Bhojraj Pokharel was the Chief Election Commissioner during the 2006 Constituent Assembly elections. Pokharel was appointed to a high-level panel by the UN Secretary-General during the parliamentary elections held in Bangladesh in 2008 and the referendum process in South Sudan in 2010/11.

Pokharel was the co-chair of the Carter Center's election observation mission in the parliamentary elections held in Myanmar in 2015. Durga Dulal and Jaisingh Mahara spoke to Pokharel, who is currently abroad, via virtual media for Kantipur, focusing on the elections scheduled for 21 Falgun:

It has been almost two months since the government was formed to hold elections on 21 Falgun. Looking at the preparations of the government and the Election Commission, does it seem that the environment is being created?

The government and the Election Commission are making efforts because of the topics like these that are coming up in the public media. In the initial days, the government faced many difficulties. Those difficulties were and are the cornerstones of creating an election environment. But now more efforts are needed to create an election-focused environment. Otherwise, it may be difficult to hold elections on 21 Falgun. For this work, it is necessary to work in an extraordinary manner, not in a 'business as usual' manner. More effort is required. The situation of the Commission is also similar. As soon as the election date was announced, the Commission should have been 'proactive' and started creating an environment, but it was somewhat slow and confusing. However, now it is gradually getting into rhythm. I see that it is under pressure to speed up its work. We do not have much time now.

The posts of the Chief Election Commissioner and one commissioner are vacant. There is no way to appoint a new one. Political parties and other stakeholders also seem to be apprehensive about the election. What could be the government's priorities in such a situation?

There is some discomfort when the post of the Chief Commissioner is vacant. But we have seen that in a country like India, one commissioner has managed the election. Therefore, the current three commissioners cannot hold the election. In the event that new appointments cannot be made, the government should trust the current team to work confidently. They should also work fearlessly within the framework of the constitution. The most important thing is to show their credibility through work. Because just holding an election is not enough. The success of an election can only happen when the election results are universally accepted. The Commission should take this as its main motto and move forward with its work.

The government has some 'agendas'. But the main 'agenda' is the election on 21 Falgun. Looking at the current situation, it seems that the issue of security has been raised along with the political environment. I had seen some confusion in the beginning regarding the issue of the political environment. In recent days, the government has started discussions with the parties. This effort should be intensified further. On the one hand, the government should take the old parties into confidence. On the other hand, it should work towards how the feelings and demands of the younger generation including Gen-G can be addressed and reflected in the election. Basically, the government should spend the most energy on creating a political environment.

The Prime Minister has said that he will not talk to the top leaders of the old parties. The top leaders of the parties also seem to be in the same state of mind. Will the 'egos' of both parties affect the election or not?

All parties will be brought to the election. It is said that no one can be a permanent enemy or friend in politics. It is not this or that in the work of giving a solution to the nation, all responsible people have equal responsibility and liability. If the country is not going to be given a way out, then the fight against ego is fine, otherwise there is no alternative to focusing on the elections. My experience related to world elections says that if any political party says it will boycott the elections and stay out, it will suffer losses. They have understood this. Therefore, once the election environment is created, the election train does not stop. It does not even wait for any passenger at that ‘station’. The passenger must reach the ‘station’ before the train leaves.

What I believe is that when arranging political, security and legal arrangements, it is not that no one will come to the elections. Parties come. They have their own ‘bargaining’. But parties should come to the elections. This is also their duty. If they do not come and the elections cannot be held, what will happen to the country? The parties should definitely be aware that they have to take responsibility for that.

How responsible is the government leadership in terms of getting political parties to participate in the elections?

The most responsible is the Prime Minister. The role of bringing the parties to the elections is played by the Prime Minister or the government. The other is the Election Commission. The Commission should have intervened before the government somehow 'opened up'. The Commission failed here. This may have happened due to some shortcomings, including the experience of those in the Commission. I will tell you the experience of 2064, even when the parties were not united, the Commission brought everyone to the Commission and warned all the top leaders repeatedly, and the environment was created. Therefore, the Commission has an important role. In fact, the government is also a partner in the matter of elections. However, the government also has to have trust, which is not without saying. Therefore, both the government and the Commission should work to create an environment for the elections. I suggest that we make responsible efforts to include the parties.

