Forgot your password?
Relevance Of Election Ordinances
By KTM Metro Reporter
August 17, 2012: the Office of the Head of State said that the Head of State believed the election-related ordinances were no more relevant at the moment, as elections to a new CA was not going to hold after the Election Commission served a notice to the government stating holding the election to a CA on November 22 was impossible without a political consensus and necessary laws; so, the Head of State sent back the election-related two ordinances the government had submitted on July 27, 2012.
The question was why the Head of State took so much time to decide whether to issue the ordinances following the recommendations of the prime minister or not. Anybody could guess whether the Head of State despite his stand on not crossing over the boundary of the constitution had simply ignored his previous stand and followed the advice of the opposition coalition of NC and CPN-UML. If it were so, then it would be disastrous to the Head of State and to the country, too,
If the election to a new CA was not possible on Nov. 22, then it had to happen some time in the future no matter when; so, the election-related laws were always relevant if the Head of State was for holding the election to a new CA and if he had no intention to continue his office forever. If he wanted to stay on to power, as his colleagues wanted then he could fire the current government and turn over the power to his NC colleagues overstepping the constitution bringing the political chaos and risking his necks and that of the colleagues in question.
If the Head of State correctly understood the current political situation he should work with the current government to hold the elections to a new CA as soon as possible not following the advices of the so-called democratic parties that were not for elections: the basic principles of democracy.
The Head of State had asked Chairman of UCPN-Maoist Prachanda to build a political consensus. What was the role of the Head of State if the chairman of one party had to build a consensus while other leaders could turn down any offer made for building a consensus. In absence of the CA, the Head of State should take an initiative to build a consensus or to lead all political parties to elections to a new CA otherwise the Head of State had no rights to stay on in the office rather his office would be no more relevant.
