| Username |
Post |
| sparsha |
Posted
on 21-May-03 06:55 AM
Who is Girija Prasasd Koirala?
GPK always likes to talk about what is constitutional and what is not when it comes to others. Some times, he present himself as the sole interpretor of the constituition. This ongoing fuss (call it "a"/ or heck even "the" jana andolan, if you want, I don't care) regarding Oct. 04 is solely based on the merit of the constitution, I believe. These protesting parties are not fighting for me or other common citizens but for themselves, this is what my conviction is. However, GPK and others are saying the King violated the constitution. Hence the protest. Fine. The King is above the law, whether we like it or not. Should he be? this may be a good topic to argue. My personal view is with the limited head of the state concessions, the king should also be within the laws of the nation. Well, we can leave the topic for some other time. Right now, let's talk about our so-called " *the* champion" and " *the mighty* defender" of democracy, the constitution or people's rights-Mr. Girija Prasad Koirala.
Is CIAA a constitutional body or not? What authority does GPK have to defy a summon of CIAA? Is he above the constitition? Is he not violating the constitution - the same constitution he keeps giving "duhai" of when he wants to make case against others- by showing middle finger to CIAA? If he has nothing to hide, then why worry? Just tell the commission what he has to say. "nabiraunu nadaraunu". I thought CIAA was giving him an excellent opportunity to prove he is not corrupt or whoever he is , if that's what he is claiming by knocking the court door.
GPK is showing his arrogance by defying CIAA. I am not disputing his right to go the court challanging CIAA, but I am troubled with his unwarranted "superman-above the constitution" attitude. If the King in one extreme or me on the other extreme were summoned by the CIAA [now don't lecture me on "the King can't be summoned by CIAA" - I know. I am only giving an example] and we defy, would it be OK? Would GPK in his right mind have appreciated our defiance? Will he? I very much doubt.
Some of his party leaders including spokerperson Arjun Narsing KC went there honoring the summons and that was ok with GPK but for him to go to CIAA is against his "saan". I wonder why?
Who is Girija Prasad Koirala?
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 21-May-03 07:00 AM
Correction: Header was supposed to be "Girija and CIAA". [ I was thinking whether I should put "Girija answers CIAA" or "Girija and CIAA" as the header but before I could correct the header I saw me hitting submit button].
|
| allare |
Posted
on 21-May-03 07:17 AM
Guys!!!
I just could wish that instead of Madan Bhandari and Ashrit, this GPK and GRJ were dead at that accident. I am not saying that Madan bhandari would have done great to Nepal, but just can not go any further with GPK. Yo GPK nabhayeko bhaye Nepal kasto hunthyo hola..? Is this single guy creating all problem and hindering in the devleopment of Nepal.
Trikal ji, GPK ko raashi herer aja kati baancha bhannus na. Waqqa laagi sakyo bhane.. yesko naam suner.. yesko naam naheru bhane pani nahune.. yesko barema nalekhu bhane pani nahune.. the best ever judgement about GPK was written by bijaya kumar long before in Nepal magzine.
This is just another example of his arrogant attitude to not get appear infront of CIAA. What could we expect from these kind of leader.
|
| Sadabichar |
Posted
on 21-May-03 08:29 AM
I understand Majority doesn't want to see GPK, but the fact is it's the Nepalese culture and attitude that kept him all the way up to here.
We Nepalese should have felt deep shame and done something the time when Ganesh Man Singh surrendered the NC membership. There is something wil the mentality of NC party members of all levels, and they let it happen. Plus, The people who are with NC kept silent. And the opposition.
Something had to be done at that time, clean the overall nepalese mass's attitude... but all had something to do with "being opportunitsts".
|
| Jhilke Kyailan |
Posted
on 21-May-03 09:02 AM
Girija should answer the CIAA charges, of that there is no doubt. But he does raise a valid point. Why are the CIAA only targetting the people they are targetting and no others????? I am a simple man with some capacity to analyse (well not a lot actually but just enough) and I see them targetting only people of certain political dispensation and following. The rest they leave untouched, and we know that (unsubstantiated claim but generally accepted) everyone, EVERYONE, (99%) are or were corrupt. So when I see this obvious bias of a investigative body I can only come to one conclusion......When the CIAA first started showing its fangs I was one of its ardent supporters but now, more and more, I feel like I(as a member of the public) have been deceived..........YET AGAIN. Until I see a few panchayati big wigs (with four letter last names) brought to book the CIAA for me has no credibility.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 21-May-03 09:29 AM
GPK can disagree with CIAA but should not disrespect the constitutional body if he wants to talk about the constitution and its validity. His arrogance sucks.