The parties are seen divided over the elections. UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli is saying that they will not go to the elections, this government will not hold elections, and will move towards restoring the parliament. Do you think that the environment for elections will be created when any party or UML alone refuses?

Even if the parliament is restored, it will go through the election. Rather than forcing it to go through the restoration right now, it should go through a fresh mandate. But only UML is seen opposing the election, which shows that, just as it had to leave power unexpectedly, just as it was attacked physically and humanly, it will take time to manage the pain. I think, UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli should express his pain. Even though he is the leader of the party and the Prime Minister, he is also a person. He also feels the same feelings as other people.

UML is also a party that came from the democratic process. Such a party understands very well that it will lose if it boycotts the election. They may have some bargaining issues. There is something inherent in going to this election, it may mean not going to the election without managing it. It may mean that these conditions must be fulfilled for us to come to the election. But it does not seem like UML is saying that it will not come to the election, because it must have said that if we create the environment, we will come. If we can create the environment, if we make the country election-ready, which party will not come? A lot should have been done so far to create an election-friendly environment. Radio, FM, newspapers, and TV should have broadcast election messages everywhere. It helps create an atmosphere among the common citizen that elections are coming and will be held. We are confused about creating such an environment. Time is running out. Other things can be managed gradually, but we cannot turn back the time that has passed.

An ordinance regarding the voter list has been issued. What other laws do you see as necessary?

One is the issue of youth participation. Another is the demand that people who live elsewhere than the place where the voter list is registered due to work and business should also vote. There is a demand that those outside the country should be given the right to vote. Similarly, there is talk of 'NOTA' that does not allow anyone to vote. These things should be addressed in a 'package'. To address these popular issues, the government will amend the Voter List Act and the House of Representatives Election Act, which will also help create a kind of election environment. There is also a need for reform in the political party law to increase the representation of youth in party executive.

During the Gen-G movement, there was also a demand for new faces in politics, for generational change. Where and what amendments should be made in the existing law to address such demands?

This is a very true and legitimate demand. However, its address should be multifaceted. The government and political parties themselves have an important role. For that, we need to improve how Gen-G or the representation of the young generation in parties, elected bodies and the government can be increased. Anyone who meets the qualifications specified by the constitution and law can become a candidate. If someone is eligible to participate in the elections, they cannot be deprived. That is why democracy is called a state of law. But the most direct question to resolve this issue is currently with political parties. Parties should consider whether to go to the elections with the leadership that has been rejected or under their own leadership. Let's leave the calculation of the profit and loss to the parties and their leaders. To increase the representation of youth, legal provisions can be made to ensure that at least 40 percent of the candidates for the party's executive positions are young.

Can a law be made to prohibit those who have been MPs for a fixed term?

The US Constitution does not allow the president to run for more than two terms. There are also such provisions in some other countries. However, now we should also look at the provisions of our constitution to impose a 'term limit'. Now, let's not make such amendments so that there is no environment where those who have to run for elections also run away from the elections. These are difficult times. We have to hold elections. We have to address demands. We have to bring those who are trying to run to the elections. We should be able to coordinate these two things in an intelligent way. As the saying goes, 'Even a snake should die, and a stick should not be broken.'

The age for becoming a candidate or voting can be reduced. But the question is how to adjust the constitution. It does not seem that amending the election law alone will be enough to amend the provisions of the constitution that a person must be 25 years old to be a member of the House of Representatives and 18 years old to vote. If the government can amend this restriction, then there seems to be no objection to lowering the age. The argument behind keeping that age was that by then, one would be mature. But the Gen-G movement has already rejected that argument. The demand for why voters should not be allowed to be candidates cannot be called illegitimate.

In the past, mature people have risen to leadership in the country. But that is not all, the Gen-G movement has taken place. Now the argument that maturity is only due to age is not relevant. There has been a demand to prevent people above 70 years of age from being candidates, which our contemporary environment has further confirmed. This may sound undemocratic, but it seems that some steps or arrangements need to be taken or made to give responsibility to the younger generation by dismissing the generation and individuals who have always failed and are occupying it, who do not leave it themselves and cannot even provide 'delivery'.

