| Username |
Post |
| Neutral |
Posted
on 06-Mar-02 08:43 PM
I am smelling something fishy particularly in follwoing aspects:
1. Why did cabinet think it important to nominate two members without first finding the chairman. Would not it have been more logical just to decide to constitue a high-level commission and make recomendation to the king to nominate chairman and its members?
2. There is news reports (in weekly newspapers) that the Judicial Council (which is the consitutional body responsible to recomend name of one of the SC judge to the king) is trying hard to find a SC judge to chair the commission. Why? If it was a fair process, why should anybody decline such a coveted position. Given the significance of the task the commission is entrusted, the name of chairman is surely to go well in the histry book founding a new legacy.
3. There is a report that one senior advocate Mr. Krishna Prasad Bhandary told that the individuals nominated as commission member are not appropriate for the job given their past record.
4. One weekly paper even blame one of the member as most corrupt.
5. Is it because of the image of the members that no one is interested to chair the commission?
As we know that one of the instituion which made aquantum jump in istituionalizing the corruption after 2047 is our Judiciary. The corruption in others areas is just continuation of the practice in panchayat. Due to unrestricted press freedom the cases of corruption by politicaians and govt officials were well reported and greatly helped to build public opinion against the corruption. But the press could not report the corruption in judiciary to the same detail (due to MANHANI case) as it is doing in case of politicians and govt officials. As a result, we do not know how many GRJ, KBK, BKG-equivalent are there in our judicial system. I wonder if some of them already find a place in the comission! (hope it is not the case).
Neutral
---------------------
|
| Gosaikunda |
Posted
on 06-Mar-02 09:34 PM
Neutral Jee,
The point you arose is serious matter.
1.Please try to remember about the "Mallik Ayog!"
2. There is almost nobody appropriate for this task.
3. If you want to lead the commission, what do you want?
If it was me, first of all I need the "Full Power" constitutionally, I should be able to start the job from Royal relatives, Girija, Ser Bahadur before I come to others.
4. In the team I should include 2/3 other members "Not Dar Chheruwa, Neutral like your name, Not corrupted".
5. I need full security.
6. I need co-operation from all.
Is it possible, you think?
That's why it's being late.
In Lauda case, I guess those Judges were also involved, do you agree on me?
These all are for "Sake Maobadiko ankhama, nasake sarva sadharanko ankhama chharo halne kam".
|
| neutral |
Posted
on 07-Mar-02 12:29 AM
Gosaikunda,
See! today's kantipur has reported that SC justice Mr. Rayamajhi (who has been recomended for the position of chairman)is not happy with the way government nominated members of the commission. Who can believe that the cabinet would opt to nominate fair, competent and clean personalities, given the fact that majority of cabinet member are likely to be indicted by a free and fair investigation.
So, there is much sustance in the rumurors floated in weekly papers and there is every possibilty that the commission is just for white washing the curruption and close the matter forever.
neutral
---------------------------------
|
