Friday, September 28, 2012

शेरबहादुर देउबाको ठाउंमा बाबुराम भट्टराई


नेपालभित्र भारतिय सवारी साधनलाई निषेध गर्नाले तथा हिन्दी सिनेमा प्रदर्शन प्रतिबन्धित भएर छिमेकीसंगको सम्बन्ध बिग्रने हुनाले यस्तो आन्दोलन गर्नेलाई कारवाहि गर्ने निर्देशन कामचलाउ प्रधानमन्त्री भट्टराईले सुरक्षा निकायहरुलाई दिएको समाचार प्रेषित भएको छ । ठीकै पनि हो, यस्तो कृयाकलापले भारत निश्चय पनि चिढिन्छ । अझ महत्वपूर्ण कुरा त के हो भने यसो गर्दा अधिकांश नेपालीको चुलो बल्दैन, खाना पकाउने ग्यांसको अभाव भएर र खाद्य सामग्रीमा समेत भारतमाथि निर्भर हुनाले । तसर्थ कारवाहि गर्नुको औचित्य आफै स्पष्ट छ ।

तर २०५२ सालमा बाबुराम भट्टराईले नैं शेरबहादुर देउबालाई यो समेतका ४० बुंदे माँग प्रस्तुत गरेका थिए र यस्तै माँग शेरबहादुर देउबाले पूरा गर्न नगरेकोले जनयुद्ध शुरु गरिएको थियो ।

अहिले शेरबहादुर देउबाको ठाउंमा बाबुराम भट्टराई पुगेका छन्, प्रधानमन्त्री भएर मात्र होइन, भारतिय सवारी साधनलाई नेपालमा निषेध गर्नेलाई कारवाहि गर्ने निर्देशन दिएर पनि । यो पृष्ठभूमिमा बिचार गर्दा भट्टराई आफैले पूरा गर्न नसक्ने माँग देउबासंग गरेर १० वर्ष सम्म चलाएको जनयुद्धमा नेपाल आमाका झण्डै २० हजार सन्ततीले मृत्युवरण गरेको निष्फल रहेछ कि भन्ने आशंका जनमानसमा पर्न थालेकोछ, कामचलाउ प्रधानमन्त्री तथा एमाओबादी दलले यथासिघ्र स्पष्ट पार्दा सबैको भलो हुने देखिन्छ ।
Ratna Sansar Shrestha

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

State capture by NC or UCPNM

Care taker PM Bhattarai has expressed apprehension that if he is to hand over the “state” to Nepali Congress, they will never conduct election and capture the “state” forever. It manifests one of the two things:

• He may be right and NC may want to perpetuate itself unconstitutionally.

•  Maybe it reflects what the care taker PM himself has been planning and doing and plans to perpetuate it under such pretext.

Therefore, the best alternative is formation of non-political government, comprising people with clean image and cleaner conscience with express ToR to (1) conduct referendum regarding ethnocentric federalism or else, (2) to conduct election of both parliament and local bodies (with 3 boxes, simultaneously, for the voters). This government will hand over the charge to the elected government which will assist the parliament to proclaim/promulgate new constitution after incorporating people’s verdict in the work already completed by the CA.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

PERILS AND POSSIBILITIES OF NEPAL'S ADVENT AS A FEDERAL STATE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WATER RESOURCES

Abstract

Nepal has already been declared a “federal” democratic republic; although, in the considered opinion of a section of the citizenry, it isn’t set in stone as sovereign people have not been “consulted” in this respect. Demand for provincialization on the basis of identities is seemingly gaining strength as political parties in the care taker government are pursuing it. However, impediments will be created in the optimum exploitation of water resources and sharing of benefits therefrom if upstream areas, downstream areas and project site lie in different provinces. This will not only deprive Nepal from the benefits of positive externalities from water resource projects, like flood control and augmented/regulated flow in dry season, but also downstream riparian countries like India and Bangladesh. Therefore, it is in the best interest of Nepal as well as other countries in Ganga River basin to create 3 provinces based on the watershed of 3 major river systems.