There is an order from the Supreme Court to allow Nepalis living abroad to participate in voting. There is also a debate about it at the moment. Is this possible or not?

The issue of voting rights for those living abroad has been raised for a long time. This issue was formally raised in the Election Commission's first long-term strategy, 2065 BS. Now, the law that is being drafted should make arrangements for voters living outside the place where their names are registered, doing various jobs within the country, to vote from the place where they currently live. Nepalis living abroad should also be given full voting rights in both systems - majority and proportional. But there are many challenges in its implementation. We also have the answer to manage the challenge. Even if the law opens that path, its implementation will have to be done in a phased manner. Even if the right to vote on both ballot papers is given, it is not currently possible to fully implement it in the Falgun 21 election. Because, time does not support the preparation. Until the country goes to e-voting, it is not possible to manage it. Therefore, arrangements can be made now to vote on the proportional system, that too as a 'pilot' in some places as a test, as mentioned above.

In the current short time, we cannot create a separate voter list for this purpose. निर्वाचन आयोगले ‘अपडेट’ गरेको मतदाता नामावलीमा नाम भएका मतदाताले म फलानो ठाउँ वा देशमा छु, म त्यो ठाउँ वा देशबाट मतदान गर्न पाऊँ भनेर माग गरेको अवस्थामा मतदाताको सूची आयोगले तयार गरेर तिनीहरूलाई मताधिकार दिने हो । अब विदेशका लागि अर्को मतदाता नामावली बनाउन सक्ने सम्भावना अहिले छैन ।

‘आउट अफ स्टेसन’ को भोटिङ गर्दा चार/पाँच वटा कुरा छन् । एउटा चाहिँ ‘अर्ली भोटिङ’ को कुरा गरिन्छ । मतदानको दिनभन्दा केही अगाडिदेखि नै भोट दिन पाउने व्यवस्था यसमा पर्छ । अर्को, ‘पोस्टल भोटिङ’ भनिन्छ, हुलाकबाट मतपत्र पठाउने । तेस्रो, ‘प्रोक्सी भोटिङ’ भनिन्छ, मेरो मत फलानोमार्फत दिन पाऊँ भन्ने हो । चौथो, ‘इन्टरनेट’ वा ‘अनलाइन भोटिङ’ भनिन्छ, मोबाइल बैंकिङ जस्तै जहाँबाट पनि मतदान गर्ने । यी प्रणाली कुनै न कुनै रूपमा विश्वमा प्रचलनमा छन् । तर अहिलेको अवस्थामा हामीसँग उपलब्ध समयअनुसार यी उपायहरूमा जान सक्ने अवस्था छैन । यीमध्ये कतिपय कुरा हाम्रोमा लागू हुने अवस्था पनि देख्दिँन । अन्ततः हामीले ‘ई–भोटिङ’ मा जानैपर्छ । त्यसका लागि तयारी गर्न लामो समय चाहिन्छ, त्यसैले तत्कालचाहिँ ‘ई–भोटिङ’ मा जानका लागि समय, स्रोत र व्यवस्थापन क्षमता जस्ता कारणले सकिने देखिँदैन ।

