Posted by: naivelyStupid August 6, 2009
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
After going through the arguments in the court's ruling, I was more-or-less convinced with the decision. The basic argument is that the politicians must first include adequate provisions in the constitution or relevant laws for any possible deviation in the generally practiced procedure, before such deviations are actually practiced.
१ - शपथ लिन खस भाषा अनिवार्य नै हो त ?
As per the ruling, the VP should do it in Nepali. For others, it may not be the case. There are provisions for oaths in mother tongues.
२ - फेरी मातृभाषामा शपथ लिन्छु भन्य भने, मानिलिउँ उपराष्ट्रपतिले मैथिलीमा लिन्छु भन्यो भने ठीक छ ?
The court said no such provision is there in the constitution. But politicians can change our constitution in no time if they want. So should not be an issue. Personally, I feel it would be good to see the P,VP, PM etc. taking the oath in the practical official language.
३ - मातृभाषा होइन, खस भाषा पनि होइन, तर नेपालकै अन्य कुनै भाषा, जस्तो राइ भाषा, गुरुङ भाषा, चेपाङ भाषा वा तराइका अन्यभाषा, जस्तो कि भोजपुरी, अवधि वा थारु भाषामा शपथ लिन्छु भन्यो भने अदालतले त्यसलाइ पनि बदर गर्ला कि नगर्ला, अथवा अदालतले यो फैसला गर्दा टेकेको धारा उपधाराले सदर वा बदर के गर्ला ?
Without any further constitutional ammendments or political decisions, the court decision would likely be the same.
४ - अंग्रेजी (अमेरीकामा जस्तै) वा सबैलाइ मान्य हुने एकभाषालाइमात्र शपथ लिन प्रयोग गर्नु पर्ने बाध्यात्मक ब्यबस्था गर्न संभव होला ?
Do you think you now have to go that far to get a language acceptable to all Nepalese? Personally I would see no justification in throwing into dustbin a language that already is more-or-less a practical 'official language', only to revert to a foreign language that hardly 10% of the population can use at present.
The real problem is that our politicians and activists have not had any real debates on language issues. Every community understands the issue on their one way. This way, we're sure to move into a serious language conflict in the days to come. Though ethnic sentiments are valid, practicality and aspects of national unity are serious issues that should be considered when we talk about the polity at the national level. Learning from the past is fine but being too much obsessed with seemlingly impossible historical course corrections in a short time may yield nothing but more trouble.
Last edited: 06-Aug-09 10:46 AM