1. Nepal as a Federal State
A debate has been raging about federalism in Nepal, with the declaration of Nepal as a federal state by the Interim Legislature-Parliament in March 2007, by amending Article 138(1) of Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2007. Some oppose it dreading repetition of Yugoslavian history (which disappeared from the world map after the internecine ethnic conflict) and opine that Nepal should learn lessons from Rwanda, Ethiopia, Sudan, etc. Some advocate creating 10 provinces on the basis of single identities of about 10 ethnocentric (ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic) groups – one province for each group, out of so far identified 118 groups; thereby depriving the remaining groups from the right to recognition of their identities. Strangely, the proponents of identity based federalism prefer one contiguous province for the whole southern plain known as Terai, depriving several prominent ethnocentric groups in the area from recognition of their identities. This indicates lack of consistency and rationale in the proposal to create provinces on the basis of identities.

Further, the federalists also demand right to “self determination” to the provinces. Nepal is smaller than an average province of India and use of right to self determination by the tiny provinces could entail spinning off of tiny “sovereign” states that could cause headache even for India and China. On the other hand this will also mean that the ethnocentric groups that aren’t fortunate enough to have separate provinces for their groups will be deprived of the right to self determination.

Moreover, the proponents of identity based “federalism” are seeking “preemptive rights” to the ethnocentric groups in the provinces named after them. For example Newars in Newa Rajya will be entitled to preemptive right in every walk in life as well as in governance. This will render other ethnocentric groups in each of such provinces second class citizenry. Similarly, it will also result in minority rule over majority as in all 10 proposed ethnocentric provinces the main group is in minority (to illustrate Newars are in minority in the proposed Newa Rajya).
All of these pose a serious peril of flare up of ethnocentric conflict, as about 10 ethnocentric groups will become privileged class (by having their identities recognized and being conferred with preemptive right) while disenfranchising the remaining.

Experts are of the opinion that the Interim Legislature-Parliament decided about it as if it enjoyed powers similar to that of an elected Constituent Assembly. This violates the right of the sovereign people to take decision in this respect after holding extensive brainstorming discussions and debates, subsequent to them being educated about manifestations and ramifications of federalism and also about the ramifications of the “preemptive” rights to be bestowed to about 10 ethnocentric groups. The decision process has deprived sovereign people from exercising their right to full and meaningful participation in decision through popularly elected body like Constituent Assembly (CA), which was effectively preempted by Interim Legislature-Parliament. An unelected body has no such right.

This has polarized politicos, intelligentsia and the general public and has potential to open floodgate of ethnocentric conflict as evidenced by the murder of 7 people from Gorkha by the people from Manag in Nar in 2009 over ownership of natural resources.

2. Perils from the perspective of water resources
In Nepal’s context, water resources, including other natural resources is as important as other issues like as nationality, national integrity, national security, ethnocentric identity, economy, etc. It will be better to be clear about the challenges of optimum exploitation of water resources, its management and usage of the benefit, including sharing thereof, for the betterment of Nepal and Nepali people in the federal context. It would have been better if the Constituent Assembly (CA) had discussed about optimum exploitation and the utilization of water resources in the interest of the country and formulated necessary provisions by arriving at a proper decision while adopting federalism in the country. If the country adopts federalism, the problems inherent in challenges pertaining to the utilization of water resources and sharing of benefit thereof needs to be addressed first. Water resource alone has potential to metamorphose Nepal from a backward, medieval economy to one comparable to India and China.

While some people and most political parties see only electricity in water resources. Others are able to see benefits that can be extracted from the multidimensional uses of water: adequate pure/clean water for consumption and sanitation (elimination of disease/death related to water and sanitation), multiple cropping through irrigation to achieve food security (abolition of famine) including from animal husbandries and fisheries (cost effective nutritious food), navigation (water transport, fuel cost of which is more than 5 times lower than that of road transport), tourism based on water sports, its use for industrial purposes and even generation of substantial revenue from export of pure mineral water; besides electricity generation.
Despite being one of the natural resources, the nature and forms of utilization and benefiting therefrom in the case of water resources is entirely different from other natural resources. It is necessary to identify the existing differences between water resources and other natural resources in the context of the federalism. By involving themselves and working as entrepreneurs local people can benefit directly from natural resources like land, forests, herbs, wildlife, minerals, etc. through extraction, collection, utilization and other forms of use, i.e. picking fruit from trees, cultivating land, collecting herbs, etc. Water resources, however, cannot be utilized and benefitted from in this manner. At the local level people can benefit from micro irrigation schemes, micro hydropower, tourism based on water sports and other industries. For example, cities use most electricity but will not be possible to generate there and electricity is generated in hilly rural areas that cannot consume much electricity.
Benefit from water resources can only be maximized by ensuring its optimum exploitation which is likely to be hindered by fragmentation of the country in very small units in the name of federalism. People are already discussing division of water resources under federalism which is superficial without ensuring its optimum exploitation. Further, investment friendly environment will cease to exist due to interprovincial differences/conflict when project site is in one province and upstream areas and downstream areas are in other provinces.

