who are fortunate enough to live in the west at this torrid time are capable to think sensibly on this issue.So lets contemplate with the love for the country and citizens in mind now.

Some of us may have been victims of atrocities committed by the Maoists. Some may have suffered because of the corrupted political leaders. And some of us may have been the victim of injustice in the Panchayat era and at present. So we are expressing our vengeance against those who have made us to suffer. And therefore we are divided. The citizens who are educated, who have seen how democray functions, who know the fruits of social justice in a developed society; we are divided. And this is not a good sign for the future. Tommorow, we have to take the burden of Nepal in our shoulders. We have to hand the nation to our next generation. We have to make sure that we can hand over a peaceful and prosperous nation to our children and die. Otherwise we are not different to the previous generation which never got the oppurtunity like us to see the democracy and prosperity of the western world. Our children will blame us if we fail to do better things for our country.So let's try to be impartial, let's forget our personal interest, let's put away our vengeance against both sides of the debate.With a cool mind let's discuss what can we do at best to resolve the current crisis from our part. I will try to give my assement in the next thread on what can we expect in the near future and what is best for the country in the coming days. Please put your thoughts, unbiased and pragmatic, without spilling your anguish and hatred to all the sides- political parties, monarchy and maoists.I hope all of you will take part in this debate very seriously.
Newuser.

India- FIRST DAY IN THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY


The Constituent Assembly met for the first time in New Delhi on 9 December, 1946 in the Constitution Hall which is now known as the Central Hall of Parliament House. Decorated elegantly for the occasion, the Chamber wore a new look on that day with a constellation of bright lamps hanging from the high ceilings and also from the brackets on its walls.
Overwhelmed and jubilant as they were, the hon'ble members sat in semi-circular rows facing the Presidential dias. The desks which could be warmed electrically were placed on sloping green-carpeted terraces. Those who adorned the front row were Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Acharya J.B. Kripalani, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Smt. Sarojini Naidu, Shri Hare-Krushna Mahatab, Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Shri Sarat Chandra Bose, Shri C. Rajagopalachari and Shri M. Asaf Ali. Two hundred and seven representatives, including nine women were present.
The inaugural session began at 11 a.m. with the introduction of Dr. Sachchidananda Sinha, the temporary Chairman of the Assembly, by Acharya Kripalani. While welcoming Dr. Sinha and others, Acharyaji said: "As we begin every work with Divine blessings, we request Dr. Sinha to invoke these blessings so that our work may proceed smoothly. Now, I once more, on your behalf, call upon Dr. Sinha to take the Chair."
Occupying the Chair amidst acclamation, Dr. Sinha read out the goodwill messages received from different countries. After the Chairman's inaugural address and the nomination of a Deputy Chairman, the members were formally requested to present their credentials. The First Day's proceedings ended after all the 207 members present submitted their credentials and signed the Register.
Seated in the galleries, some thirty feet above the floor of the Chamber, the representatives of the Press and the visitors witnessed this memorable event. The All India Radio, Delhi broadcast a composite sound picture of the entire proceedings.
SOME FACTS

The Constituent Assembly took almost three years (two years, eleven months and seventeen days to be precise) to complete its historic task of drafting the Constitution for Independent India. During this period, it held eleven sessions covering a total of 165 days. Of these, 114 days were spent on the consideration of the Draft Constitution.
As to its composition, members were chosen by indirect election by the members of the Provincial Legislative Assemblies, according to the scheme recommended by the Cabinet Mission. The arrangement was: (i) 292 members were elected through the Provincial Legislative Assemblies; (ii) 93 members represented the Indian Princely States; and (iii) 4 members represented the Chief Commissioners' Provinces. The total membership of the Assembly thus was to be 389. However, as a result of the partition under the Mountbatten Plan of 3 June, 1947, a separate Constituent Assembly was set up for Pakistan and representatives of some Provinces ceased to be members of the Assembly. As a result, the membership of the Assembly was reduced to 299.
On 13 December, 1946, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru moved the Objectives Resolution

1.This Constituent Assembly declares its firm and solemn resolve to proclaim India as an Independent Soverign Republic and to draw up for her future governance a Constitution;

2.WHEREIN the territories that now comprise British India, the territories that now form the Indian States, and such other parts fo India as are outside British India and the States as well as such other territories as are willing to be constituted into the Independent Soverign India, shall be a Union of them all; and

