[Archive] After seeing the face of a 'corrupt' in Girija Prasad's cabinet...

Girija Prasad became the Prime Minister with the agreement of even the opposition parties, pledging to stop corruption and irregularities in the country and establish good governance.

Ashad 14, 2083

Kantipur Reporter

[Archive] After seeing the face of a 'corrupt' in Girija Prasad's cabinet...

We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:

This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.


Girija Prasad Koirala, who was appointed Prime Minister in the last week of Chaitra, expanded the Council of Ministers on 2016 Baisakh 8. Girija Prasad became Prime Minister with the agreement of the opposition parties, promising to stop corruption and irregularities in the country and establish good governance. Due to the split between the UML and the Rastriya Prajatantra Party, the Nepali Congress, which had become the largest party in the House of Representatives, did not have enough MPs to form a government. Girija Prasad was leading a minority government with the support of the opposition.

The opposition had supported Girija Prasad on the condition that he would control corruption and irregularities through political stability, especially in the country that had been plagued by power struggles since 2015. Therefore, it was necessary for him to follow the path of establishing political stability and good governance right from the expansion of the Council of Ministers. But when the Council of Ministers was expanded, his own MPs protested against Girija Prasad. Not only was the expansion of the Council of Ministers by him opposed, 60 MPs of the Nepali Congress boycotted the Parliament meeting on 2016 Baisakh 9. It was probably the first time in parliamentary history since 1946 that the ruling party boycotted a parliament session. They had accused Girija Prasad of appointing corrupt faces as members of the cabinet. Girija Prasad had formed a 27-member cabinet. The cabinet included 18 ministers, 8 ministers of state, and 1 assistant minister. The Congress's Jhangiyeo Chhattiseyo and Hathtartharai group, i.e. the Girija Prasad and Krishna Prasad Bhattarai factions, had the same statement: 'Leaders say one thing to the people, but do the opposite. We have expressed our protest against the leaders.' Despite becoming the Prime Minister with the slogan of good governance, the parliamentarians had accused Girija Prasad of increasing the size of the cabinet and appointing corrupt faces as ministers. 

[Archive] After seeing the face of a 'corrupt' in Girija Prasad's cabinet...

  The parliament session itself was affected by the absence of the ruling party parliamentarians. 7 ruling party parliamentarians were present in the parliament session. But the ministers seemed to be filling the seats. In the meeting, UML MP Khagaraj Adhikari sarcastically said, ‘The small cabinet has been made bigger, but the ruling party is not satisfied.’ UML also responded that the party was disappointed with the faces included in the cabinet. State Minister Amarraj Kaini and Assistant Minister Kamala Pant did not take the oath, expressing dissatisfaction. Leaders such as Purna Bahadur Khadka, Prakash Man Singh, Arjun Narsingh KC, Vijay Kumar Gachhadar, Anand Dhungana, Bimalendra Nidhi, who are currently active as ‘senior leaders’ of the Congress, had become ministers 29 years ago. Some leaders had already become ministers in the governments of 048 and 052.

[Archive] After seeing the face of a 'corrupt' in Girija Prasad's cabinet...


Even though the ruling party’s chief whip Dhungana and whip Devendra Raj Kandel became ministers, there was a need for someone to act as the whip of the Congress parliamentary party in the house. Congress Chhavi Prasad Devkota sarcastically said, ‘The Nepali people must have been overjoyed to see a minister with a clean image in the expanded cabinet. Whatever else, the ministers have come with a 'clean image'. There is talk that even corrupt ones have been included in the cabinet. Even if they are corrupt, they should bear it with joy.' The generosity shown by the ruling and opposition parties towards the new cabinet had created a situation where ministers had to find it difficult to attend the parliament meeting. RPP MP Prakash Chandra Lohani had sarcastically said that the shutdown of the ruling party MPs would last for one or two days. RPP MP Pashupati Shamsher had shown the empty chairs in the parliament and congratulated the ministers for the trust of his own party MPs.


Some MPs had expressed concern about how corrupt people had been included in the cabinet. UML MP Hemraj Rai had sarcastically said that they had to look for MPs now because they used to look for ministers in the parliament when they were in government. They had mainly protested against the fact that their own MPs, who were part of the ruling Nepali Congress-led government, had not appointed ministers. Even though Girija Prasad instructed MPs and ministers to reduce government expenditure and maintain good governance, Congress leaders said that it would be difficult to implement his instructions due to the members included in the Council of Ministers.

[Archive] After seeing the face of a 'corrupt' in Girija Prasad's cabinet...

Kantipur Daily published a news article on the incident where MPs of the ruling party Congress boycotted Parliament against the decision made by their own leader on 10 Baisakh 2055 under the title ‘Boycott of Parliament in Protest of the Expansion of the Cabinet by Congress MPs’. The day before that, on 9 Baisakh, Kantipur had published a news article titled ‘Koirala Cabinet Expansion’. On the same day, another news article titled ‘UML Disappointed by the Expansion of the Cabinet’ was published. Overall, Girija Prasad’s expansion of the cabinet was highly criticized. There was especially opposition to the fact that the party’s second and third generation leaders were involved in corruption.

Presentation: Rishiram Paudyal 

Kantipur

Link copied successfully