To those who believe in this kind of "people's verdict".

I still doubt whether it was free, fearless, without intimidation, and a well informed election. You should look at the election result: every constituency is supposed to be representing around 100,000 people. Remove 30% as kids below 16 (considering 60 years average life expectancy in Nepal, and median age around 25: assuming 25 years ago Nepal's population was about 150 lakhs), then 70,000 people should have participated election, the number of votes that any winner in Kathmandu secured is so low that it makes me surprising.

Why the hell such a low rate of vote cast? Was there free, fearless, without intimidation and a well informed environment to cast the vote that a voter would like to cast? I doubt.

As the so called "International" observers (which Maoist leader Prachanda was not happy about: read Kantipur daily of few days ago, he was blaming that International .... are playing foul game with so many observers, now, he must be happy and I will not be surprised if he turns coin upside down) believed that it was a great CA, I can not deny this election result.

Meanwhile, I would like to hear whether Maoists used intimidation, fear, and threats particularly against those voters who were planning to vote a candidate who is not a Maoist? I still leave this question open for discussion, and let history judge it in the days ahead. Well, even if you did not vote in this eleciton, you have to accept the result.

Here, I am questioning the process and not the result. The process published on news media tells it not hard to call it questionable process in a supposed to be democratic election. Period.

I am waiting to hear their  progress report on 101th day as "100days achievements".

GP