Kamal Thapa and his party, Rastriya Prajatantra Party (Nepal), are fighting the election for the second Constituent Assembly on 19 November 2013 on two principal planks, restoration of monarchy and Hindu state. Nepal had removed monarchy and was declared a secular country in 2008.
In the election for the first Constituent Assembly that took those momentous decisions, Mr. Thapa’s opponents prevented him from having mass meetings and hooted whenever he did. Rather than flowing with the tide of time, Mr. Thapa, a minister for several times under the party-less Panchayat system and multiparty democracy, stuck to his guns.
Thanks to mismanagement and corruption unleashed by secularist forces in the country, Mr. Thapa and his party are getting traction. He attracts huge audience and his words are heard with some nostalgia. A few months back, Mr. Thapa’s party organized a mass meeting at open theater, in the heart of Kathmandu, and the theater was almost full with audience.
In this venue, his party had not had the courage to organize and address a mass meeting in 2008. Though he and his party are unlikely to win a significant number of seats in the upcoming election, his cause does not seem a lost one anymore. Well, Great Britain had restored its monarchy after 10 years. By that measure, Mr. Thapa has 5 more years to realize his goal.
Not all those who attend Mr. Thapa’s mass meetings are equally sympathetic to his two objectives. His call for the restoration of Hindu state is more popular in a country where 88 percent people practice Hindu faith at varying degrees than to the restoration of monarchy. Even moderate secularist like Bhagirath Basnet, a former foreign secretary, believe that there should have been a referendum before ...
... middle of paper ...
...y are not for production and expanding the national pie. They are for redistribution. They are communists after all.
Action invites reaction. The increased strength of militant left will likely trigger a reaction in militant right in the days to come. This will likely offer a fresh opportunity for Kamal Thapa and his party gain further ground in the next election as a reaction to the far left’s rise. But who knows whether the new constitution written by a militant left dominated Constituent Assembly will even allow multiparty elections next time around.
If that happens, Mr. Thapa’s goal may remain unachieved for a long time or even never. Or the UCPN (Maoist) will co-opt him on jingoistic agenda, which they share. The marriage between the royalists and communists in Cambodia presents a template for them. But the main losers will be liberal democrats in the middle.
One of the most influential and celebrated scholars of British consistutional law , Professor A.V Dicey, once declared parliamentary soverignity as “the dominant feature of our political insitutions” . This inital account of parliamentray soverginity involved two fundamental components, fistly :that the Queen-in-Parliament the “right to make or unmake any law whatever” and that secondly “no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament.” . However this Diceyian notion though an established principle of our constitution now lies uneasy amongst a myriad of contemporary challenges such as our membership of the European Union, the Human Rights Act and a spread of law making authority known as ‘Devolution’. In this essay I shall set out to assess the impact of each of these challenges upon the immutability of the traditional concept of parliamentary sovereignty in the British constitution.
Unfortunately, there existed too many hopes and disappointments in the past 22 years – to begin with the proclaiming of the national independence and ending with the world-famous Orange Revolution. The inauguration of Viktor Yanukovych as president in 2010, consequently the
The rump did have certain achievements which have been highlighted in this essay. The reason they have been labelled a failure is due only to the fact that did not achieve enough. Cromwell had left them there to create reform, and the political utopia he felt was necessary for England. They had failed in this goal, being so caught up in trying to please different parties, they had fell blind to their true goal, that of restoring national stability.
As a representative of the Algo ethnic group, I want to say that our people would like the new state to introduce a parliamentary system of governence. Parliamentarism is a system of government in which the head of government is elected by and accountable to a parliament or legislature. One could rightfully ask: What is our reasoning for desiring this? We think it is justified because in presidential systems the populace at large votes for a chief executive, who is the President, in a nation-wide election. This is revenant as the Algo comprises the minority of the population of the Republic of Jarth, which consists of only 1.1 million representatives in the whole state, compared to that of 2.9 million Randies, 3.8 million Dorfas and 2.2 million Takas living in the Republic of Jarth. One can reasonably assume that the outcome will most likely be that the cumulation of the majority’s vote will hinder the representation (in numbers) of the members of the minority in office. Subsequently, the Algo will have to live under the control of a leader from another ethnic group again, which the Algo members tremble at the thought of because we are proud of their ethnicity and do not wished to be shamed for it. On the other hand, in parliamentarism, the first step is an election of members of parliament, which are the political parties. This is imperative since it will allow the Algo to be able to choose the party we really share interests with....
