Shirley Blair’s Nepal News

Global Voices the South Asia - Nepal section includes some excellent content on the situation on the ground in Nepal.

Global Voices

seeks to amplify, curate and aggregate the global conversation online - with a focus on countries and communities outside the U.S. and Western Europe. We are committed to developing tools, institutions and relationships that will help all voices everywhere to be heard. http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/

Global Voices Online is a non-profit global citizens’ media project, sponsored by and launched from the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at the Harvard Law School. Read more about them.

Received from Jessica Squire on Ottawa Activist Event

******************* 

Discussion about the deteriorating human rights situation in Nepal.

Time: 7:00 PM
Date: Thursday April 27 2006
Location: Craft Room Mcnabb 180 Percy Street (near Bronson and McLeod)
              Parking available For Bus & Accessible
              #14 Bus

Organized by:
Canada Nepal Solidarity for Peace (CNSP), a non partisan organization that seeks to bring peace to Nepal  by non-violent means.  CNSP believes that  the only way to bring to peace to Nepal  is through the restoration of Parliamentary Democracy.

Speakers:

• Tara Upreti, Canada Nepal Solidarity for Peace
• Alina Kharel, Nepali Women’s Rights Activist
• Moderator, Kevin McLeod, Canada Nepal Solidarity for Peace

Brief:
Since 1996 Nepal  has been plagued by a war between government and Maoist forces.   Human rights violations have been committed  by both sides and Nepali civilians have suffered the most as a result.

On February. 1, 2005 Nepal’s  King dissolved the country’s parliament and seized total   control of the  government.  Following  his coup political leaders have been arrested, public demonstrations  banned and a massive crackdown on civil liberties has occurred.   Under  the King’s direction the Nepalese Army’s war against Maoist forces has  intensified and many more innocent civilians have been killed.

For more info: please email nepalcnsp@yahoo.ca or phone 237-8056 and ask for Kevin

Shirley forwarded the following from a friend of hers who runs a nearby school/orphanage…

We (the Child Haven family) have been doing well. So far we have been able to feed the children although market prices are very expensive. Somedays we don’t have vegetable if the seller cannot come to the home.  We will have a complete fuel shortage in 6 days. We are planning to use wood fire for our cooking when the fuel runs out.  We have also had water problems because it is very difficult for the water companies to deliver and there is such high demand.  They had to come in the middle of the night to be safe.  We started boiling water through the electricity and use it for cooking rice and lentils. The children have been learning that  difficulties and challenges exist during times of political change. Many of the children haven’t returned back from their family homes to Child Haven yet because it is very hard to travel during the strike and curfews.  They are safe with their families.

Many of the staff, including myself, have been joining in the demonstration for the last 5 days. I was on the CNN news video last Friday.   I was in the front of the demonstration trying to push through a police blockade to break the government curfew. It was interesting that police were tired and asking us not to push too hard. Some of them were supporting our protest. Child Haven has been helping in treatment for the injured demonstrators through the Women’s Foundation, an NGO that is offering immediate medical treatment to protesters.  So far we have helped by donating $1,170 Canadian. More is being collected.

I’m not sure what access to news you have, so I’ll write a quick summary. The king made an offer to the 7 party alliance the other day that he would relinquish his total authority and return to ruling by the constitution. Even though the international media and governments have supported this gesture as a solution to the problem, the Nepali people do not think so. Previously under this constitution the King had used Clause 127 to Dismiss the Prime Minister many times. So even though the power would appear to Rest with a ‘demosratic government,’ in reality the King still had ultimate authority.  Under the constitution the King is also in control of the army. In the King’s offer he also did not mention anything about the Maoist problem.  The 7 parties are demanding a solution that incorporates the Maoists into the new government because the previous strategy of fighting the Maoists has obviously failed.  The 7 parties want to reinstate the

Old parliament, form a collusion government that would include the Maoists, and then call a constitutional assembly.  The Maoists have promised that they will follow the wishes of the Nepali people as represented by the elected members of a constitutional assembly.  Whatever that assembly decides, to keep the monarchy or to become a republic, they promise to honor.  The king does not want to allow a constitutional assembly because he’s worried that he will be dethroned and exiled if there is a new constitution.  Even though the international media seemed to think that things would calm down after the king’s speech, in reality they have become more violent and the Nepali people are angrier at the King than before.  The demonstrations are still growing and the strike continues.

We haven’t purchased bags and other necessary items for the new school session as there is a curfew every day. During the curfew hours, which are often 8 hours a day, people are ordered to stay inside their homes.  The government has given permission to the army and police to shoot violaters on sight.  But thousands of people are breaking the curfew and protesting. The other problem is that many of the stores are closed in support of the 7 party alliance.  Because our area of Arubari is outside the curfew boundaries we can walk around freely and the children can play and take their morning exercise.  However, we cannot easily get into Kathmandu. Also, we cannot do any banking transactions because all of the banks have been closed for the last two weeks.