In deciding to implement federalism it should be ensured that there are no obstacles in the optimum exploitation of water resources, its management and usage of the benefit for the betterment of Nepal and Nepali people (if possible even downstream riparian countries). Thus, it would be appropriate to hold discussions on the following points with regard to the water resources in federal state:

2.1 Drinking Water
We have age old practice of buying water source of one village by another village. After twenty years of conception of the idea of diverting water from Melamchi River of Sindhupalchowk district through underground tunnels into Kathmandu Valley to resolve the drinking water problem of the capital city, the work has started only recently. Although, this will deprive the local people from using the water of this river, traditionally used by them, no arrangement has been made to recompense them for the deprivation. In the meantime, local people have already put forward various demands for compensation, including sustained source of income for them. However, no arrangements have been made to meet their demand as it cannot be done by hiking the price of drinking water. If source of this project is to lie in a province with right to self determination other than Kathmandu valley, another province, the complexity of this project will get compounded.

What shouldn’t be forgotten in this respect is the heartrending incident of about 500 people’s untimely death in 2008 due to the outbreak of diarrhea and cholera in several districts of Far Western and Mid-Western development regions (Rukum and Jajarkot districts were the prominent ones) due to lack of potable drinking water and sanitation facilities. Besides, people are already getting killed in the dispute over water in several countries.

2.2 Multipurpose Project with Reservoir
A hydropower project with reservoir results in negative externalities by a magnitude than a run of the river project. The Kali-Gandaki A hydropower project, which stores water on a daily basis impacts less adversely than Kulekhani hydropower project, which stores water around the year. A reservoir project causes submergence (of land, forests and wildlife, tourist site, temple and infrastructure) and involuntary displacement; two negative externalities.

While the people living in the upstream areas will be deprived from the consumptive uses of water (like, futuristic sounding, hydrogen economy) in order to ensure specific quantum of water for the reservoir as the project’s electricity production will decrease if the quantum of water available get reduced, and consequently, project’s revenue too will decrease; thereby rendering the project unfeasible. In order to avoid this, the Rule 10 of the Electricity Regulation guarantees specific quantum of the water to the licensee in accordance with the license. If the Upper Karnali Project, for example, is implemented, the people in Jumla will be denied the opportunity to consumptive uses of water from Tila River.
A reservoir project also results in positive externalities in the form of downstream benefits due to augmented/regulated flow and flood control. Augmented/regulated flow during the dry seasons will make multiple cropping possible through irrigation. Such water can also be used for drinking and sanitation, fishery and animal husbandry, water based industry, etc. The downstream areas will also benefit from water sport based tourism, navigation as well due to watershed improvement. Moreover, flood control means saving of life and limb from the ravages of flood and from subsequent saving of expenditure in repair and rehabilitation.

If a water resource project involves two or more provinces, while people in downstream province will benefit as water will become available during dry season for the purposes of irrigation, etc., but the province where the project is located will suffer due to submergence and involuntary displacement. And people in upstream province will have to sacrifice in terms of consumptive uses of water. In such a circumstance, the province where the project is to be located and the people in the upstream province will hardly be willing to have the project implemented. This has amply been demonstrated by Narmada, Kaveri disputes in India and dispute between Sindh and Punjab provinces about Kalabagh project in Pakistan.

In this backdrop, it will be unfortunate if separate province/s is/are created for the southern plains (Terai). Because, there is plenty of agricultural land but is dependent on monsoon rains for farming (no water). It is not possible to avail adequate water in the dry season by building projects there. Similarly, most of the industries are located in this region, but generation of electricity in cost effective manner is not possible in Terai. In other words, hills and plains are interdependent on each other and complementarities exist. Actually, hills can become self reliant by building water resource projects, but same isn’t possible in the plains (as no significant head and storage space is available).

Involuntary displacement will also call for resettlement. The paradox is: construction of a hydropower project with reservoir is not possible in the plains and there is not enough land in the hilly area to resettle people displaced by such a project. Conversely, there is plenty of land for resettlement in Terai but if Terai is declared a separate province, resettlement of people from hills will be unacceptable. Tharus of the Western Terai have already refused to resettle the people displaced by the West Seti Project.

