| Username |
Post |
| mabi |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 11:21 AM
Hi,
It must be a rare instance in Nepalese history that the palace has asked the government to reconsider its decision for the nomination of an ambassador to Myanmar, Mr. AK Kharel.
Mr. AK Kharel has been declared (by media) as one of the most ineffective and inefficient IGP's in the Police history of Nepal.
The existing government forcefully made him to take leave before appointing his successor. The government must have taken accounts of his incompetencies and yet, (ironically) made an attempt to make him ambassador.
The questions in my mind is:
Doesn't the image of Ambassadors get tarnished with that kind of person? Or Mr. Kharel, like any other ambassadors of Nepal, has just right qualifications and diplomatic credentials or capabilities for the Ambassadorship?
If yes what good they will bring for the "Rashtra"?
Mabi
From TKP:
Palace Returns Kharel Nomination
Kathmandu, Nov.8: The Royal Palace has returned to the government for reconsideration the
controversial nomination of former Inspector General of Police Achut Kharel as Royal Nepali Ambassador to Myanmar, daily newspaper Naya Sadak said quoting a source in the Council of
Ministers.
The government had sent the appointment to the Royal Palace for approval after nomination. Before completing his tenure, Kharel went on forced home leave in September immediately after the Dunai massacre when Maoists killed 14 policemen and injured 40 others in an attack on district headquarters of Dolpo.
Home Minister Govinda Raj Joshi resigned after a stunning statement alleging the Army did not intervene to help the Police.
The government also mobilized the Army and either sacked or transferred several police officials after the Dunai debacle.
A Parliamentary committee member also asked the government to halt nomination pending the
completion of an investigation of a police deal with the Indian Oil Corporation (IOL ) giving the company a long-term monopoly to supply lubricants to the Police in exchange for the construction of a petrol pump at headquarters in Naxal during Kharel's tenure.
Inspector of General of Police Pradip SJB Rana and Kharel's successor acknowledged there were
shortcomings in the deal between the IOC and Police. nepalnews.com br
|
| Trailokya Aryal |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 12:19 PM
>Hi,
>It must be a rare instance in Nepalese
>history that the palace has asked the
>government to reconsider its decision for
>the nomination of an ambassador to Myanmar,
>Mr. AK Kharel.
>Mr. AK Kharel has been declared (by media)
>as one of the most ineffective and
>inefficient IGP's in the Police history of
>Nepal.
>The existing government forcefully made him
>to take leave before appointing his
>successor. The government must have taken
>accounts of his incompetencies and yet, (
>ironically) made an attempt to make him
>ambassador.
>The questions in my mind is:
>Doesn't the image of Ambassadors get
>tarnished with that kind of person? Or Mr.
>Kharel, like any other ambassadors of Nepal,
>has just right qualifications and diplomatic
>credentials or capabilities for the
>Ambassadorship?
>If yes what good they will bring for the "
>Rashtra"?
>Mabi
Namaste Mabi dai
The Criterias for nomination of Ambasadors (as I see it)
1. You have to be either a COngressi or Communist. It doesn't matter whether you know (or don't know) anything about the country that you will be going to RESPRESENT Nepal.
2. If not Congressi/Communist you have to have at least 1-2 karod rupiya to "donate" to one of those partes.
3. A Prof. who has spent more time spreading party propoganda than teaching or THE MOST CORRUPT "shiri panch ko sarkar" ko karmachari.
4. If none of the above, you have to be a relative of either a congressi big shot or a Communist big shot!
If you have any of these 4 qualifications, you are in. COngratulations! you are the next Royal nepali Ambassador!
I guess these are the criterias for the nomination of Ambassadors. Unlike in the US or anywhere else, where people get appointed Ambassadors based on their skills, in Nepal they are nominated/appointed based on their political affiliation(s).
I hope this helps :o)
Trailokya Aryal
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 12:51 PM
There are career diplomats, and there are appointed
diplomats in Nepal's foreign service.
The latter are usually former bureaucrats, chiefs
of police or military, or persons of distinguished non-political achievements and so on. Damodar
Gautam in the US and Kedar Mathema in Japan are
two examples of appointed diplomats.
Had his nomination gone through, Kharel too would
have become an appointed diplomat. But Kharel's
tenure as the Chief of Police has been too politically-charged and controversial to take him sincerely/seriously as a possible diplomat. He
has shown an extraordinary lack of strategic
skills and has made a series of blunders (often
costing his subordinates' lives) when dealing
with, to cite one example, the Maoists.
