NO SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION AT CONSTITUTION MAIM DRAFTING COMMITEE

NO SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION AT CONSTITUTION
DRAFTING COMMITTEE MEET

Kathmandu, 2 March: There was no substantive discussion at a
crucial meeting of the main constitution
drafting committee chaired by Nilambar Acharya.
Leaders agreed to meet again Sunday.
Leaders of the Nig Three reported o progress in talks to resolve differences of themes for inclusion in a constitution to be promukgated 28 May ad asked for more time to settle differences,
But the differences had to be settled by Friday.
Acharya said he will have no option but to report to the
constituent assembly charged with responsibility to draft a
constitution with details of differences.
Nnnn

ORDER ISSUED FOR ARREST OF HIMAL GAS OWNER

Kathmandu, 2 March: Amid extreme and prolonged gas
shortage police Thursday issued arrest warrants against
Managing Director of Himal Gas Subash Khetan amid charges of creating shortages.
Warrants were also issued for arrest of plant in-charge Gyan
Ratna Sakya and mechanical in-chage Bhimsen Bhujel in Kavre.
Factory in-manager Deg Raj Bhattarai has already been
Arrested following an inspection by Minister Bhatta.
With shortages, households have started using electricity for cooking—a problematic switch with 10-hour load-shedding every day,
Nnnn

NO FURTHER LEADS ON KATHMANDU BLAST
Kathmandu, 2 March: Even after an arrest warrant against Depraj Lama aka Bishwokranti in connection with Monday’s bomb attack at Babarmahal, police are still scratching their head to find out if he was really behind the blast, Ankit
Adhikari writes in The Kathmandu Post. .
Police have no concrete evidence to prove that Bishwokranti was the blast mastermind. Instead of their own investigation leading to a conclusion, police issued the warrant based on media reports after the accused telephoned some journalists to immediately own up the incident.
According to DIG Upendra Kanta Aryal, leader of the probe team investigating the case, the arrest warrant was issued against Bishwokranti simply because he claimed responsibility for the incident. Although DIG Aryal said there were other evidences too, he, however, refused to divulge details.
The arrest warrant issued on Tuesday holds underground outfit Samyukta Jatiya Mukti Morcha (SJMM) responsible for the blast, but police are yet to gain a lead.
While uncertainty and confusion still prevail, some officials are also of the view that it is too early to conclude that SJMM was behind the blast. “No guesses related to the blast can be ruled out yet. It can be SJMM or anybody else,” said SSP Devendra Subedi, a member of the probe team.
“We are still in the middle of our investigation,” he said. Confusion among police rose as, on the blast day, the group first owned up the bombing and later ruled out its involvement.
With two opposite claims made public by the alleged culprit SJMM, the government statement, too, has turned out to be sketchy.
The first official view publicised through the media that coincided with the owning up of the blast by SJMM has Home Minister Bijay Kumar Gachhadar saying that SJMM could be behind the blast. However, as soon as the group denied its involvement, the government stand altered and police, who were sure of SJMM’s involvement just
a couple of hours before, were again in a spin.
Informed sources say the dilemma prevailed among government officials as the outfit itself split into two factions lately. While it is believed that one faction, first claimed its responsibility, the other denied its involvement later.
Moreover, police statement that the warrant against Bishwokranti was based on media reports, has again revealed obscurity within police three days after the blast.
Police are also linking the bomb attack with another
explosion at the Ncell tower in Dhading last Saturday. The fact that two of the dead and one injured in Monday’s incident also hail from Baireni has led security personnel to link the two cases. Police have already established SJMM’s involvement in the Dhading explosion.
Asked if there was any link between the two cases, SSP Subedi said, “There may be some links,
but we can’t be so sure of anything until our investigations are over. However, nothing can be ruled out yet.
Nnnn

JC SHORTLISTS COMPLAINTS AGAINST 12 JUDGES
Kathmandu, 2 March: As the Judicial Council (JC) starts probe into the Supreme Court recommendation for action against the then Special Court judges who gave clean chit to former minister JP Gupta in a corruption case, the constitutional body has opened files of some 200 complaints against more than 60 judges, Pranab Kharel writes in The Kathmandu Post..
According to JC sources, who sought anonymity, the Council has prioritised investigation into complaints against 12 judges including Cholendra Shumsher Janga Bahadur Rana--one of the three judges recommended action by the apex court while issuing its verdict on February 21 in the corruption case involving Gupta. The other judges are Bhoopadhwoj Adhikari and Komalnath Sharma. A division bench of the apex court in May 2010 recommended that the JC take action against the trio, who was found to have made “grave mistakes” in handling a corruption case involving former Defence Secretary Chakra Bandu Aryal.
The defendants also include chief judges of the Biratnagar-, Janakpur- and Dipayal-based Appellate Courts. The JC source maintains that many complaints have been lodged against judges in district and appeal courts in the Tarai.
Others sought JC action include nominees for vacant posts at the apex court. “Their appointment will take place once they are cleared of the charges,” said the source.
Asked about the nature of complaints, sources state that many were filed by the party losing the case. A common charge against the judges is indulgence in financial irregularities. Sources, however, claim not all complaints hold ground. “In some cases, the party has also called for a review of the court's decision while registering a complaint against the judge who gave the verdict,” according to the source.
The JC on February 29 decided to study notices issued to it regarding complaints filed against judges.
nnnn