3.WHEREIN the said territories, whether with their present boundaries or with such others as may be determined by the Constituent Assembly and thereafter according to the law of the Constitution, shall possess and retain the status of autonomous Units, together with residuary powers and exercise all powers and functions of goverrnment and administration, save and except such powers and functions as are vested in or assigned to the Union, or as are inherent or implied in the Union or resulting therefrom; and

4.WHEREIN all power and authority of the Soverign Independent India, its constituent parts and organs of government, are derived from the people; and

5.WHEREIN shall be guaranteed and secured to all the people of India justice, social economic and political : equality of status, of opportunity, and before the law; freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship, vocation, association and action, subject to law and public morality; and

6.WHEREIN adequate safeguards shall be provided for minorities, backward and tribal areas, and depressed and other backward classes; and

7.WHEREBY shall be maintained the integrity of the territory of the Republic and its soverign rights on land, sea, and air according to justice and the law of civilized nations; and

8.this ancient land attains its righful and honoured placed in the world and make its full and willing contribution to the promotion of world peace and the welfare of mankind.

This Resolution was unanimously adopted by the Constituent Assembly on 22 January 1947.
Late in the evening of 14 August, 1947 the Assembly met in the Constitution Hall and at the stroke of midnight, took over as the Legislative Assembly of an Independent India.

On 29 August, 1947, the Constituent Assembly set up a Drafting Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar to prepare a Draft Constitution for India. While deliberating upon the draft Constitution, the Assembly moved, discussed and disposed of as many as 2,473 amendments out of a total of 7,635 tabled.

The Constitution of India was adopted on 26 November, 1949 and the hon'ble members appended their signatures to it on 24 January, 1950. In all, 284 members actually signed the Constitution. On that day when the Constitution was being signed, it was drizzling outside and it was interpreted as a sign of a good omen.

The Constitution of India came into force on 2 6 January, 1950. On that day, the Assembly ceased to exist, transforming itself into the Provisional Parliament of India until a new Parliament was constituted in1952

Sessions of the Constituent Assembly



First Session: 9-23 December, 1946

Second Session: 20-25 January, 1947

Third Session: 28 April - 2 May, 1947

Fourth Session: 14-31 July, 1947

Fifth Session: 14-30 August, 1947

Sixth Session: 27 January, 1948

Seventh Session: 4 November,1948 - 8 January, 1949

Eighth Session: 16 May - 16 June, 1949

Ninth Session: 30 July - 18 September, 1949

Tenth Session: 6-17 October, 1949

Eleventh Session: 14-26 November, 1949


[The Assembly met once again on 24 January, 1950,

when the members appended their signatures

to the Constitution of India]


IMPORTANT COMMITTEES OF
THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY AND THEIR CHAIRMEN

-------------------------------------------------------------

Name of the Committee Chairman

-------------------------------------------------------------

Committee on the Rules of Rajendra Prasad
Procedure

Steering Committee Rajendra Prasad

Finance and Staff Committee Rajendra Prasad

Credential Committee Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar

House Committee B. Pattabhi Sitaramayya

Order of Business Committee K.M. Munsi

Ad hoc Committee on the Rajendra Prasad
National Flag

Committee on the Functions of G.V. Mavalankar
the Constituent Assembly

States Committee Jawaharlal Nehru

Advisory Committee on Vallabhbhai Patel
Fundamental Rights, Minorities
and Tribal and Excluded Areas

Minorities Sub-Committee H.C. Mookherjee

Fundamental Rights J.B. Kripalani
Sub-Committee

North-East Frontier Tribal Areas Gopinath Bardoloi
and Assam Exluded & Partially
Excluded Areas Sub-Committee

Excluded and Partially Excluded A.V. Thakkar
Areas (Other than those in Assam)
Sub-Committee

Union Powers Committee Jawaharlal Nehru

Union Constitution Committee Jawaharlal Nehru

Drafting Committee B.R. Ambedkar

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STATEWISE MEMBERSHIP OF THE CONSTITUENT