Across Kathmandu all schools, from nursery to university, have been indefinitely postponed.  Because of the situation - the curfew, the violence, the transportation problems - it is impossible for the kids to have school.  Also, the school supervisors are supporting the strike by not opening.  School should have started on the 16th of April.  We are keeping the children occupied with some home improvements, and they are also enjoying the extended holiday.

Received April 24, 2006 

Trace,

   The security forces have catalogued and mapped every renter (ie: the poor, the lower castes) in the valley. The front of the document shows photos & names (clear indication of caste and ethnicity) and village of origin. The reverse shows a hand drawn map of how to get to there. We were told this was for ’security’, but the spectre of ethnic cleansing looms in my mind. I fear the riots against muslims were a test run. Militias are already

Operating with royal encouragement in the south of Nepal.

If we do not get democracy, I am very afraid of what will come.

sb

Received - April 24, 2006 

The following open letter to ambassadors was prepared by a group of highly respected professionals detained in Duwakot by the royal regime:

Sunday, April 23, 2006
To the Ambassadors
Of the European Union member states,
The United States, India, China,
and the Representative of the United Nations.

23 April 2006
Duwakot, Bhaktapur District

Excellencies,
We civil society detainees, kept at the Duwakot Armed Police barrack,  believe that your governments’ welcoming response to Friday’s address by  King Gyanendra was based on a misperception of Nepali political reality  and a misreading of the address itself. Though surely based on the best of  intentions, your reaction has needlessly delayed a peaceful transition in the country at a critical hour, when millions of Nepalis are on the streets agitating for an immediate return to democracy. This show of  people’s solidarity carried out massively and peacefully all over the country and in Kathmandu Valley, deserves more respect than has been accorded by the international community.

While the royal address certainly indicated a step back by the king, and it might even have been adequate sometime ago, at the given moment it was grievously misplaced in both tone and substance. In terms of tone: the king justified his 1 February 2005 coup d’etat; spoke in favour of the security forces despite their dubious record; did not acknowledge the need to engage the Maoist rebels; and ignored the incredible show of people power on the streets whose essential demand is that kingship be abolished or made absolutely powerless.

In terms of substance, the king has talked about returning power that had been given to him for ’safekeeping’, when the fact is that the events of 4 October 2002 and 1 February 2005 represented a naked power grab. Further, the king is not the custodian of sovereignty, which is naturally inherent in the people under the constitution of 1990 and it is not up to him to hand it back to the people.

Most importantly, those who welcome the royal address seem to believe that the king has unequivocally conceded sovereignty to the Nepali people. This is not our reading. Nowhere does ’sovereign’ or ’sovereignty’ occur in the Nepali original, unlike in the translation, apparently provided by the royal palace, where there is reference to "source of sovereign authority". In the Nepali original, the king refers to "state power remaining with the people" as part of listing the terms of reference of the government to be formed. This phrase is included only in passing, and does not amount to the king conceding sovereignty as residing in the people.

According to two jurists, both framers of the 1990 Constitution, who are included in our Duwakot group, ’state power’ does not by any stretch of imagination translate as ’sovereign authority’. We believe that there is a sleight of hand involved here, by a royal palace intent on misleading the embassies. Overall, we conclude that the king is not prepared to transfer sovereign power.

As things stand, what king Gyanendra has asked the political parties to do is to set up a government with ‘executive power’ but without legislative authority. In substance and form, this government would have the same authority, under the much-maligned Article 127 of the Constitution, as given to governments constituted thrice and disbanded as many times by the king between October 2002 and February 2005. The government would be an executive at the king’s command, meant to take responsibility for the excesses committed under the royal direct rule. It would only have the power over day-to-day administration, without authority to undo the ordinances, appointments, and other actions of the king during his period of active rule. Because the executive would act without the backing of a legislature, the king would be the authority of last resort, retaining the power of dismissing the sitting prime minister.

Given the royal palace’s record, we know that the government to be formed would be hindered at every step as the latter seeks to pursue the publicly announced seven-party roadmap for peace and democracy. Nor would this government have the authority ab initio to challenge the army’s current role and the ongoing militarisation of state and society by the royal regime. Further, the royal address seeks to retain the link of loyalty between the king and the army. This is a far cry from what is needed: a government that works on the mandate of the People’s Movement and not that of the royal palace. In sum, the king’s grudging concession does not address the great issues that cry out for resolution.