Since, thanks to Nepal's messed-up legal system,
no charges against Kharel can be filed (except
offer him a trial by the media), here's to wishing
that he retires quietly to his village in Kavre,
and lives happily after.
oohi
ashu
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 03:38 PM
>Kharel's
>tenure as the Chief of Police has been too
>politically-charged and controversial to
>take him sincerely/seriously as a possible
>diplomat. >
>Since, thanks to Nepal's messed-up legal
>system,
>no charges against Kharel can be filed (
>except
>offer him a trial by the media), here's to
>wishing
>that he retires quietly to his village in
>Kavre,
>and lives happily after.
>
>oohi
>ashu
This is the same Kharel who was praised for his hard stance on the chaotic situation in Bhairhawa/Butwal and Pokhara and also in KTM (as a DSP). Now, he is a no good man. How do we evaluate a person? A person needs to be good all the time to be considered a good person or based on the acts of that person he/she is evaluated? I beleive if a person does a good/bad job then he/she should be given the appropriate credit/blame for the good/bad job done.
I am not writing in support of Kharel, but what an IGP can do living within a political arena which is so disgustingly corrupted. Constant pressure from his so called superiors -who keep changing like the weather-, irresponsible opportunist subordinates (backed up by many parties), and massive expectation disgruntled people within or outside of mainstream can be quite hectic.
In our country, system is so messed up that we just cannot blame one person for the failure of a subsystem for which he/she may be responsible.
He
>has shown an extraordinary lack of strategic
>
skills and has made a series of blunders (
>often
>costing his subordinates' lives) when
>dealing
>with, to cite one example, the Maoists.
So, what do you suggest ashu, what he was supposed to do. If you are watching the political environment in Nepal then tell me honestly how the chief of police should act? and do you think that is possible? Cab you put yourself in his(kharel's) shoes and see how it feels?
Finally, I beleive for all the blunders that kharel made he should be held accountable (also should be thanked for the jobs well done, if any). Also, we shouldn't let go those who may have influenced kharel to act the way he acted- irresponsibly.
sparsha
I am not checking spellings/grammar. So, I take the the responsibility for all the mistakes in writing.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 05:15 PM
Sparsha is right in his evaluation that a police
officer is helpless in a corrupt system like that
of ours, where nobody is independent, nobody is insulated from bias and filth of irresponsibility
and nepotism/cronyisms.
Though I consider Kharel as a strong jawan,I have some
grave complaints against him:
1.As an IGP, he whimsically started "kapaal chhoto
paara abhiyan" in KTM. What was the basis for that?
2.When some Indian Police came to KTM and ransacked
the home of one ex-CDO and stirred a grave sense of
insecurity among Nepalese, Mr Kharel was said to be
outside of country, providing tacit agreement to the
intruders. I had even heard at the time that his son
was a student in Indian Embassy highschool.
3.Mr Kharel, as a head of police force, is supposed to
have sent his opponents in police force to the jungle
to fight with rebels.He is said to have inducted his
villagers/relatives from his village in Kavre in police
force.Interestingly enough, he never commisioned any
independent body to investigate those charges, nor did
he ever thought it imperative to clear himself from
those charges.
4.It is said that he paid more than several crores of
rupees just for hiring helicopters, while he could have
bought more helicopters in that price.That means,
either he posses inveterate avarice for commission, or
he is incompetent enought not to predict the cost
of fighting a rebel force.
5. He is said to be a person in charge of the the
police organization that dealt with an Indian oil
company for supply of oil to Nepal Prahari,
contravening all legal norms.
6.He is supposed to be a reason behind the worsening
relationship of army and police.
In conclusion, he definitely seems to be tainted, and
probably misfit to represent Nepal to Myanmar, a fellow
Asian country , with vast poor population of Buddist
and democracy-seekers.
|
| mabi |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 06:56 PM
Hi Biswo,
>Sparsha is right in his evaluation that a
>police
>officer is helpless in a corrupt system like
>that
>of ours, where nobody is independent, nobody
>is insulated from bias and filth of
>irresponsibility
>and nepotism/cronyisms.
>
>Though I consider Kharel as a strong jawan,I
>have some
>grave complaints against him:
>
>1.As an IGP, he whimsically started "kapaal
>chhoto
>paara abhiyan" in KTM. What was the basis
>for that?
>
>2.When some Indian Police came to KTM and
>ransacked
>the home of one ex-CDO and stirred a grave
>sense of
>insecurity among Nepalese, Mr Kharel was
>said to be
>outside of country, providing tacit
>agreement to the
>intruders. I had even heard at the time that
>his son
>was a student in Indian Embassy highschool.