ASSEMBLY OF INDIA AS ON 31 DECEMBER, 1947

PROVINCES-229

-----------------------------------------------------------

S.No. State No. of Members

-----------------------------------------------------------

1. Madras 49

2. Bombay 21

3. West Bengal 19

4. United Provinces 55

5. East Punjab 12

6. Bihar 36

7. C.P. and Berar 17

8. Assam 8

9. Orissa 9

10. Delhi 1

11. Ajmer-Merwara 1

12. Coorg 1


INDIAN STATES-70


1. Alwar 1

2. Baroda 3

3. Bhopal 1

4. Bikaner 1

5. Cochin 1

6. Gwalior 4

7. Indore 1

8. Jaipur 3

9. Jodhpur 2

10. Kolhapur 1

11. Kotah 1

12. Mayurbhanj 1

13. Mysore 7

14. Patiala 2

15. Rewa 2

16. Travancore 6

17. Udaipur 2

18. Sikkim and Cooch Behar Group 1

19. Tripura, Manipur and Khasi
States Group 1

20. U.P. States Group 1

21. Eastern Rajputana States Group 3

22. Central India States Group 3
(including Bundelkhand and Malwa)

23. Western India States Group 4

24. Gujarat States Group 2

25. Deccan and Madras States Group 2

26. Punjab States Group I 3

27. Eastern States Group I 4

28. Eastern States Group II 3

29. Residuary States Group 4

------

Total 299

Crystal Reference Encyclopedia
from Crystal Reference
Constituent Assembly (Italy)
A special assembly endowed with supreme authority which was elected with universal suffrage in June 1946 to draw up the new Italian constitution. It comprised 556 deputies who in December 1947 voted to approve the text, which had been prepared by a 75-member commission. It was chaired first by Giuseppe Saragat, then by Umberto Terracini. It also operated as a short-term, limited-function parliament, and approved the peace treaty Italy concluded with the World War 2 victors in 1947. It was dissolved in January 1948.

National Assembly
Eritrea: National Assembly
In accordance with transitional arrangements formulated in Decree No. 37 of May 1993, the National Assembly consists of the Central Committee of the People?s Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ) and 60 other members: 30 from the Provincial Assemblies and an additional 30 members, including a minimum of 10 women, to be nominated by the PFDJ Central Committee. The legislative body ?outlines the internal and external policies of the government, regulates their implementation, approves the budget and elects a president for the country?. The National Assembly is to hold regular sessions every six months under the chairmanship of the President. In his role as Head of the Government and Commander-in-Chief of the Army, the President nominates individuals to head the various government departments. These nominations are ratified by the legislative body. In March 1994 the National Assembly voted to alter its composition: it would henceforth comprise the 75 members of the Central Committee of the PFDJ and 75 directly elected members. In May 1997, following the adoption of the Constitution, the Constituent Assembly empowered a Transitional National Assembly (comprising the 75 members of the PFDJ, 60 members of the former Constituent Assembly and 15 representatives of Eritreans residing abroad) to act as the legislature until elections were held for a new National Assembly.

Is there anything to fear about constituent assembly?

A diff. story to add:

- http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/01/nepal10224.htm

Sorry for posting continuously but I think five of the last six postings might give you an insight on constituent assembly. Intended for sajhaittes who are interested in more intensive understanding of affairs.

eeh, newuser has already posted a link, raicha.. :P and i started a thread :P

been following ur post..keep on battling..

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings


The free bird leaps
on the back of the win
and floats downstream
till the current ends
and dips his wings
in the orange sun rays
and dares to claim the sky.

But a bird that stalks
down his narrow cage
can seldom see through
his bars of rage
his wings are clipped and
his feet are tied
so he opens his throat to sing.

The caged bird sings
with fearful trill
of the things unknown
but longed for still
and is tune is heard
on the distant hillfor the caged bird
sings of freedom

The free bird thinks of another breeze
an the trade winds soft through the sighing trees
and the fat worms waiting on a dawn-bright lawn
and he names the sky his own.

But a caged bird stands on the grave of dreams
his shadow shouts on a nightmare scream
his wings are clipped and his feet are tied
so he opens his throat to sing

The caged bird sings
with a fearful trill
of things unknown
but longed for still
and his tune is heard
on the distant hill
for the caged bird
sings of freedom.

Maya Angelou

Newuser dude

How on the earth can anyone think "impartially" on entirely pollitical affairs and how do you expect anyone to do that ?

Ok may be on issues like civil service and criminal justice system, impartiality is very much expected but on distinctly political issues.....damn..

Yo Them Chilluns now not them talk about them iparsial things in da kingdom of Sajha. Him Sarkar gets angry and him ban you chilluns.

Them Emergency peopal bans them IP. I is just askin peopal to send my message.

''Bhrasta netaji afna maobadi karyakarta lai uchalera mrityu ko mukh ma falne kaam nagarnu yar. ''

I told you the above sentence just three days ago and this happened yesterday:

- http://www.satribune.com/archives/200503/P1_arun.htm

Khaubai, Only the sides having military might can win power bhannu hunthyo ni, who won power?

Nevertheless for people like you, the deaths of poor Nepalese hardly make any sense.

