June 12, 2012
Dear Colleague
Do note that I have recommended only two options for governance. Reverting back to monarchy isn’t an option from my perspective. I was against monarchy since 2040 BS.
I disagree with you that possibility of referendum has “faded now” to borrow your words. Election of CA once more is no brainer.
But fundamentally I agree with you that in next election voters will choose from amongst two types of candidates: those favoring provincialization on ethnocentric lines or against it.
With best regards,
Sincerely,
Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
http://www.ratnasansar.com/
Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2012 12:08
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: Re: FW: संबिधानसभा बिघटनमा चांदीको घेरा
Ratna Sansarji,
While harboring sympathy for an american style of government (as you have suggested with your choice no. 1 for a referendum) as the most desirable one, I would still disagree on a referendum on the system of governance. The political parties have already agreed on a mixed model and that's good enough and why to look back.? If you suggest that there might be others who would like to include the option of reverting to monarchy as well.
The most sticky issues which led to the demise of CA and which are exposing the hypocrisy of parties like NC and UML are:
a) federalism : either 10 provinces or 14 provinces model suggested by two different commissions, and
b) single ethnicity based or multi-ethnicity based identities die such provinces.
It is quite clear that MJF-L and UCPNM are open for either of the option on a) and they also agree on the single-ethnicity based identity. NC and UML had agreed on 11 provinces and multi-ethnicity based identity.
Since the possibility of a referendum seems to have faded now, the elections, if they are held, will definitely show on whose side are the people because the parties will have to have make their positions clear in their manifestos. People will not vote for any candidate who is not clear on these twin issues....
No comments:
Post a Comment