>
>3.Mr Kharel, as a head of police force, is
>supposed to
>have sent his opponents in police force to
>the jungle
>to fight with rebels.He is said to have
>inducted his
>villagers/relatives from his village in
>Kavre in police
>force.Interestingly enough, he never
>commisioned any
>independent body to investigate those
>charges, nor did
>he ever thought it imperative to clear
>himself from
>those charges.
>
>4.It is said that he paid more than several
>crores of
>rupees just for hiring helicopters, while he
>could have
>bought more helicopters in that price.That
>means,
>either he posses inveterate avarice for
>commission, or
>he is incompetent enought not to predict the
>cost
>of fighting a rebel force.
>
>5. He is said to be a person in charge of
>the the
>police organization that dealt with an
>Indian oil
>company for supply of oil to Nepal Prahari,
>contravening all legal norms.
>
>6.He is supposed to be a reason behind the
>worsening
>relationship of army and police.
>
> In conclusion, he definitely seems to be
>tainted, and
>probably misfit to represent Nepal to
>Myanmar, a fellow
>Asian country , with vast poor population of
>Buddist
>and democracy-seekers.
I really admire you for the vast information you have.
After reading all these, I feel it is the democratically elected government, who is to be blamed than the individual Mr. Kharel.
I commend Mr. Kharel for his talents to manipulate the government (elected and mandated)despite all his shortcomings, that too, for the prestigious ambassadorship. (Now the ambassadorship does not sound very prestigious to me as a even failure like him can be considered).
What about the rest of the ambassadors? Were are they wrt the criterias set by Tilokya bhai?
Have they done any good for the sake of nation, with respect to the amount of the $$$$$$ spent on them, strategically and beially? Or they just proven to be the "whiteelephants"spending nations hard earned foreign currencies?
Regards
Mabi
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 09:13 PM
Sparsha wrote:
>This is the same Kharel who was praised for
>his hard stance on the chaotic situation in
>Bhairhawa/Butwal and Pokhara and also in KTM
>(as a DSP). Now, he is a no good man.
Kharel has always been an autocrat -- subsrvient to
his superiors while very hard on his subordinates
and the ordinary jantana. He seems to have
absolutely no respect for democratic norms. He
was able to "control" Bhairahawa/Butwal and Pokhara
before, during the Panchayati times and shortly
thereafter because he could get way using "police terrorism" against the citizens, violating their
rights to trial and so on.
As a Nepali citizen, I'd rather have some chaos
in public than live under so-called Police state.
[We don't need Nepal to be like former East
Germany]
>How do
>we evaluate a person? A person needs to be
>good all the time to be considered a good
>person or based on the acts of that person
>he/she is evaluated? I beleive if a person
>does a good/bad job then he/she should be
>given the appropriate credit/blame for the
>good/bad job done.
Well, that's for historians to say and write -- to
provide fuller pictures of complex, complicated
human beings.
For the rest of us, we go by the LATEST provable
actions of a particular PUBLIC person. And Kharel
is a PUBLIC individual.
I mean, who cares how "great" Kharel was in Pokhara or Butwal when, as an IGP, he seemed to show shocking disregard for innocent lives lost in Maoist clashes?
>I am not writing in support of Kharel, but
>what an IGP can do living within a political
>arena which is so disgustingly corrupted.
This is like a Nazi defense: "The superiors
made me do it" type of thing, and this, as
Nuremberg trials have taught is, holds no
water. Kharel is 100 per cent responsible
for his actions and decisions -- regardless
of whether he was under pressure from above
or not.
No matter how corrupt, how khattam our system
is, Kharel is responsible for being a willing
participant in it. Like I wrote earlier,
the Nepalis can do him NO harm -- except offer
him a trial by media and that would, unfortunately,
be that.
>In our country, system is so messed up that
>we just cannot blame one person for the
>failure of a subsystem for which he/she may
>be responsible.
Well, no one is blaming Kharel for the collapse
of the entire system. Because of the likelihood
os his being an ambassadorm he's just been singled
out for a series of his occupational
strategic mistakes and blunders that as an IGP he should NOT have made.
I mean, come on, when you are an IGP, and
1000s of Police Jawaans continue to die in these
stupid Maoist wars (with deaths often being preventable in the first place), one wonders what
kind of callous, unsympathetic and strategically foolish IGP you are.
>So, what do you suggest ashu, what he was
>supposed to do. If you are watching the
>political environment in Nepal then tell me
>honestly how the chief of police should act?
