Sher Bahadur Deuba’s Reappointment

The appointment of the Nepali Congress (Democratic) leader, Sher Bahadur Deuba to the Prime Ministerial post after 20 months on 2 June has been widely appreciated in the Nepali media. Deuba’s government had been dismissed (he was initially elected on 22 July 2001) on 4 October 2002 for its inability to conduct elections.  It was also viewed as a continuation of the controversial Article 127 of the 1990 Constitution, since Deuba was also appointed in the same ‘undemocratic’ way as his predecessors Lokendra Bahadur Chand and Surya Bahadur Thapa.  The Nepali vernacular newspaper, Samacharpatra (3 June) in its editorial says that public opinion favours the King’s decision and it was a chance to end the animosity between the king and the political parties.  Further, it says the pre-4 October situation has been restored with the return of Deuba’s government and called for wide support for his government.

Spacetime (3 June) in its editorial says that the conflict situation was not conducive to holding elections for the House of Representatives unless the Government provides peace and security to the people.  Except in Kathmandu and other important urban centres, the governmental apparatus has no presence, including in a majority of the rural areas. The Maoists’ second-in-command and political wing leader, Baburam Bhattarai wrote in Kantipur (8 June) that the appointment of the ‘puppet prime minister’ had complicated the issues more and questioned the reappointment of Deuba, who had been sacked from the same position on grounds of incompetence.  He indicted the King’s reconciliatory move as ‘illusion’ and prompted by foreign advisers to dupe the people better than Lokendra Bahadur Chand or Surya Bahadur Thapa.  He said that Deuba’s appointment was a shield to protect the King and ‘if anyone takes his reappointment as regression redressed, it will be a grave mistake.’

Education under Threat

The Samacharpatra (8 June) in its editorial opined that education was among the worst affected in the current political climate of instability.  It condemned the parliamentary parties and the Maoists for their direct attack on schools and colleges with constant strikes to leverage their demands. If they want to prove their social and political worth, they should halt the bandhs, so that the government can work towards fulfilling their demands.  It further said that the children were traumatized because of constant attacks on their schools, buses and the presence of either the Maoists or the security forces in their premises.  The continuous strikes have kept 7.7 million students away from their classes.

Tax for Insurgency

Rajdhani (21 June) in its report from Sindhuli district said that the Maoists have stopped receiving donations from the common public.  Instead, the report continued, the insurgents have levied taxes based on personal income on behalf of the ‘People’s Government’.  So far only teachers were subjected to pay tax (a month salary for every four months), but now even the farmers and the poor labourers were also included in the ‘tax payee’ category depending on the value of their property.  Local government and the Village Development Committee employees were no more allowed to work in their respective areas and even the NGOs could not pursue their developmental projects without the Maoists’ written permission.

Call for Wider Participation

In Bimarsa (28 May-3 June) Baburam Bhattarai urged for active support of revolutionary journalists and said ‘our defence and offensive strategies have already made a huge impact at national and international levels… the time has come for revolutionary journalists to be more committed in their responsibilities towards society and the nation.  Any social revolution without their support is doomed to failure’.  He called the revolutionary journalists to be more objective and provide constructive analyses and to check the penetration of the capitalist global media into Nepal.  As the revolution becomes more urban-centric, revolutionary journalists play a key role in clearing prejudices, exposing the crimes of reactionaries and boosting the morale of the ‘people’s army’ and party members. 

In Kantipur (30 May), Hisila Yami, Maoist leader and wife of Bhattarai, argued that the liberty of women is possible only with the freedom of all communities and classes in society.  Further, ‘the first step in the question of women’s emancipation is an unconditional right to parental property and equal participation in the state power.  Yami invited courageous and patriotic women to join hands with the men and stand up against the fascist regime.