2.3 Hydropower
From the perspective of production and use, even though the Western development region produces the highest quantum of electricity (about 330 MW) in the country, it consumes less than half of what it produces. However, the Eastern development region consumes 20 times more electricity than what it produces (14 MW). The Central development region consumes a little more than it produces (275 MW). Even if the existing five development regions are to be declared as five provinces, this type of happy sharing will not be possible. Simple issue like pricing can spin out of control and provinces with more generation capacity can shut off power if the price is not right. There is even a possibility that if India offers higher rate, then a province could choose to export rather than supply to other provinces.

2.4 Delineation of boundaries
Rivers have been used to delineate most of the districts, zones and development regions of Nepal since long time. In various permutations of provincializaitons rivers have been used as boundaries. This will be unfortunate as two provinces may have different aspirations, needs and priorities, which will result in disputes forcing non-implementation of water resource projects.

3. Possibilities from the perspective of water resources
In the endeavor to explain possible perils, it has already been explained about the possibilities to metamorphose Nepal’s economy in the context of federalism putting up impediments in its path. Therefore, no repetition is warranted. On the other hand, it has not been possible to attain optimum exploitation of Nepal’s water resources under centralized unitary system. People are already debating about sharing and division of the water resources after provincialization. What needs to be remembered is that without ensuring optimum exploitation, what could be shared/divided in the situation obtaining at the moment is the division of flood during 4 months of rainy season and drought in 8 months of dry season. In the case of water resources, Nepal and her people can benefit only by ensuring optimum exploitation (ensuring no obstacles in the optimum exploitation of it), prudent management and sharing of the positive externalities from multidimensional uses of the water resources and bearing negative externalities equitably.
Due to lack of river basin approach, sites that can result in multidimensional benefit have been “given” away as projects such that Nepal will be deprived from benefits by a magnitude. A prominent example is Upper Karnali project, which is an ideal site for 4,180 MW installed capacity with reservoir that has potential to irrigate up to 1.5 million hectares of land even in dry season and also flood control. However, GoN has already issued a license for this project as a run-of-the-river project of 300 MW.

In view of the above, the best solution for Nepal is to declare provinces on the basis of river basins of 3 large river systems as illustrated below:



As Mechi River has a limited catchment area, we can have one Sapta Koshi-Mechi province in eastern Nepal. The river basin of Sapta Gandaki could be declared as the second province. Mahakali River too has a limited catchment area in Nepal, and therefore, we can have Karnali-Mahakali province in west Nepal. The right to decide the optimum level of exploitation of the rivers of a province should rest with the concerned province by adopting river basin approach.

However, a Federal Constitutional Commission on Natural Resources at the center will have to be created to, among others, monitor/regulate work of provinces with respect to water resources in order to ensure optimum exploitation, effective management and best use and sharing of the benefits. Besides, this commission can also settle disputes that may arise amongst provincial or local governments. Despite our long experience in social, cultural and religious diversity in the country, in view of the inevitability of our interdependence, lack of capacity, and inexperience of the federal system, maximum utilization of the country’s water resources would be possible only if the residual power for its management rests with the Centre.

There is a already a provision in Interim Constitution for parliamentary ratification of, accession to, acceptance of or approval of treaties related to division/sharing of natural resources or of benefits thereof in Article 156. This provision will have to be enshrined in the new constitution for parliamentary ratification of, accession to, acceptance of or approval of treaties related to division/sharing of natural resources or of benefits thereof amongst provinces of Nepal or between a province of Nepal and a neighboring country in case a province with right to self determination is to be allowed to sign treaties with foreign countries.
4. Conclusion
Bhattarai cabinet has already been rendered care taker as PM Bhattarai is no more a member of CA. Besides, the country has also lost legislature; CA was also working as a legislature which is no more in existence without succeeding to promulgate a constitution. The care taker government is refusing to make way for a new government with executive authority unless consensus is reached regarding federalism and constitution. But the country is looking at a dead-end of one way street due to statements from the coalition in the care taker government that no constitution shall be acceptable without federalism and also that federalism, if it isn’t based on recognition of ethnocentric identity, will too won’t be acceptable. On the other hand, identity based federalism will overshadow identities of over 100 groups and deprive them from right to self determination availed to other groups. Further, implementation of federalism in Nepal on these lines will create second class citizenry as well as result in rule of minority over majority. In view of this, it is unlikely that people will accept federalism on the basis of identities of a few ethnocentric groups. This has amply been demonstrated by several opinion polls conducted by several institutions over several years.

