LIGHTNING INJURES 14 IN GORKHA Kathmandu, 15 June: At least 14 persons were hurt after being struck by different accidents of lightning at Ashrang VDC in Gorkha district last night, RSS reports from Gorkha. Condition of four is critical in Ashrang VDC-3, local teacher Khadananda Bhatta said over phone. House walls of Ram Chandra Bhattarai have been cracked and window panes have been smashed by the lightning. Similarly, four persons fell unconscious and a house of Jag Bahadur Nepali in Ashrang VDC-4 was also partially damaged by the lightning. The injured are receiving treatment at local sub-health post, teacher Thakur Prasad Bhattarai said. Likewise, six persons have lost consciousness after being struck by lightning in ward no. 1 in the same VDC, according to local Raju Miya. Nnnn FIRE DESTROYS 40 HOUS AT BANKE VILLAGE Kathmandu, 15 June: A fire during the current dry spell Friday morning destroyed at least 40 houses at Jamuniya village in Matehiya-8 in Banke first reports A fire earlier destroyed nearly 150 houses and sheds in the village. Nnnn OPINION DOOMED TO BE DIVIDED Kathmandu, 15 June: After crisscrossing the whole gamut of bargaining over issues of individual nature and communal structure, a handful of leaders representing three or four political groups decided outside the jumbo-size 601-member Constituent Assembly, the leaders of three major political parties in mid-May had announced that the Gordian's knot had been untied. The very next day, Madhasi Morcha objected to the "consensus" in which the Madhesi groups had no part, Trikal Vastavik writes in People’s Review.. One-third of the country's population had been relegated to the status of "others." But no-nonsense strikes Brahmin-Chhetri-Thakuri-Dasnami front that pressed for a clear mention of their identity in the constitution made the major parties quickly wilt. The Maoist-NC-UML sitting had not addressed this issue. Enough was enough, and the humiliated combine put its foot down. The so-called major party leaders quickly agreed to something they had deliberately ignored for almost four years. Credit for the new arrangement does not go to any of "senior" leaders like Sushil Koirala, Sher bahadur Deuba, Ram Sharan Mahat, Ram Chandra Poudel, Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhala Nath Khanal, K.P. Oli, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Mohan Baidya, Baburam Bhattarai, Surya Bahadur Thapa, Lokendra Bahadur Chand and Prakash Chandra Lohani. The scenario is only an inkling of things to strike in the coming days under the new constitution. Lack of vision and even rudimentary competence to look into the various aspects of constitution-making creates confusion and serious consequences. In a country where political activists openly confess that they are yet to find the grounding of democratic statesmanship, and against the background of how these incompetent people have created a dangerous mess in a few years' time, all existing roads lead to deep divisions, instability and heavy sectarian feelings never witnessed in 243 years. Shared powers between the president and the prime minister, therefore, mean divided loyalty and clash of interests. We can dump the argument that there are some countries with "mixed" system. First of all, the people of the few such countries do not have the problem of "lack of statesmen." They have political stability and rule of law. Or, in the case of the premier playing second fiddle to the president, the latter yes-man does not dare to clash with the powerful boss. Ram Baran Yadav, the interim president, is supposed to be a nominal head. Yet he labors hard to be seen and heard. He even threatened not to sign the constitution if it went against the spirit of Nepali people. His advisors issue statements on the president's "concern" over a host of issues in connection with the constitution-making process. Yadav used to tell his confidants that he felt extremely uncomfortable when meeting with Girija Prasad Koirala who served as his big boss in the Nepali Congress for so long. But he suddenly got himself engaged in hectic activity, including frequent summoning of political party leaders to express his concerns. What extra ounces of confidence and daring did he manage to build to do so? If one looks at Yadav's itinerary when he visits places outside Kathmandu Valley, an answer can be found. And he is supposed to be a titular, and not an executive, president. The new constitution provides more specific powers to the president with the potential for laming the prime minister elected by the popular house that is also elected by popular votes. Anyone with the tendency to be "seen and heard," would want to interpret and expand his role and space. The authoritarian tendency that we see in all political party leadership is an indication of this. If the president and the prime minister are from two different parties, the tension can be sensed in advance. Look at the people who surround Ram Baran Yadav as staff members and advisors. Were these people selected on nonpartisan basis or on strictly party lines? When a president enjoys broad executive powers at the expense of a prime minister, the potential for trouble is not strong but is a certainty if the president hails from one stripe and the prime minister from another persuasion. There might be empty argument about the provision for "impeachment." This business is nonsense in a country where party activists are shielded for impunity in such blatant manner that the rule of law has been made a mockery, especially in the last six years. Obtaining two-thirds majority in a mixed voting system is practically improbable. The petty politics that Nepalis have been witness to in the earlier past and the recent past emphasizes a pattern that is most likely to be left not erased. The maverick Maoist chief Pushpa Kamal Dahal, whatever his rhetoric about democracy, is an authoritarian in style and purpose. When he pleaded for powers for the president, he did not have the institution in mind but himself in the institutional chair. His insistence that the president under the new constitution be given significant executive powers was guided solely by his personal fancies rather than in the interest of the Nepali people in general. In fact, he is said to be thinking of two terms at the high office which will have powers that were not supposed to be the case in the immediate aftermath of the 2006 political changes that have doomed Nepalis for decades of instability and disharmony. He will then want immunity from prosecution for acts of omission and commission not only when in office but also when out of it. The richest politician of the richest political party in the whole of South Asia defends all sorts of charges against his party or himself to show that he is abreast of what is said about him but not the issue of corruption in his organization or what his senior opponents in the party level against him. It seems that there has been no corruption by any government minister during loktantra years. It is not that there is no corruption. Everyone, including Transparency International chaps, insist that corruption is rampant and the problem is the second worst in the whole of South Asians, next to Afghanistan. The corruption checking commission makes a lot of noises when booking someone for charges against corruption. But so far it has yet to name any loktantrik minister for taking bribes. Whatever it has pursued regarding former ministers, it was initiated during the bad old days of the constitutional monarchy period. So what can one expect from the "new, model" thrust upon Nepalis? Be prepared for center-local war of words for resources, privileges and "full-fledged autonomy" that will only reinforce sectarianism and impunity. nnnn