Ok about CIAA not being fair. May be.
let's look at this as an example:
Total corrupt people: 1000.
100 UML
100 NC
100 RPP
100 NSP
.
.
.
.
100 NMKP
-----
1,000
I assume you agree with me in saying that all these 1000 corrupt bhates should be prosecuted. May I count you on this?
Let's move on. Out of these 1,000 allachhinas, CIAA summoned 200 (100 from UML and 100 from NC). Would you complain for not calling other bhates? I guess so. What is it that you want? What matters you more? the prosecution of corrupt bhates or who belongs to which party? let the CIAA work. The term of CIAA is not ending tomorrow, May the 22nd, 2003. I am not saying CIAA shouldn't be impartial. It should. We should protest if CIAA keeps bugging non-corrupt people and lets the corrupt ones off the hook. But as long as it focuses on corrupt ones, I will be happy. I will wait until it says, "I am done". Then I would protest against the commission if I see other corrupt bhates roaming free.
I will support CIAA even if it prosecutes one out of 1000. At least one is down, that gives me some relief.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 21-May-03 10:39 AM
Sparshaji,
I fail to understand why should one rush to blame Mr Koirala rightnow.
What he has done is he has taken recourse to Supreme Court. That's a constitutional recourse. Hello? Are we in communist China where police is the last word?
I would personally prefer Mr Koirala to go to CIAA. But if thinks he is unjustifiably targetted, he has right to defy the summon and ask supreme court to protect his right. That right is the only right rightnow which protects citizens from CIAA's supreme authority. CIAA is not god Shankar, and it can also make mistakes, and that's why there must be constitutional remedy against it. If Sharad Chandra Shah is made CIAA chief tomorrow, what will common citizen do then if they are not protected by his arbitrariness?
CIAA has right to ask individuals to explain the money that is earned above his proportionate income. Now Mr Koirala has said that all he has is a few pieces of land, one vehicle [and courage and crores of supporters in the nation],and that JICP also says it didn't recommend anything against him, there is enough room to suspect some foul play.
If Girija hadn't been to CIAA, and hadn't appeal against it in Supreme court, then one could have argued that he's doing things unconstitutionally. But, he is doing right thing. He is asking the court to protect him from what he thinks to be prejudiced action bent on assassinating his character. If the court protects him, that wraps up a day with a legal victory for Mr Koirala.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:26 AM
Biswoji,
I am not saying GPK has no right to go to the court. If you had read my post carefully you would have seen this line"..I am not disputing his right to go the court challanging CIAA.."
" Hello? Are we in communist China where police is the last word?"
Ok, I failed understand you here. What was the reasoning behind this sentence?
He likes to play with the constitution. He favors the constitution and its outlets as long as they favor him and his interests. This man is as arrorant as a stupid can be. I have no respect for most of his roles he has played in the past 12 years.
What's wrong in going to CIAA first? Why did he have to defy summon?
"CIAA is not god Shankar, and it can also make mistakes, and that's why there must be constitutional remedy against it. "
There is only one God Shakar I am aware of and he is into Nepali politics as far as I know.
I agree CIAA can make mistakes and there must be constitutional remedy against it. [see, I agree with you too].
"Now Mr Koirala has said that all he has is a few pieces of land, one vehicle [and courage and crores of supporters in the nation]..."
Biswoji, Nepal has less than 3 crore people and you claim he has crores of supporters. What other have? udus?
"If Girija hadn't been to CIAA, and hadn't appeal against it in Supreme court, then one could have argued that he's doing things unconstitutionally."
People would have understood. GPK is famous for doing all kinds of stuff.
His arrogance will destroy him.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:28 AM
Coorection:
"CIAA is not god Shankar, and it can also make mistakes, and that's why there must be constitutional remedy against it. "
There is only one God Shankar I am aware of and he is NOT into Nepali politics as far as I know.
I agree CIAA can make mistakes and there must be constitutional remedy against it. [see, I agree with you too].
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:36 AM
Are we in communist China where police is the last word?
Police is not the last word in China. There are rules and regulations and the courts which determine punishments.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:57 AM
>Are we in communist China where police is the last word?
>Police is not the last word in China. There are rules
>and regulations and the courts which determine punishments.