The same fate may occur with the Army or the police soon. Who knows? In a hide and sick game, sometimes one side suffer more loss and sometimes the other side.

Even if the army suffers less, the less number of body count in their side will only bolster the interest of Gyanendra and his henchmen to encourage more bloodshed.

Afnai daju bhai marera faida kasle liyo? Gyanendra ra Prachanda le.

Thats why I say don't fight to each other. Why dont the army and the maoists gun down their supremos instead of fighting against each other? Why they die for the comforts of their bloody commander-in-cheifs?

And these shameless politicians, they are waiting for the pressure from international commmunity. India ra America le feri kurshi ma rakhdela ra bhudi phutne gari khaula bhanera parkhirachhan. Why don't they go to streets on their own and call for both the warring side to stop bloodshed. Janatalai bheda banaera satta ma jaane shakuni haru.

And see these educated people residing in Europe and Americas. They are supporting violence in the country. One supporting Maoists and the other King. Some children of corrupt politicians are dancing in there own tune. Khai ali ali padheka dekheka Nepali ko buddhi aaeko?

Guys let's call everybody to end this series of violence and atrocities. lets call them to start dialogue. Kati Nepali Aama ko kakh ritto huna dine? Kati Nepali cheli ko siudo pucchina dine? Kati Nepali keta keti lai tuhuro banna dine? Kebal Gyanendra, Prachanda, Girija ra Makune ko swartha ka lagi Nepali haru kina bivajit bhaera ladne?

Come and join me to call everybody- the King, the Maoists and the politicians to unite for peace in the country. Baru jati man lagchha teti desh ko dhukuti rittto garau, but don't incite killings of fellow Nepalese. Pls Pls Pls. This is too much.

Gyanendra is softening the freedoms of Nepalese people, see this:

- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4313291.stm

Great democratic King Gyenendra will cull down the violence, and hand over flawless democracy to the political parties in 3 years.

Lets call an end to violence and call for peace. I think you are in a state of Euphoria. If there was no conflict of interest, there would have been no violence to start with and to return to the state of ultimate peace all demands have to be met. The king has to keep power and the Maoist have to get the king out and institute a communist rule, and the political parties (all) have to have power. Now how is that possible. The other alternative is to compromise and a comprise can only occur when one side has more to lose than the other. It remains to be seen who will lose more.

Dear BGM, my idea is not euphoric. It's pragmatic and best suitable option for all the sides.

Who do you think are winning or loosing at present?

I think it's all the Nepalese- the king, the maoists, political parties and the public loosing very badly now. The continuation of violence means irrepairable loss to Nepal. The more the violence continues, the greater will be the chance of loosing everything. Even the sovereignty of the country. At least the dignity has already fallen so low.

If only one side wins, there will be no peace in Nepal. Be sure. Why? because the loosing side never sits quiet. Even a knocked out boxer vows to defeat the victor in the next bout. We are talking about politics and we are talking about mass. So peace will never prevail unless all the sides make a compromised deal.

What is a compromise than?
For Gyanendra- limitation of his unassailable constitutional power. But he can enjoy all the powers of a truly constitutional monarch. What wrong does this do to him anyway?What will Gyanendra gain by retaining the supremacy of the army and the authority to dismiss governments at his will? What profit has he made now? I see nothing. May be I am wrong if you guys think so.

For Maoists- Giving up the dream of making Nepal a communist republic. How could they estabilish communism in Nepal when this system has been proven a failure in the rest of the world? North Korea apart, I do not call China or Cuba as real communist republics. NK may be a true communist republic but it's failure to deliver the people is clearly open to the world. Who says Maoism can be or will be estabilished in Nepal? Only lunatics like Prachanda and Baburam.

For political leaders- Limitation of their power as legislators and policy-makers only. Setting up a limitation on their rights to take part in election and remain in government.Few more comstitutional changes to make them legally accountable for their wrongdoings.

All the above compromise can be made by rewriting the constitution. You tell me which side will precisely loose what things if the constitution is rewritten? A constitution which puts the King and the people in equal footing and that limits the authority of the politicians and make them accountable for their wrong doings makes everyone the victor and none the vanquished. More importantly this is the main demand of the warring rebels and once Gyanendra accepts their demand to hold a constituent assembly election, they must and they will immidiately lay down their arms. Otherwise status quo means loss to everybody. Loss to Nepal that may finally cost the sovereignty of the nation.Let alone the chance of the King or Maoists or politicians ruling the country single handedly.

oye maobaadi!!!
ajhai afulai thinking imparaially and sensibly..... this dude has his head full of crap... and all he spilsl out is crap......

oye ta saala... pani banduk bokera jangle ja.... jungli janawar ko baas asthan ki jungle ho ki zoo....
hehehehe

Newuser,
Heard your calling. But who art thou, our saviour? Seriously.
na naam na pata

. maoists ko jamghat ta yaa po cha...
reply highfly's question

and jivin's The Burned AID too...

naravakshi janawar haru... katti ragat piuna sakne.....