>and do you think that is possible? Cab you
>put yourself in his(kharel's) shoes and see
>how it feels?
In PUBLIC, you, as a public figure,
are only good as your LAST action.
Supposedly good stuff went earlier
does not count. That is why, many
people do NOT want to live a public
live, under constant glare from the
media, and that's fine to.
I don't pretend to know much to tell Kharel
how to do his job. But as a citizen, I do know
when fundamental democratic rights are
violated for political expediency, and that
does not make me happy.
oohi
ashu
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 09-Nov-00 09:31 PM
Hi Mabi:
>What about the rest of the ambassadors? Were
>are they wrt the criterias set by Tilokya
>bhai?
>
>Have they done any good for the sake of
>nation, with respect to the amount of the $$$
>$$$ spent on them, strategically and beially?
> Or they just proven to be the "
>whiteelephants"spending nations hard earned
>foreign currencies?
>
>Regards
>Mabi
Thanks for compliments.
To think dispassionately, I believe there are very few
things our ambassadors in foreign country can achieve
given the limited financial resources available to
them.
For example, what our ambassador can do in USA? You
will face really big problem to mount a successful
lobbying in Washington on behalf of our government in
every cases that we are facing: like Indian hegemonism
Bhutanese atrocity against Nepalese origin people etc.
But there have been occasional cases of our diplomatic
success.To remember 1988 Indo-Nepal crisis, there were
more than half a dozen senators speaking in favor of
Nepal(probably because that was still a period of
cold war..), and in the same period, in China,
newspapers have written profusively pro-nepalese
articles.(I still remember reading one article "Will
Indo Nepalese relation improve ? " in Beijing Review.)
I specially remember ambassador Ranadhir Subba(assured,
I have never met anybody who even said he is related
to him, to fend off accusation of nepotism on me) who
was especially dear to Chinese leader when he was
ambassador there.Such intimacy with foreign leaders
were even not achieved when Tulsi Lal Amatya , a
acquaintee of Mao himself, was there as ambassador.
I believe as long as we treat the ambassadorship as
a position to relegate former army chiefs(even police
chiefs), former beaurocrats, professors and old leaders
there is virtually very few to expect from that
position or position holders.
But,
We need to specially careful while sending ambassadors
to important neighbors and foreign powerplayers. We
at least need those people who know diplomatic
civility. I bet, Mr Achyut Kharel, not only doesn't
know what is the official language of Myanmar but
also probably doesn't know anything about Myanmar's
1988 movement and its repercussions. He probably
still has to know why Nepal have its embassy in
Myanmar. He may have heard of nepalese exodus from
there, but may not have heard of Ne Win. From his
appointment, he could get the refuge from hounding
PAC of nation's parliament which is investigating his
role in diverse corruption cases, but, alas, he
spoilt his chances by antagonizing army.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 10-Nov-00 09:19 AM
>
>Kharel has always been an autocrat --
>subsrvient to
>his superiors while very hard on his
>subordinates
>and the ordinary jantana. He seems to have
>absolutely no respect for democratic norms.
>He
>was able to "control" Bhairahawa/Butwal and
>Pokhara
>before, during the Panchayati times and
>shortly
>thereafter because he could get way using "
>police terrorism" against the citizens,
>violating their
>rights to trial and so on.
>
>As a Nepali citizen, I'd rather have some
>chaos
>in public than live under so-called Police
>state.
>[We don't need Nepal to be like former East
>Germany]
Well, ashu, I wonder whether what you said is what you meant. What do you mean by "As a Nepali citizen, I'd rather have some
>chaos
>in public than live under so-called Police
>state." What is SOME chaos? You mean Bhirahawa/Butwal and Pokhara were like East Germany when Kharel was there? I don't think so.
You are blaming Kharel for being strict and also blaming him for being liberal. How do respect norms of democracy where vast majority has no clue what that is.
>Well, that's for historians to say and write
>-- to
>provide fuller pictures of complex,
>complicated
>human beings.
>
>For the rest of us, we go by the LATEST
>provable
>actions of a particular PUBLIC person. And
>Kharel
>is a PUBLIC individual.
Why do you want to wait for some historians to write about kharel to evaluate him? and what guarantee is there that the historians will be unbiased? and why do you want to evaluate a person from his most recent act?what about the other acts that were performed earlier? If they are all bad then you would like to add them up but if they were good, you would want to discard them?
>
>I mean, who cares how "great" Kharel was in
>Pokhara or Butwal when, as an IGP, he seemed
>to show shocking disregard for innocent
>lives lost in Maoist clashes?