Until late 1990s, when Qiao Shi was the speaker of rubber stamp parliament of China, more than 99% of the cases police brought against individuals were successful. Of course, that is understandable because police were themselves the judges.
Even famous criminals like "Broken Tooth" were sentenced to death within two weeks of verdict, despite the international media attention they got.So, once you are sentenced, the sentence was immediately carried out, and in a lot of cases, the defendants were immediately carried away to carry out death sentence in China.
My classmates from Henan told me the story of how people were routed from court to the river bank near their hometown and shot there in the back of the head. Public execution in the stadiums are also common practice.
It surprises me to see people trying to defend rules and regulations of the country where peacefully demonstrating students were crushed by tanks just about fourteen years ago.
Of course, police is not last word if the communist leaders in Beijing are separated from police and they are asked to intervene. But, no police officer would dare to arrest a person who is endeared by central leadership.
Recently, China's parliament has passed a new law enabling defendants to have a lawyer. What is the success rate behind this is yet to be known.
>Biswoji, Nepal has less than 3 crore people and
>you claim he has crores of supporters. What
>other have? udus?
Let's ask for a free election, and see who has how many supporters. As long as I know, basically every political parties with some popular base support Girija rightnow. And that definitely means crores. If you are asking me if the supporters of Paras and Gyanendra are udus,[and jumra and upiyaa,] then may be you picked the appropriate words to describe them.
>What's wrong in going to CIAA first? Why did he have to defy summon?
What's wrong in going to Supreme Court first? If someone thinks he is justified in defying summon, and wants to prove it by Supreme Court, I think that is great. Let's wait until the decision comes from Supreme Court, rather than rushing to judge him by prejudice.
It is not 'defying', it is challenging its legality in court. For your information, this is the common practice in the democratic societies.
If a police ask you to come to a police post, there must be some reason behind it. For example, did anyone filed complaint against you? Were you recommended for action? Now I am not sure if anyone recommended action against Girija. JICP said it didn't. It is also not clear if anyone has any proof that Girija is having or spending more money than he has earned. It is also not clear if anyone filed a complaint against him in CIAA. When you ask someone to come to your office, you need to have some solid reason for it, otherwise, the defendant can always go to the court. That is called the rule of law.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 12:06 PM
My classmates from Henan told me the story of how people were routed from court to the river bank near their hometown and shot there in the back of the head. Public execution in the stadiums are also common practice.
I don't know whether the above statements except for the last one are true.
yes, people are shot in public if they are found guilty of major offenses including corruption!
It surprises me to see people trying to defend rules and regulations of the country where peacefully demonstrating students were crushed by tanks just about fourteen years ago.
Biswo,
Kati tianaan men ko kura garney. But, one thing: no matter what the political system is, the people have to abide by the rules and regulations of the state. The Tiananmen protests were not endorsed by any rule/law of the State and the State had authority to carry out the actions.
Also, you should not forget that China in the late 80s was going through a lot of transformation and hadn't the state did what it did, then China would have been in a huge mess now. That's what Deng said in the speech to declare the Martial law in Beijing.
Of course, police is not last word if the communist leaders in Beijing are separated from police and they are asked to intervene. But, no police officer would dare to arrest a person who is endeared by central leadership.
Well, weren't some of the curropt officials from Shenzhen and beijing arrested and after a FAIR trial punished?
See, the Chinese judicial system is not horrible as you see in the Hollywood movies.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 21-May-03 12:06 PM
"Let's ask for a free election, and see who has how many supporters. As long as I know, basically every political parties with some popular base support Girija rightnow. And that definitely means crores. If you are asking me if the supporters of Paras and Gyanendra are udus,[and jumra and upiyaa,] then may be you picked the appropriate words to describe them. "
I didn't know if general election takes place today even UML and other political parties will vote for GPK. This is a new information to me. Thanks. Yeah, crores are running behind GPK. And UML, other political parties including Maobadis, and GBBS are followed by udus and upiya. Got it.
"What's wrong in going to Supreme Court first? If someone thinks he is justified in defying summon, and wants to prove it by Supreme Court, I think that is great. Let's wait until the decision comes from Supreme Court, rather than rushing to judge him by prejudice. "
CIAA's jurisdiction and authority is defined. That needs to be honored. What to do you do if every time some one is summoned by CIAA or ther bodies, he/she runs to the supreme court?
"It is not 'defying', it is challenging its legality in court."
Whose legality? and what is "challange" here if its not defiance?
|