New User, I like your views, at least I'm convinced with your last thread, but the main problem is how the hell those two (actually three) damn power (king, maobadi & so called prajatantrabadi) will come to the compromising point. Do you think king will just give up his all current achievement, noway........ it's not that easy. And maobadi... do they just give up their weapons, just by requesting or threatning. No way.... I don't count the third power(Prajatantrabadi) for now. They don't have anything left to show. International community le kehi jharlan ra kham la bhaner kuri ra chan.

ohm shanti jay Nepal

tara ma convinced bhayer ke garne hunu parne haru bha cahinan.... question is how to convince them....

Omh Shanit Jay nepal

After a short break, I am trying to give continuation to this thread stressing my views that democratic rights should be restored in Nepal for every good reasons.

The latest developments in Nepal are suggesting that the country is heading towards further crisis. As criticism is mounting and support decreasing of his actions, King Gyanendra has shown signs of deterioration in his self belief. He has pushed the barriers of civil liberties and his supporters have gone crazy to survive the chance of ruling Nepal in darkness for long. However, their humble pie is crumbling to pieces.

In recent days, the security forces have achieved a morale boosting win in Bardiya. However, the incident in Sandhikharka(Arghakhachi) is an evidence that security forces cannot avoid maoists attack everywhere in the country. If the Maoists can launch another major attack against the security forces and inflict a bigger casualty on the government side, the upbeat mood of the government hierarchy after the Bardiya success will be short-lived.

King Gyanendra has opted to dismiss the call from the international community to respect human rights commitment once again. Security forces' refusal of the government run National Human rights commission to make a field trip to Kapilbastu is an ample proof of the attempt to hide the truth of human rights violation. This kind of actions will only help to raise concerns of the international community. Further more, when reports of disappearances and extra-judicial killings are rising on, the restrictions on the investigation of such cases will increase the number of violations unprecedentedly. There are every chances of innocents being victims of government and maoists atrocities when an independent body is denied to investigate the truth. The governments denial suggests that it's involvements are questionable. The attempt to cover up murders and extra judicial killings require more killings of innocent civilians. Slowly, this kind of incidents will transform our security forces as that of Saddam Hussein's army of the 80s and the 90s. It may not be impossible now to find one of our own kins being a victim of security forces' abuse no matter he or she is totally unaffiliated to any political belief. The restrictions of independent reporting of maoists related incident will further hide the truth in the battlefield.


Gyanendra's ambition to rule Nepal on his own may not have been challenged by the people very quickly but the opposition from the international community has given him a lot of headache. So, he is sending Rameshnath Pandey to India. Mr. Pandey has no special assurances for India apart from the logic that Maoists should be wiped out for the good of India itself. But India has lots of bargain. Without getting assurances that it's bargain will be fulfilled, India is never going to give Gyanendra a good sleep. So either Nepal has to fulfill India's wholesome demand or face a strong oppostion from India for the long run. Both options are not good for the cause of Nepal.

This trip to India by Rameshnath Pandey is more important because US assistant secretary of state Christina Rocca is visiting India very soon. The meeting between Rocca and Natwar Singh will certainly decide the fate of international military assistance to Nepal. As both the countries US and India being the advocate of democracy and civil liberties, they cannot continue assisting Nepal unless King Gyanendra lifts the shameless ban on fundamental principles of freedom. King Gyanendra cannot fight against the maoists also without getting military aids from India and the west. So he has got to lift the ban sooner or letter. If he lifts them now, he doesn't need to compromise with India. Otherwise, Nepal's water resources and geographical integrity will have to pay the price for the short sighted autocratic restrictions imposed by King Gyanendra.

As Abe Lincoln said: 'You can't please all the people all the time'. Readers feedback only underlines how tastes differ and perceptions of the same posting vary.

Yet I have a responsibility to remain in touch with the views of the whole of this diverse audience.
I also have a duty to respect standards of taste and decency. I cherish the right to challenge and surprise my readers ? but not to offend them needlessly.

This requires care, not just abou tputting my views, but also about the likely readers expectations of the posting or service being provided.

lovely articles by newuser..so enlightening. pls keep posting. and writing.