On the other hand, how the issue pans out is of utmost importance even to downstream riparian countries like India and Bangladesh; besides, most importantly, Nepal. Conversely, all three countries will end up losing if provinces are created that will come in the way of optimum exploitation of Nepal’s water resources; deprive from positive externalities like flood control and augmented/regulated flow in dry season. Nepal and Bangladesh, with the per capita water availability of 9,122 m3 and 8,809 m3 respectively, are deemed richer, compared to the neighbors (2,961 m3 in Pakistan, 2,642 m3 in Sri Lanka, 2,259 m3 in China and 1,880 m3 in India). However, tragicomic situation of “water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink” exists. This is mainly due to, specifically in the case of Nepal, flood during 4 months and drought in 8 months. While the water table is declining at a rate of one foot per year averaged over the Indian states of Rajasthan, Punjab and Haryana, including the national capital territory of Delhi, more than 438,000 square kilometers. Bangladesh, on the other hand while being ravaged by flood regularly also is in need of irrigation to increase productivity.

It has been estimated that approximately 70% of dry season flow and 40% of annual flow of the Ganga River comes through Nepal; the terrain and topography of which affords opportunity to add temporal and spatial value in terms of flood control and provide augmented/regulated flow during dry season for irrigation; generating high value electricity (peak-in power) cost effectively as a byproduct. For the purpose, reservoir projects will have to be built in Nepal’s mid-hills. For which close cooperation between future provinces of Nepal, focusing on proper apportionment of both positive externalities and negative externalities, is sine qua non.

Therefore, 3 provinces should be created on the basis of watershed of 3 major river systems (river basin approach) in order to maximize benefit from positive externalities from water resources, not only for Nepal but also for downstream riparians like India and Bangladesh; for example it can become possible to travel in a steamer from Benighat on Prithvi Highway in Nepal through to Narayanganj port on Bay of Bengal near Dhaka of Bangladesh around the year.

Paper presented in Conference on NEPAL AS A FEDERAL STATE: LESSONS FROM INDIAN EXPERIENCE organised Jointly by Centre for South Asian Studies (CSAS) and Centre for Security Analysis (CSA)on August 30-31, 2012 at Hotel Radisson, Lazimpat, Kathmandu
Ratna Sansar Shrestha “Nepali”, FCA

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

FW: [NNSD] IGP Selection *

September 13, 2012
 Prof. Madhukar SJB Rana


Madhukar jee

I doubt that anybody that believes in good governance and corruption free society will oppose your idea to collectively demand “that, to begin with, the chiefs of all constitutional organisations be led by moral and ethical persons so that we henceforth get leaders that will transform their organisations -- and Nepal” with rare exceptions. Exceptions will comprise of people who aspire to garner wealth for “seven generations” by hook or crook once the position is “snared” by participating in the “bidding” process or those who are already made billions (a million is a very small amount for “these” people) by snaring position being the highest bidder.

I feel that appointments to all the high offices should be “vetted” by a process of public hearing; not the farce of hearing in parliamentary committee (that were enacted during last few years) where even one “yes” vote works as a “veto” in favor of the person’s appointment. This should ensure that “all constitutional organizations be led by moral and ethical persons” as you have appropriately mentioned.

It has become very important and also urgent. Simply because, if a the post of IGP is snared by the highest bidder, then that person would need to “recover” her/his investment as any such person would not have a printer to print notes or a tree to pick notes from, at home. Therefore, such a person will be trigger corruption exponentially. Let’s just reflect/ponder/contemplate about it for a minute and it will easily dawn on us that magnitude of corruption is a lot higher than people are complacent about.

There are people who urge not to be fixated with corruption but continue to “spend” on developmental work, which will be tantamount to pouring money in a bottomless pit. Therefore, it is incumbent on the likes of us to strongly raise voice about it in concert.

With best regards,

Sincerely,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com

From: NNSD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NNSD@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of madhukar sjb rana
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 12:14
To: NNSD@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NNSD] IGP Selection *

We get leaders we deserve, yes. Now let the likes of us collectively demand that, to begin with, the chiefs of all constitutional organisations be led by moral and ethical persons so that we henceforth get leaders that will transform their organisations -- and Nepal. We have living examples of how one man can do it as for example from the Supreme Court, Election Commission and the CIIA

God bless

Madhukar
Sent from my iPad

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Invocation of article 158

September 8, 2012
To: Dr Surya Dhungel
Cc: Rajendra Dahal; Hari Sharma; Lalit Basnet; 'Mohan Lohani'

Surya jee

I trust you are back home now. You must have been rejuvenated by having spent quality time with your grandchild. It happens so with me too. I become more committed and dedicated to work for the generations to come and for our motherland after I each time I spend some quality time with them (yes I have two of them).

