Editorial»
Illnation, diagnosis and treatment
NOV 26 - W e must however be clear at the outset of our goal and our target. Good intentions alone are not going to help, and in the absence of a well thought out goal we will simply lose our way in a maze of ill-conceived notions and arguments. First, therefore, let us be clear about our goal. What is it that formed the nucleus, the core of our miserable state? It was no other than bad, even evil governance over the past decades which sacrificed public and national interests at the altar of personal self-interest. So, this is what exactly has to be targeted. We need good governance, for in the absence of this, simply bringing back peace will not be of any avail. If peace were to come just to take us back to the same starting points of earlier slides, then that will do us no good. Ensuring the foundation for good governance and providing the mechanism for it should be our goal. Capable persons will surely be produced along the way and over time. Wiser people, having learnt the lessons of the past, will surely emerge once a good foundation is laid.
So let us start by accepting and agreeing on the goal, and then walk backwards step by step to the present state to make that goal happen. Having agreed on good governance as the goal, we have to ensure that this is within the basic framework of a democratic set up, neither a right nor a left dictatorship. It also has to be along a multiparty democratic system that ensures freedom of speech and movement, with equal opportunities for all and the discipline that goes with it. On the surface, all these necessary ingredients were present in the system enshrined within the present constitution. If that was the case, then why am I taking this approach?
Obviously, I am trying to rectify what has not worked for the people and the country in the present parliamentary set up. The election of a PM by a majority of the 205 members, the buying of loyalties of these members for this purpose, the constant leg pulling of the PM by disgruntled members not receiving ministerial berths and constant instability of various governments bred corruption at the highest level and made democracy for us a mockery, which went beyond a laughing matter. This is the very reason for the loss of faith in a democratic system, that 2046 should have ushered in, and which we have now to rectify in such a foolproof manner that this scenario will never be repeated in future, and there is no more bad governance.
Therefore, I feel that this present system has to be totally revised, for a better starting, from the head of the government. Otherwise, it is certain to push us to complete ruin if allowed further life. What is needed is a directly elected PM within a multi-party framework. This will ensure a strong government for a full term and also ensure less malpractice at election time since no one will be able to capture booths nationwide nor buy the votes of all the people, nor play to regional or parochial sentiments. Israel has a directly elected PM and there is no reason why we must opt in to the Westminster or the Indian system. Such a PM will look towards bettering the entire nation and not merely his constituency of just a few thousand persons.
There will have to be enough checks and balances in the Constitution to ensure that such a PM does not go astray too. Alongside, we would have a small elected parliament with one member from each district, which would act precisely in a way similar to the US Senate. Their members will not become ministers, the ministers coming from outside parliament but ratified by parliament. Such ministers likewise will see to the whole nation and not just small sections since they will not be elected persons, and most importantly their loyalties will remain to the nation. Since they cannot be bought monetarily to pull down the PM, their interest will be to serve the nation well and that alone.
What I have outlined so far is what I believe to be the best option for the future and what should be our goal. But this concept must be put before the people as a whole, and since it can be effected only by framing a new Constitution or by a drastically altered one, we would have to take the needed procedures to know the opinion of the population and put it in place by democratic means. This would naturally mean either a national referendum or elections for a Constituent Assembly, a much talked about process.
Talking of the Constitution, for other reasons as well, while ours may be the best in the world, as some believe, I do not think it has helped us, and instead our present situation is partly due to it, since it left loopholes that could be exploited. True, had we honest and better leadership things may not have come to this pass, but the threat as we have experienced would always be there and some day in future would catch up with us anyway. So treatment of both, the reasons for use of the Constitution in this way and the actual authority to do so, would need to be addressed and this would be possible, as stated earlier, by bringing in a totally new Constitution or an utterly revised one. Mere patchwork will not be sufficient this time around.
If I am not dwelling on the revival of the parliament as demanded by some quarters as a panacea, it is because the last Parliament is dead and buried and cannot be revived without causing turmoil in the legal system of the country. It is also because I do not believe that a revived parliament under the same Constitution will be any better than the dismissed one and will all over again be but a playground for all the wheeling and dealing that went on earlier, all to no good for the country. No ‘zombie’ had ever been known to do good in countries where that practice existed. It would be no better in Nepal.
One word of warning now. Any solution must obviously come from the voice of the people and from the pen rather than from the sword or gun. A military solution will be unthinkable to anyone with any sense of world history and besides achieving what could be only a temporary respite to its advocates would in the near future be a disaster to all concerned and for the country as a whole. A military option should under no condition be even remotely contemplated, since it will never be a long-term solution. I hope wisdom prevails over adventurism.
(To be concluded)Posted on: 2003-11-25 08:09
Headlines
Advertisements