We appeal to your excellencies to also recall the many times that the royal palace has played the game of deception with you, and to introspect whether king Gyanendra, retaining all the powers as head of state not responsible to a legislature, will allow any forthcoming government to act independently. Your attitude seems to be "the king has given this much, take it and make the best of it". Unfortunately, neither the political
parties nor we here in Duwakot, are confident that the royal palace will not intervene in the workings of the executive to be formed. This would be in line with the historical record of the royal palace victimizing the people whenever there has been a move toward genuine democracy.

We ask you, in the hours and days ahead, to be more alert to royal machinations and to support the political parties as they challenge the royal palace. For our part, we would hope that the political parties make a pro-active announcement and cease the moment. There is a need for such an initiative in order to prevent anarchy and dangerous collapse of state structures. For this, the political parties should unilaterally declare restoration of the Third Parliament and/or announce a parallel government. Thereafter, they should consult with the Maoist rebels who have credibly indicated their intention to enter open politics, and announce elections to an unconditional constituent assembly. We hope that the international community will come forward with immediate recognition of such a unilateral declaration, required to prevent Nepal from sinking into the pit of one kind of extremism or another. In such an evolution, we see no role for king Gyanendra other than as a mute spectator.

Please note, Excellencies, that this is the only path to stability in nepal which both the Nepali masses and the international community want so keenly. The world community, which has harboured such enormous goodwill for the Nepali people and which has been party to our nation-building and development efforts for more than five decades, must respect the maturity of the Nepali political discourse which is speeding the current, exhilarating People’s Movement. Please also note, Excellencies, the kingship is not indispensable for the maintenance of Nepali nationhood, and that it should henceforth remain, if at all, at the cognisance of Nepal’s 26 million citizens.

The latest announcement by the Indian Foreign Secretary, about respecting the will of the people of Nepal, we believe, provides a corrective to the error evident in the Indian government’s initial welcome note. The Indian corrective, we believe, should be emulated by all other international players who wish the Nepali people well.

Sincerely,
Mr. Rupak Adhikari
Mr. Anubhav Ajeet
Mr. Bimal Aryal
Mr. Laxman Prasad Aryal
Mr. Ramesh Bhattarai
Mr. Kanak Mani Dixit
Dr. Saroj Dhital
Mr. Daman Nath Dhungana
Mr. Arjun Parajuli
Mr. Bhasker Gautam
Dr. Madhu Ghimire
Dr. Mahesh Maskey
Dr. Sarad Wanta
Dr. Bidur Osti
Dr. Bharat Pradhan
Mr. Charan Prasai
Mr. Padma Ratna Tuladhar
Mr. Malla K. Sunder

This was forwarded to me by Shirley, The letter is written by

Frances Klatzel

Kathmandu, Nepal

and CC’s to:  Canadian High Commission, Delhi; First Secretary, Canadian Cooperation Office, Kathmandu; Honourable Sharon Carstairs, Senate of Canada

 ********************************

Honourable Stephen Harper,

Prime Minister of Canada

Dear Sir,

I am writing from Kathmandu, Nepal to express my utter dismay at the statement issued by the Foreign Affairs Minister, Peter MacKay on the situation in Nepal and the recent address by the King of Nepal.

Presently, hundreds of thousands of ordinary people are protesting the on-going autocratic royal regime.  What we in Kathmandu see in local newscasts (and a few friends see in person) are mostly peaceful protests being fired upon with tear gas, rubber bullets, and live ammunition.  Hence, I was quite disturbed to see the following headline news:

From "The Kathmandu Post" April 21, 2006..

UN, UK Canada welcome royal address

"We hope that the King’s gesture will help bring an end to the political unrest and violence we’ve seen in Nepal over the past several weeks, re-establish democracy and human rights, and lead to national reconciliation," said Foreign Affairs Minister of Canada Peter MacKay in a statement.

Canada has also urged the seven-party alliance to work together and refrain from violence during this delicate transition period to help return stability to the country.’

Mr MacKay’s intention might have been to encourage the re-establishment of democracy and respect for human rights, however, the king’s gesture was quite ambiguous on several critical issues and was based on an article of the current constitution that could be interpreted to allow him to continue to hold real state power. 

Unfortunately, Mr MacKay’s remarks ignore several important issues and concerns that are being raised by the political parties and civil society regarding the royal address.  These issues have been eloquently presented in the following letter that was drafted by several prominent members of Nepali civil society who are presently being detained by the royal government for a peaceful protest on 9 April.