I too had a “rocking” time in Dhaka – shocking people from Bangladesh, China, India, etc. out of their slumber with respect to water resources.

I came across news in the media that the care taker government is planning to have the president invoke Article 158 “to remove difficulty.” A cursory look at it is elusive such that people may feel that it is a good way to break the extant deadlock. However, there are a number of issues that needs to forewarned about.

Firstly, the right to recommend to the president to invoke the captioned provision lies with a government with executive authority. BRB and his cronies no more possess executive authority; this is merely a care taker government and, therefore, this government has no authority to invoke it.

However, secondly, people may mistakenly believe that even care taker government has to get work done; therefore, invocation of Article 158 is called for. What needs to be remembered is the fact that an order issued under this provision has to be ratified within one month by the parliament and there is no prospect of a parliament coming into existence within 1 month and, therefore, the order issued as such will be unconstitutional ab inito.

In this backdrop, the care taker government should not be afforded a luxury of invocating this provision. What needs to be done is having them make way for a transition government with executive authority which will chart out the way forward and steer the country accordingly towards: (1) finalizing outstanding issues like federalism based on ethnic identity by conducting a referendum, (2) election of both parliament and local bodies and (3) eventually getting new constitution proclaimed by the popularly elected parliament (substantial quantum of work for which has already been done by the CA whose term expired without being able to complete the work.

With best regards,

Sincerely,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com

RE: [NNSD] IGP Selection

11 Sep 2012

Arun Dhoj Adhikari through NNSD

Arunjee


There is an oft-quoted saying that the people get the leadership they deserve. Is this the kind of leadership the people of Nepal deserve? Main manifestations of the leadership so far in modern Nepal are greed, nepotism, incompetence, indifference towards the people; with rare exceptions. They can stoop so low that, they will sell anything to the highest bidder. Now the post of IGP is on the bidding block and we, the sovereign people of Nepal are unable to stop it for lack of a control mechanism. CIAA, some time back, worked as a deterrent. Now they have succeeded to render it ineffectual.

The likes of you and I (and a substantial number of members of NNSD), of course, don’t agree that we have done anything to deserve this kind of leadership. But we have had this kind of leadership and looks like there is nothing for us to do. The likes of you and me, again of course, have been doing our level best, but we, unfortunately, are in minority. Majority, with not much education are indifferent for various reasons. Some too busy to bother with such “niceties” as they are too preoccupied earning a livelihood, in Nepal or abroad. Others, even highly educated ones are indifferent towards the plight, or are even “making hay while sun shines”.

The solution, of course, lies in raising the voices in concert which the likes of us are already doing and NNSD has been instrumental in it by providing a forum. The only thing, an important one, is to continue to do so which at times aren’t effective. But we don’t have right to despair and give up. I just hope more and more members of NNSD too will speak up, not only in this forum but in every available ones.

May truth prevail eventually (if we continue relentlessly)!


With best regards,


Sincerely,



Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com



From: NNSD@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NNSD@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Arun Adhikary
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 18:57
To: NNSD NNSD
Subject: [NNSD] IGP Selection


Where on earth are positions like those of IGP and Director Generals of infrastructure departments sold off to the highest bidder? It is rumored that the IGP post is carrying a bid value of 20 crores. If that is indeed the case and the civil society choses to remain silent over such a sensitive issue, do we then reserve the right to expect the police force to be professional, upright and duty-bound. Let the best candidate prevail.

regards

arun dhoj adhikary

Sunday, September 9, 2012

RE: Invocation of article 158

September 10, 2012
To: Dr Prof. Mohan Lohani
Cc: Surya Dhungel; Rajendra Dahal; Hari Sharma; Lalit Basnet
Dear Prof Lohani

I am pursuing the matter unrelentingly as I have only one motherland and I would like to leave my motherland intact to the future generations as my ancestors left me. Therefore, I think it is my duty to do everything possible to achieve this objective. Left it to our political leaders, I am apprehensive that they wouldn’t even mind emulating Lendup Dorje (there are exceptions, though).