The manipulation of the over-powering, federal government has sent our country on the wrong path and has set our country up to fail unintentionally. The national government is shutting down because of the executive branch’s failure to discuss issues and policies with the opposing party, which holds a duly designated majority of one house of Congress. Instead, the branch refers to opponents as “hostage takers’ and hope to succ...
Party controls the past, the present, and the future through the Ministry of Truth. They
Meanwhile, the PPP, was experiencing further turbulence and withdrawal from its own ranks at the leadership and mid-leadership levels. Others have traced unrest to the internal ‘authoritarian’ nature of the PPP. The Weekend Post noted that the Rice Producers Association, the Maha Sabha, the Guyana Council of Indian Organizations(GCIO) and the Islamic Anjuman, all of whom the PPP relied for its ethnic support base were increasingly alarmed with the party’s Marxist trajectory and were “trying to free themselves from the communist PPP.” This assertion was justified in the prevalence of public dissension in the ranks, not all of which was ideological.
The Cambodian Genocide has the historical context of the Vietnam War and the country’s own civil war. During the Vietnam War, leading up to the conflicts that would contribute to the genocide, Cambodia was used as a U.S. battleground for the Vietnam War. Cambodia would become a battle ground for American troops fighting in Vietnam for four years; the war would kill up to 750,00 Cambodians through U.S. efforts to destroy suspected North Vietnamese supply lines. This devastation would take its toll on the Cambodian peoples’ morale and would later help to contribute that conflicts that caused the Cambodian genocide. In the 1970’s the Khmer rouge guerilla movement would form. The leader of the Khmer rouge, Pol Pot was educated in France and believed in Maoist Communism. These communist ideas would become important foundations for the ideas of the genocide, and which groups would be persecuted. The genocide it’s self, would be based on Pol Pot’s ideas to bring Cambodia back to an agrarian society, starting at the year zero. His main goal was to achieve this, romanticized idea of old Cambodia, based on the ancient Cambodian ruins, with all citizens having agrarian farming lives, and being equal to each other. Due to him wanting society to be equal, and agrarian based, the victims would be those that were educated, intellectuals, professionals, and minority ethnic g...
Quiet is violent. Informing both parties that they possess a “strict duty to participate in public life” and that voting is a privilege necessary for the upkeep of other human rights and Democracy would aid in allowing the people to realize the importance of proportional representation (Durkheim). Although Democracy does not necessarily support and secure the human rights of the minority, they are able to eradicate the tyranny of the majority and gain at least some control of the government, which in turn incites them to secure the rights of all
The government has shown how they care more about money than their own people. Another problem that they face with their government is an issue of life insurance benefits. For example, Mandelbaum mentions, “Sherpas, in conjunction with the Nepalese Mountain Guide Association, issued a 13-point petition to the Nepal Ministry of Tourism. Demands include a $20,000 death benefit, disability benefits for Sherpas injured while working, and the establishment of a memorial fund.” (2). Due to the incident they have been demanding more from the government for a better life insurance to help avoid them leaving their families with economic crisis. Furthermore, the Sherpas
Shrestha, Nanda R. Nepal and Bangladesh: a World studies Handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc, 2002
Introduction In late 1947, the newly created states of India and Pakistan went to war over the valley of Kashmir. A United Nations brokered ceasefire divided the state into Indian and Pakistani controlled territories, and resolved that a referendum would be held in which the people of Kashmir would be able to choose to join either country. The referendum has not been held to date. India granted its portion of Kashmir a special status within its constitution, allowing for a great degree of self-autonomy.
One of the main arguments presented by Crick in In Defence of Politics is that politics is a realistic good necessary for well-organized governance. From my experiences in the field, I understand that democracy allows for differing interests and views to be heard in a diplomatic manner. While democracy elicits diverging ideas and opinions for people, citizens in a democratic state still understand their interests are often served through democratic values and equal representation in government affairs. Political representatives must be accountable to the masses for their actions and decisions in order for the rule of law to be obligatory. Democracy does not discriminate against ideology or party affiliation. During my internship, constituents with varying party affiliations voiced their concerns and opinions in regards to legislation either presented by the Assemblyman or presented in the State Assembly.
Radu Ban and Vijayendra. (2007). The Political Construction of Caste in South India. Working paper
The recent Gujarat riots & the government’s inability to control the situation have also led to an increase in the instability of the political arena.