प्रणालीको छनोटदेखि सबै मतदाताले त्यसलाई प्रयोग गर्ने क्षमता र त्यसमा सबैको विश्वसनीयता जस्ता अनेकौं कठिन काम हुन्छन् । त्यसैले तत्काल हुने निर्वाचनमा साबिककै ‘पेपर ब्यालेट’ वा विद्युतीय मतपत्र (ईभीएम) प्रयोग गर्नेबाहेकको अरू विकल्प देख्दिनँ । त्यस्तै, अहिले विदेशमा रहेकाको मताधिकारको व्यवस्था गर्न र एकैचोटि सबैतिर लागू गर्न पनि सम्भव छैन । बिस्तारै, जहाँ हाम्रो दूतावास छ र नेपालीको संख्या ठूलो छैन, त्यहाँ लागू गर्न सकिन्छ । लाखौं जनसंख्या भएको ठाउँमा हामीले मतदान गराउँछौं भन्यौं भने असफल हुन्छौं । संशोधित निर्वाचन कानुन बनाउँदा यो वर्ष ‘पाइलटिङ’ गर्ने र अनुभवका आधारमा क्रमशः विस्तार गर्दै लैजाने भनेर भनौं । ‘पाइलटिङ’को काम ब्राजिल, दक्षिण अफ्रिका, डेनमार्क, अस्ट्रिया, जर्मनी, पाकिस्तान, बंगलादेश, श्रीलंका, म्यानमार लगायतका केही देशहरू, जहाँ नेपालीको संख्या सानो छ, नेपालको दूतावास छ, त्यस्ता स्थानबाट सुरु गरौं । यी देशहरूमध्ये केही देशमा परीक्षणबाट सुरु गर्‍यौं भने बाहिर बस्ने नेपालीलाई एउटा आशा हुन्छ । बाहिर बस्ने नेपालीलाई अधिकार पायौं भन्ने सन्देश जान्छ । त्यसले चुनावको वातावरण बनाउन सक्छ ।

निर्वाचनका लागि केही सर्त पहिले नै पूरा हुनुपर्ने होला नि ?

निर्वाचनका लागि चारवटा ‘कन्डिसन’ हुन्छन् । एउटा सुरक्षा हो । निर्वाचनको सबै सरोकारवालाहरू निर्वाचनमा खटिने कर्मचारी, पर्यवेक्षक, उम्मेदवार र मतदाता सबै आफूहरू निर्वाचनको प्रक्रियामा सहभागी हुँदा सुरक्षित छौं भनेर विश्वस्त हुन सक्नुपर्छ । भयमुक्त वातावरण अपरिहार्य छ । त्यसका निमित्त सुरक्षाको प्रत्याभूति चाहिन्छ । तर आजसम्मको अवस्था हेर्दा सुरक्षा निकायहरूको मनोबल असाध्यै गिरेको अवस्था छ । सुरक्षा निकायको ‘मोराल’ बढाउनेबारे सरकारले ख्याल गर्नुपर्छ । कतिपय प्रहरी कार्यालय छैनन्, हतियार छैनन्, सवारी साधन छैनन्, पर्याप्त सञ्चार साधन छैनन्, अनि कपडासमेत छैनन् ।

हालसम्मको अवस्था हेर्दा प्रहरी मानसिक रूपमा तयार भइसकेको देखिँदैन । प्रहरीले २३ र २४ भदौमा जुन किसिमको अवस्था भोग्यो, त्यसको घाउ निको भइसकेको छैन । सुरक्षाकर्मीले नै आफू पूर्ण सुरक्षित छु भनेर मानसिक रूपमा तयार हुनुपर्छ । यही अवस्था अन्य सुरक्षा निकायहरू सशस्त्र प्रहरी र केही हदसम्म नेपाली सेनामा परेको छ । जबसम्म सुरक्षा अवस्था नै राम्रो हुन सक्दैन, चुनाव सम्भव हुँदैन । यो कुरा निर्वाचनको वातावरणसँग जोडिन्छ ।

यस्ता विषयको सम्बोधनको पहिलो दायित्व सरकार प्रमुखका नाताले प्रधानमन्त्रीको हो । प्रधानमन्त्रीले सुरक्षा निकायका प्रमुखहरूसँग नियमित छलफल गरेर उनीहरूको मागको सम्बोधनलाई प्राथमिकता दिनुपर्छ । भौतिक व्यवस्थापन गर्नुका साथै, मानसिक रूपमा बलियो बनाउने साधनहरूको प्रयोग गर्नुपर्छ । करिब–करिब यस्तै अवस्था २०६४ सालको संविधानसभा निर्वाचनमा भोगिसकेका छौं । त्यसको अनुभवबाट पनि सिक्न सकिन्छ । हामीलाई स्रोतसाधनको अप्ठ्यारो भएमा कतिपय मित्र राष्ट्रले सहयोग गर्ने सम्भावनाको पनि उपयोग गर्न सकिन्छ । निर्वाचनको सुरक्षाको जिम्मा प्रहरी प्रशासनको मात्र होइन, आमनागरिकले पनि गर्ने हो । राजनीतिक दल र तिनका कार्यकर्ताले पनि गर्ने हो । यो पाटोलाई पनि उपयोग गर्नुपर्छ । कतिपय अवस्थामा आन्तरिक वा बाह्य पर्यवेक्षकको उपस्थिति स्वयं पनि सुरक्षा र निर्वाचन वातावरण बनाउन उपयोगी र सहयोगी हुने गरेका छन् । यी तमाम पक्षमा सोच्नुपर्छ ।