I am starting to wonder about the “competence” of the people in president’s office because even an order has yet to be issued under Article 38(1) of the constitution. What is stopping them from doing so? It has already been more than 3 months! By failing to issue this order they are playing into the hands of the BRB and his cronies.

People are now talking about possibility of state capture by UCPNM. What they fail to appreciate is the fact that the state capture has already happened. BRB and his cronies are running the executive unconstitutionally and doing their best to perpetuate it and endeavoring to rule by ordinance. People’s opposition to it conveyed to the president has put paid to the intention of BRB and their cronies and BRB is going about “weeping” that he is not allowed to work. He forgets that he simply doesn’t belong where he is and if he is a true son of our motherland should pave path for a government with executive authority.

BRB and his cronies have even been going around claiming that they were elected by CA. But even that has become farce as UCPNM has already split and care taker government doesn’t enjoy confidence of majority of even dissolved CA.


With best regards,


Sincerely,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com
From: Mohan Lohani [mailto:m_p_lohani@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 9, 2012 6:58
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Cc: dhungel_sps@yahoo.com; dahal61@gmail.com; juhang@gmail.com; lalit_gulmi@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Invocation of article 158

Dear Ratna Sansarji,

I appreciate your unremitting commitment to nationality and national interest.Now, about the authority of the caretaker govt. if this govt has no 'executive authority' to invole Article 158, it is high time for the President to do something for the sake of the people and in the larger interest.Hope the President's advisors are fully aware of the gravity of the situation and will advise the President to act in the larger interest.

Regds,

Mohan Lohani

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Invocation of article 158

September 8, 2012
To Dr Surya Dhungel

Cc: Rajendra Dahal; Hari Sharma; Lalit Basnet; Mohan Lohani

Surya jee

I trust you are back home now. You must have been rejuvenated by having spent quality time with your grandchild. It happens so with me too. I become more committed and dedicated to work for the generations to come and for our motherland after I each time I spend some quality time with them (yes I have two of them).

I too had a “rocking” time in Dhaka – shocking people from Bangladesh, China, India, etc. out of their slumber with respect to water resources.

I came across news in the media that the care taker government is planning to have the president invoke Article 158 “to remove difficulty.” A cursory look at it is elusive such that people may feel that it is a good way to break the extant deadlock. However, there are a number of issues that needs to forewarned about.

Firstly, the right to recommend to the president to invoke the captioned provision lies with a government with executive authority. BRB and his cronies no more possess executive authority; this is merely a care taker government and, therefore, this government has no authority to invoke it.

However, secondly, people may mistakenly believe that even care taker government has to get work done; therefore, invocation of Article 158 is called for. What needs to be remembered is the fact that an order issued under this provision has to be ratified within one month by the parliament and there is no prospect of a parliament coming into existence within 1 month and, therefore, the order issued as such will be unconstitutional ab inito.

In this backdrop, the care taker government should not be afforded a luxury of invocating this provision. What needs to be done is having them make way for a transition government with executive authority which will chart out the way forward and steer the country accordingly towards: (1) finalizing outstanding issues like federalism based on ethnic identity by conducting a referendum, (2) election of both parliament and local bodies and (3) eventually getting new constitution proclaimed by the popularly elected parliament (substantial quantum of work for which has already been done by the CA whose term expired without being able to complete the work.

With best regards,

Sincerely,

Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com

Friday, September 7, 2012

MANAGEMENT OF THE GANGES RIVER BASIN: THE ROLE OF NEPAL

Abstract

Nepal and Bangladesh, with the per capita water availability of 9,122 m3 and 8,809 m3 respectively, are deemed richer, compared to the neighbors (2,961 m3 in Pakistan, 2,642 m3 in Sri Lanka, 2,259 m3 in China and 1,880 m3 in India). However, tragicomic situation of “water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink” exists. This is mainly due to, specifically in the case of Nepal, flood during 4 months and drought in 8 months. While the water table is declining at a rate of one foot per year averaged over the Indian states of Rajasthan, Punjab and Haryana, including the national capital territory of Delhi, more than 438,000 square kilometers. Bangladesh, on the other hand is ravaged by flood regularly.

It has been estimated that approximately 70% of dry season flow and 40% of annual flow of the Ganga River comes through Nepal; the terrain and topography of which affords opportunity to add temporal and spatial value in terms of flood control and provide augmented/regulated flow during dry season for irrigation; generating high value electricity (peak-in power) cost effectively as a byproduct. For the purpose, reservoir projects will have to be built in Nepal’s mid-hills. For which regional cooperation, amongst Ganga basin countries, focusing on proper apportionment of both positive externalities and negative externalities is sine qua non.