The letter has among its authors, two jurists, who worked to frame the 1990 constitution, which is now in question due to the undue leverage that it allows to the monarch.  Even if the parties and the people were to accept this offer, the king could still use the clauses to take back state power and would still have control of an army that has become notorious for its human rights abuses.   One of the few unambiguous statements in the address was the king’s thanks to the security forces, who continue to commit serious human rights abuses as documented by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and many national organisations.

Mr MacKay’s statement reveals his total misunderstanding of the political reality in Nepal and acceptance of the palace’s intentional attempt to mislead the international community and make them think that the monarch is genuinely reinstating a democratic system.  While the King uttered the words, no one that I know believes that he will ever seriously allow a functioning democracy in Nepal so long as he is on the throne.  The attempt to mislead the international community and Nepali citizens is clear when one inspects the article (35) under which he supposedly made the offer.

Article 35, shown below actually still leaves all the power with the king, especially clauses 5 and 6.

Article 35 Executive Power

(1) The executive power of the Kingdom of Nepal shall, pursuant to this Constitution and other laws, be vested in His Majesty and the Council of Ministers.

(2) Except as otherwise expressly provided as to be exercised exclusively by His Majesty or at His discretion or on the recommendation of any institution or official, the powers of His Majesty under this Constitution shall be exercised upon the recommendation and advice and with the consent of the Council of Ministers. Such recommendation, advice and consent shall be submitted through the Prime Minister.

(3) The responsibility of issuing general directives, controlling and regulating the administration of the Kingdom of Nepal shall, subject to this Constitution and other laws, lie in the Council of Ministers.

(4) Except in so far as any action is to be taken in the name of His Majesty pursuant to this Constitution and other laws, all other executive actions shall be expressed to be taken in the name of His Majesty’s Government.

(5) Any decision, order or implementation warrant to be issued in the name of His Majesty pursuant to this Constitution and other laws shall be authenticated in such manner as may be set forth in rules made by His Majesty at His discretion. All other decisions, orders and implementation warrants to be issued in the name of the Council of Ministers pursuant to clause (4) above shall be authenticated in such manner as may be set forth in rules approved by His Majesty.

(6) No question shall be raised in any court as to whether or not any recommendation or advice has been given to His Majesty pursuant to this Constitution by the Council of Ministers or any other institution or official, nor shall any question be raised in any court about what recommendation or advice has been given.

With the statement by your minister, your government has contributed to increasing the risks to Canadians visiting or residing in Nepal by making it appear that we support the autocratic regime.  As a volunteer warden for the Canadian Embassy here, I have had to make daily calls to my ‘list’ of resident Canadians, many of whom were very concerned at this very unfortunate statement and the headlines that it created.

I would urge you to reconsider this statement and reconfirm Canada’s commitment to supporting and promoting human rights, democracy, and a just peace in Nepal.

Yours sincerely,

Frances Klatzel

Kathmandu, Nepal

CC:  Canadian High Commission, Delhi,

First Secretary, Canadian Cooperation Office, Kathmandu

Honourable Sharon Carstairs, Senate of Canada

The following includes actions, letters, references to reports on Nepal sent to T. Lauriault by Shirley Posted on SerendipitYouCity.  If this is your first visit pease read them!

For Nepal, April 20, 2006 - http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2006/04/20/for-my-friends-in-nepal/

Nepal Update from the Streets, April 21, 2006 - http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2006/04/21/nepal-update-from-the-streets/ 

Nepal Action Contacting Senators & MPs (Canada) April 21, 2006 - http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2006/04/21/nepal-action-contacting-senators-mps/ 

Nepal Photo Blog, April 22, 2006 - http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2006/04/22/nepal-photo-blog/ 

Letter from Shirley to the Canadian Prime Minister April 23, 2006 - http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2006/04/23/s-blairs-letter-to-the-prime-minister-nepal/ 

Canada in the Kathmandu Post April 23, 2006 - http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2006/04/23/canada-in-kathmandu-post-april-21-2006/

Global Voices picked it up and posted on their South Asia Section  - http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2006/04/21/nepal-update-from-the-streets/ 

Shirley Blair, is a great friend who currently resides in Nepal. She is the Director, of the Schools for Himalayan Children, Shree Mangal Dvip Boarding School, PO Box 1287 Kathmandu, Nepal. Tel: 977-1-447-2007 of the  in Nepal. 

Shirley has been sending me news updates as the situation in Nepal unfolds.  I was putting her news up on my personal blog - SerendipitYouCity to keep her friends, family & acquaintances up to date. 

The traffic was high, and the messages were quite frequent, so I started this one on her behalf.  Once she is out of crisis management mode, I will show her how the whole thing works and she can manage it herself.  Until then, I will post her messages here.

Please do not hesitate to send me responses from your actions and do leave comments.

Thanks All

Tracey Lauriault