निर्वाचनको समन्वय र अनुगमनको काम कसरी गर्न गराउन सकिन्छ त ?

निर्वाचन व्यवस्थापनको समुच्च पाटो निर्वाचन आयोगसँग जोडिएको छ । तर, यसको वातावरण बनाउन सरकार र अरू सबै सरोकारवालाहरूको पनि उत्तिकै जिम्मेवारी छ । अहिलेको जस्तो विषम परिस्थितिमा निर्वाचन गराउनकै लागि सरकार बनेको छ, त्यसैले सरकारको झनै बढी भूमिका हुने नै भयो । त्यसै पनि समन्वय र प्रभावकारी अनुगमन कमजोर हुने गरेको परिवेशमा यसका लागि प्रधानमन्त्री कार्यालयले थप र सक्रिय भूमिका खेल्नुपर्ने देख्छु ।

निर्वाचन आयोग, सुरक्षा निकायहरू, अन्य सरकारी लगायतका निकायहरूले चुनावका क्रममा कुन समयमा कसले के काम सम्पन्न गर्नुपर्ने हो, समयसारिणीसहितको एकीकृत कार्यतालिका बनाउनुपर्छ । त्यसमा दैनिक भएको प्रगतिलाई प्रविधिमार्फत सूचना लिई अनुगमन हुने व्यवस्था गर्नुपर्छ । प्रधानमन्त्री कार्यालयमा रहने यस्तो संयन्त्रले निर्वाचन आयोगलाई पर्ने समस्यादेखि बाधा/अड्काउ फुकाउन भूमिका खेल्न सक्ने हुनुपर्छ । यसले आयोगको स्वायत्त भूमिकामा भने प्रवेश गर्नु हुन्न ।

२१ फागुनको निर्वाचनका लागि मौसम अनुकूल हुँदैन भन्ने अनुमान पनि भइरहेका छन् । फागुन निर्वाचन गर्नका उपयुक्त महिना हो कि होइन त ?

हामीसँग विविधायुक्त भूगोल छ । केही हिमाली जिल्लामा फागुनमा हिउँ पर्ने सम्भावना हुन्छ । अब मौसम कस्तो हुन्छ भनेर अहिले नै भन्न सकिँदैन । यो ठूलो समस्या हो जस्तो लाग्दैन । भोलि निर्वाचनमा मुलुक गइसकेपछि कुनै ठाउँ वा जिल्लामा समस्या भयो भने त्यस्ता ठाउँको निर्वाचन मिति सार्न पनि सकिन्छ । पहिले पनि यस्तो प्रयोग गरिएको छ । प्राकृतिक कारणले कुनै समस्या भयो भने मिति पुनरावलोकन गर्नु सामान्य हो । तर अहिले नै फागुनमा हुँदैन भनेर अर्को मिति हामीले सोच्न थाल्यौं भने निर्वाचन नहुने खतरातिर अग्रसर हुन थालिन्छ । अहिलेको मितिमा भएन भने अर्को मितिमा निर्वाचन नहुन सक्छ भन्ने हेक्का राख्नुपर्छ । मेरो आग्रह छ, यो मितिमा हुन्छ वा हुन्न भनेर नअलमलिऔं । एउटा चरणमा हुन सकेन भने अर्को चरणमा पनि निर्वाचन गर्न सकिन्छ । त्यसका लागि विकल्पहरू छन् । तर अहिलेचाहिँ फागुनलाई नै अर्जुनदृष्टि मानेर सरकार लाग्नुपर्छ । यदि कुनै प्राकृतिक विपत्ति आइलाग्यो भने देश निर्वाचनमा होमिइसकेपछि केही पर सार्न सकिन्छ । त्यो सहमतिमा हुने कुरा हुन् । अहिले नै तीललाई पहाड नबनाऔं । २०६४ मा पनि त हामीले तीन पटक निर्वाचनको मिति सारेको हो । तर विगतमा यही गरेकाले अब पनि त्यही गर्नुपर्छ भन्नेचाहिँ होइन । तोकिएकै मितिमा गर्नुपर्छ । प्राकृतिक रूपमा कुनै अप्ठ्यारो भयो भने सार्न सकिन्छ भन्ने मात्र मेरो तर्क हो । 

