UCPN (Maoist) Chairman Puspa Kamal Dahal “Prachanda” has stated that the key is in the hands of the people of Nepal. The people of Nepal had given the key for the peace and for writing the constitution to the 601 odd representatives whom they trusted, only to meet despair.
It seems that the key is lost now and the political parties are responsible for the loss. I would like to opine that the President is the appropriate elected representative of the sovereign people of Nepal who could order a duplicate of the lost key for the peace and for the birth of the constitution. The President of Nepal is not a duplicate of the British Monarch. The President of Nepal is required to exercise full executive powers like the
Indian President whenever such necessity arises. With the demise of the parliament, all the political parties have lost their status of bigness or smallness in the eyes of the law. A caretaker cabinet certainly does not represent the supremacy and the sovereignty of the people. It has fully lost its executive authority. In India too, Presidential Rule clears the journey of democracy whenever such responsibility of the President is needed. If
Presidential Rule in India has not killed democracy, it would be very unlikely that it would be different in Nepal. To save the journey of democracy and the supremacy of the people, the President should relieve the caretaker government by appointing a non-party Prime Minister who should be responsible to him (President).
Laxmi Bhakta Manandhar, Kathmandu
The article, “International schools in Nepal” (THT, Aug. 20, Page 8), by Mr. Mana Prasad Wagley is quite satirical to the education institutions having foreign names and gaining
popularity among the Nepalese people who just can enjoy selecting the schools with the international name and fame, and not others. However, it is not their fault. What about the Education Ministry and the departments that are supposed to be the monitoring those
entities. This is all about the impunity in the education system that no policies are
implemented as they are formulated. There had been so many protests held in the streets throughout the country just because of the name that the schools have chosen
expecting huge inflow of students to their schools. There have been so many examples of schools that have been gaining popularity with the name of international level clubs, places, even the exact name of the popular university like Oxford, Cambridge etc. It would not be that big deal if one puts the name of international schools and take the
accreditations so that they would be international not only in name but education also.
As the writer says in the article it would not make the schools international just having the
title international and English as the medium of instruction. I think there should not be any grudge over having international names for schools.
Arjun Prasad Tiwari,