Abstract of my presentation in Dhaka on the auspicies of Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies. Will be getting full paper completed in a couple of weeks.

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Regional Conference on “Common Water Management: The Case of the Ganges- Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) River Basin”


Tossed a bombshell amongst the participants who wanted to have a number of reservoir projects built in Nepal to augment flow beyond Farakka barrage and control flood. They were “shocked” to learn from me that those enjoying positive externalities like augmented flow and flood control will have to recompense Nepal for bearing negative externalities like inundation/submergence and involuntary displacement as well as restriction on consumptive use in the upstream areas (including even China) if they expect such projects to be built in Nepal. The conference was organized by Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies, Dhaka.

Sunday, September 2, 2012

RE: Please extend gratitude to president

September 3, 2012
Dr Surya Dhungel

Surya jee

Good to hear from you. Hope you will have some quality time with your first grandson. Also congratulations to you and your wife and the proud parents.

I fully agree with you regarding “ordinance tactics”. But the tactics and the prolonged stay of care taker government harms our motherland, howsoever the shorter the duration of the stay is. Therefore, firm action is called for to “evict” the squatter care taker government.

You seem to bank too much hope in the political parties. The country is in such a mess because of these very political parties. Therefore, I am not hopeful of them getting their act together any time soon. In a couple of weeks’ time, BRB and his cronies will be “forced” to send another budget ordinance as the current one is about to run out and the president will be sort of given an ultimatum saying that the country will be paralyzed. I am apprehensive that at that time the president will be impelled to “meekly” (begging pardon for the choice of word) promulgate it. In this manner the care taker government will get another lease of life.

At the moment, the president is the only legitimate institution in this country and it is incumbent upon him to rid the country from the situation of “lack of governance”. Otherwise, the president will be failing to “protect and abide” by the constitution, as stipulated in Article 36A (2) of the constitution as the care taker government is doing many things in contravention of the constitution. I can see a parallel of the current situation and ouster of Katwal 3 years ago. Under the constitution the president doesn’t have right to appoint a commander-in-chief. But he used the power to “right the wrong” (manifest in removal of Katwal in contravention of constitution) by reinstating Katwal. Had Prachanda followed the due process (recommending to the president to remove Katwal from office) the president would not have had much choice but to oblige the government with executive authority. Therefore, the situation is almost similar, except for the fact that this government doesn’t have executive authority and the magnitude of what BRB and his cronies are doing is a lot higher than the removal of government servant (Katwal was one). The difference is like between an earthquake of 1 Richter scale vs. 8 Richter scale.

Therefore, I hope the president will wake up (with due respect him and hoping that he wouldn’t take the word personally) soon and cease to depend on the political parties (for example NC is busy exonerating Khum B Khadka, already in jail and UML is busy to ensure that the likes of Ashok Rai doesn’t desert the party) and call for the formation of consensus government under article 38(1) of the constitution (I am unable to fathom why he is hesitating to do so even after more than 3 months of BRB becoming care taker PM). Failing which he should simply form a transition government comprising non-political people with clean record and cleaner conscience. This government will consult the political parties with regards to the way forward. In my considered opinion the way forward is to build upon the work already performed by CA. This government should, simultaneously, conduct a referendum on the outstanding issues (like whether federalism on the communal – recognition of ethnocentric identities – lines or water resources), hold election to both parliament and local bodies. In other words, the transition government will hold general election affording the citizenry to vote for three things: decision regarding federalism, elect a parliament and local village and municipal councils (each voting center will have 3 boxes).

If you feel that I should explain these to him in person, I will be more than happy to do so when both of us are back (I am going to Dhaka tomorrow for a regional conference on Ganga basin).


With best regards,

Sincerely,


Ratna Sansar Shrestha, FCA
Senior Water Resource Analyst
www.RatnaSansar.com


From: SPS dhungel [mailto:dhungel_sps@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, September 3, 2012 5:58
To: Ratna Sansar Shrestha
Subject: RE: Please extend gratitude to president

Dear Ratna ji,

I am in Sydney for a week to see my first grandson.

However, I am following the developments closely.

Ordinance tactics to divert political attention from the real world may not work for long. It all perhaps
depends on the genuine role of other political parties.

Will return by the weekend.


Thanks and with warmth,

Surya Dhungel