तपाईं आयोगको नेतृत्वमा हुँदा कठिन समयमा पनि निर्वाचन गराएको इतिहास छ । त्यसको अनुभव तपाईंसँग छ । त्यस आधारमा सरकार, आयोग र दलले तत्कालै गर्नुपर्ने काम के हो ?

दलबाटै सुरु गरौं । मुलुकका जिम्मेवार र ठूला दल भनेर जसले आफूलाई दाबी गर्नुहुन्छ, उहाँहरूले छिटोभन्दा छिटो आफ्नो ‘पोजिसन क्लियर’ गर्नुपर्छ । जस्तो, अहिले कांग्रेसको केन्द्रीय समिति बैठक चलिरहेको छ । उसले फागुनको निर्वाचनका लागि वातावरण बनोस्, हामी भाग लिन्छौं भनेर निर्णय गर्नुपर्छ । उसले निर्णय गरेपछि अरू दललाई पनि दबाब बढ्छ । त्यस्तै, एमाले, जो लामो समयदेखि मूलधारको राजनीतिमा छ । यसले पनि निर्वाचनको विषयमा आफ्नो ‘पोजिसन क्लियर’ गर्नुपर्छ । सरकार र जेन–जी आन्दोलनप्रति उसका सर्त र अरू कुरा होलान् । तर सर्तहरू राखेरै भए पनि फागुनको निर्वाचनमा जाने भनेर निर्णय गर्नुपर्छ । यसमा उसले ढिलाइ गर्न पाउँदैन । किनकि, प्रमुख राजनीतिक दल भएकाले उसको कर्तव्य पनि हो । माओवादी लगायतका अरू केही दलहरूले फागुनको निर्वाचनको पक्षमा आफूलाई उभ्याइसकेका छन् । 

कथंकथाचित निर्वाचन हुन सकेन भने त्यसपछिको ‘रोडम्याप’ के हो ? यसबाट थप संकट निम्तियो भने त्यसलाई त उहाँहरूले पनि भोग्नुहुन्छ नि । त्यस हिसाबले ठूला दलहरूलाई मेरो आग्रह छ, यो निर्वाचनको विकल्प नखोजौं । विकल्प खोज्न थाल्यौं भने मुलुक अँध्यारो सुरुङमा फस्न सक्छ । तपाईंहरूका कारणले त्यस्तो नहोस् भन्नेमा सतर्क रहनुपर्छ । हिजोका कमीकमजोरी र गल्तीलाई सुधार गरेर अब नयाँ पुस्तासँग हात मिलाएर अगाडि बढ्नुपर्छ । 

मेरो आग्रह जेन–जीका साथीहरूलाई पनि छ । अहिलेको सरकारले पूरा गर्नै नसक्ने माग राखेर निर्वाचन वातावरण बिग्रन नदिनुहोस् । यो निर्वाचनका लागि मात्रै बनेको सरकार हो । यसका कतिपय सीमितताहरू छन् । त्यसलाई बुझेर अरू धेरै कुरालाई थाती राखेर भए पनि फागुन २१ गतेको निर्वाचनमा केन्द्रित भइदिनुहोस् । अहिले के–के कुरा गर्न सकिने हुन्छ, ती पूरा गर्ने र नसकिने कुराहरूलाई निरन्तर उठाउँदै निर्वाचनमा केन्द्रित हुनुपर्छ । उहाँहरूकै कारण यो निर्वाचन हुन लागेको हो । यसलाई सफल बनाउने भूमिका उहाँहरूले पनि खेल्नुपर्छ ।