I care. I support and respect for a good job done by whoever-may it be kharel or ashu. Also, I reserve the right to condemn a bad job done. Like I said earlier, I am not here to defend kharel (What an irony, it seems like I am defending him when I myself so disgusted by the way police force was handled during Bahudal period). As an IGP, as you wrote, he showed no respect fot the innocent lives.I agree. I am not saying he did a good job as an IGP.
>>I am not writing in support of Kharel, but
>>what an IGP can do living within a
>political
>>arena which is so disgustingly corrupted.
>
>This is like a Nazi defense: "The superiors
>made me do it" type of thing..>
Whatever type of defence that may be, but I still beleive he is not the only to blame. What about Home minstry and the minister(s)? where were they when all these lousy performance were being displayed by kharel? what were they waiting for? a chance to make him an Ambassador? What about the entire cabinet or the government? What about the parliament? what about the people going to the court? He is not alone. It's tough to stand against a "aandhi" of corruption and poor khattam so called leaders,...passive people who are constantly busy just to survive...DID HE TRY TO STAND FOR THE BETTERMENT OF PEOPLE AND THE COUNTRY? I want to know this. Only he, being honest to himself, can answer this question. Others can speculate.
There is a clear indication here, if you do poor job you may be an ambassador, if you do a good job you may be going to retire in poverty or be sent to handle "maobadi samasya."
Ashu, why didn't you write how would you have done better? What would you do if you were an IGP now. When you answer, please consider the actual political environment in Nepal. I am not interested in a role of an ideal IGP or some ideology or "ism" from a country where almost all the subsystems of a system are well established, well balanced, well maintained, and the defenders (people) are not struggling just to have "ek chhak dal bhat". I am talking about Nepal here.
sparsha
>No matter how corrupt, how khattam our
>system
>is, Kharel is responsible for being a
>willing
>participant in it. Like I wrote earlier,
>the Nepalis can do him NO harm -- except
>offer
>him a trial by media and that would,
>unfortunately,
>be that.
>
>
In our country, system is so messed up that
we just cannot blame one person for the
failure of a subsystem for which he/she may
be responsible.
|
| basu |
Posted
on 10-Nov-00 08:39 PM
Hi trailokyo,
Let me add some more to your points like
a. they must have some capabilty to steal, a c(k)liptomaniac like Mr. Pradhan, be it a book or a towel from a hotel room.
b. manipualte with the credit card like Mr. Rai. Or at least has smart wifes to use the credit cards yet not settle the balance.
basu
>>Hi,
>>It must be a rare instance in Nepalese
>>history that the palace has asked the
>>government to reconsider its decision for
>>the nomination of an ambassador to Myanmar,
>
>Mr. AK Kharel.
>>Mr. AK Kharel has been declared (by media)
>>as one of the most ineffective and
>>inefficient IGP's in the Police history of
>>Nepal.
>>The existing government forcefully made him
>
>to take leave before appointing his
>>successor. The government must have taken
>>accounts of his incompetencies and yet, (
>>ironically) made an attempt to make him
>>ambassador.
>>The questions in my mind is:
>>Doesn't the image of Ambassadors get
>>tarnished with that kind of person? Or Mr.
>>Kharel, like any other ambassadors of Nepal,
>
>>has just right qualifications and
>diplomatic
>>credentials or capabilities for the
>>Ambassadorship?
>>If yes what good they will bring for the "
>>Rashtra"?
>>Mabi
>
>Namaste Mabi dai
>
>The Criterias for nomination of Ambasadors (
>as I see it)
>
>1. You have to be either a COngressi or
>Communist. It doesn't matter whether you
>know (or don't know) anything about the
>country that you will be going to RESPRESENT
>Nepal.
>
>2. If not Congressi/Communist you have to
>have at least 1-2 karod rupiya to "donate"
>to one of those partes.
>
>3. A Prof. who has spent more time spreading
>party propoganda than teaching or THE MOST
>CORRUPT "shiri panch ko sarkar" ko
>karmachari.
>
>4. If none of the above, you have to be a
>relative of either a congressi big shot or a
>Communist big shot!
>
>If you have any of these 4 qualifications,
>you are in. COngratulations! you are the
>next Royal nepali Ambassador!
>
>
>I guess these are the criterias for the
>nomination of Ambassadors. Unlike in the US
>or anywhere else, where people get appointed
>Ambassadors based on their skills, in Nepal
>they are nominated/appointed based on their
>political affiliation(s).
>
>I hope this helps :o)
>
>Trailokya Aryal
|