सरकारका तर्फबाट पनि निर्वाचनको वातावरण बनाउन अर्जुनदृष्टि लगाउनुपर्छ । आफ्नै कारणबाट निर्वाचनलाई असर पुग्ने कामबाट अलग रहनुपर्छ । त्यस्तै, निर्वाचन आयोग र सरकारले निर्वाचनका सबै सरोकारवालाहरू राष्ट्रिय र अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय सबैसँग कुराकानी र सहकार्य सुरु गर्नुपर्छ । पर्यवेक्षण र निर्वाचनको अनुगमनका लागि यूएनलगायत अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय निकायहरूको संलग्नताको वातावरण बनाउनुपर्छ । त्यसका लागि आग्रह गरिनुपर्छ । उनीहरूलाई पनि तयारीका लागि समय चाहिन्छ, ढिला नगरी अनुरोध गर्नुपर्छ । यसबाट स्वतन्त्र र निष्पक्ष निर्वाचनको वातावरण बनाउन सहयोग पुग्छ ।

निर्वाचन आयोगले पनि सरकारबाट हुनुपर्ने कामको स्पष्ट तालिकासहित भन्नुपर्छ । नत्र यो निर्वाचन गर्न हामी सक्दैनौं भनेर भन्न सक्नुपर्छ । यो अवधिभित्र कानुन, जनशक्ति र आवश्यक अरू कुरा उपलब्ध भयो भने मात्रै निर्वाचन गर्न सक्छौं, होइन भने निर्वाचन सम्भव छैन भनेर आयोगले दबाब दिन थाल्नुपर्छ । २०६४ को मेरो अनुभवले के लाग्छ भने दबाब नदिई काम हुँदैन । तत्कालीन समयमा हामीले कानुन दिनुस् भन्दाभन्दै चार महिना बितेको थियो । त्यसपछि निर्वाचन अब गर्न सक्दैनौं भनेर बोलेको हो नि । आयोगले दृढ भएर सरकारलाई यो मितिमा यो काम हुनुपर्छ, नत्र सम्भव हुँदैन भनेर भन्न सक्नुपर्छ । मैले अनुभव गरेको, प्रचारप्रसारमा पनि कमी भयो । आयोगले अहिलेसम्म निर्वाचनको वातावारण बनाउनका लागि सार्वजनिक रूपमा रेडियो, सामाजिक सञ्जाल र पत्रपत्रिकासहितका ठाउँबाट व्यापक प्रचार थाल्नुपर्ने थियो । त्यो काममा ढिलाइ भइरहेको छ ।

सरकारलाई निर्वाचनसँगै जेन–जी आन्दोलनले भ्रष्टाचार र सुशासनको पक्षमा पनि काम गर्ने ॅम्यान्डेट’ छ । यसतर्फ काम भएन र सरकार निर्वाचनमा मात्र केन्द्रित भयो भनेर जेन–जीहरूले नै अवरोध गर्ने वा निर्वाचनका लागि सरकार नै तयार नहुन सक्ने आशंका पनि छन् नि ?

सरकार निर्वाचनका लागि गठन भएको हो । तर, सरकार जेन–जीले उठाएको भ्रष्टाचार लगायतका अरू मुद्दाबाट पन्छिन मिल्दैन र सक्तैन पनि । यदि त्यस्तो भयो भने त त्यो सरकारको औचित्य त्यही दिन सकिन्छ । मलाई लाग्दछ, कुनै पनि सरकारले आफ्नो औचित्य आफैं समाप्त गर्दैन । जेन–जी पनि निर्वाचन नै चाहन्छन् भन्ने मलाई लाग्दछ । उनीहरूको आन्दोलन संस्थागत गर्न पनि निर्वाचन हुनुपर्छ । सरकारले नै निर्वाचन गराउन चाहँदैन भन्ने अहिलेसम्म मेरो कल्पना र अनुमान छैन ।