Home Minister in a dignified bargain

The Home Minister raised issues such as Trichandra College park construction, Trivi website design, goat rearing, appointment of Vice Chancellor of BP Koirala Institute of Health Sciences, red passport, widebody ship, fake Bhutanese refugees, not only the land issue of Tikapur, but also the sale of sensitive information of the country to foreigners. And, at the end, he said, 'Do we have to investigate such matters as well? If there is going to be an investigation on me today, why shouldn't there be an investigation on these issues as well?'

At least the home minister of the country has the right and responsibility to confirm the matters he spoke in the parliament, to punish the guilty. However, he has raised all these issues and tried to negotiate based on them and escape. He also misused the rostrum of the Parliament to criticize the media world for publishing the facts with evidence of misappropriation of cooperative savings. However, the shareholders, directors and managing directors of the company could not clarify the issue of how they can be exempted from the responsibility of the illegal work done at that time.

Yes, Lamichhane was a TV presenter before joining politics. At that time, he questioned everyone, sought accountability. Now he himself is a Member of Parliament, Chairman of the National Party and Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of the country. However, he did not take care of all those official positions and duties on Sunday. On the contrary, he hurled accusations at the opposition parties and their leaders who asked questions in the House. That too is not for the purpose of good governance, but for the implicit purpose of bargaining.

The main issue raised now is the embezzlement of common people's savings by accessors like Lamichhane, GB Rais. Opposition parties including the Congress demand that such persons should be investigated and if found guilty, action should be taken. However, Lamichhane opined that if a committee focused on him is to be formed, a committee should also be formed on people whose names are linked to various other issues. He should keep in mind that every issue of maladministration is different, they should all be investigated based on their own laws. However, the embezzlement of the savings of the cooperative, which is linked to the value of the common man's sweat, cannot be a subject of bargaining and bargaining.

Lamichhane is the incumbent Home Minister of this country who has the legal right to investigate and take action if there is information about any irregular activities. They can open the file of the incident at any time. However, because he raised questions about him, he threatened by saying, 'Let's investigate you too?' But the UML and the Maoists who are now in power did not raise the issue of the incidents that happened when they were in government. Giribandhu did not even consider it necessary to touch the issue of land lease of T State. It is clear that he is not driven by responsibility, but by revenge.

In the House, he made a serious point at the beginning - about the MP selling the secret information of the country. Not only those who carry two or three citizenships. Those who carry the same citizenship but sell the country's secret information to foreigners should also be sent out, removed from the parliament, no matter how big the minister or the general minister of the party is, Lamichhane said.

If a member of parliament has sold the country's secret information to a foreigner, what could be a bigger threat than that? If that matter is in the notice of the Home Minister, what is he looking at? Is this subject he is trying to exchange with the issue of misappropriation of cooperative savings? Or, is he prepared to insult those who question him at any level? However, he has said in the parliament that he is ready to step down. However, no matter how low it goes, the home minister of the country is not allowed to be irresponsible. Lamichhane's statement should be questioned and debated again in Parliament.

Lamichhane has objected to it saying that they are going to form a committee targeting him. Speaker, if we focus on individuals, things can go a long way. If the parliament wants to create a committee to investigate every news that comes in the newspaper while being individual-centered, it is in the minimum common program of the government to open the file, no matter how old it is, I am ready. Let's start with me," he said. "Let's open the files of all those I have mentioned now. Form a committee, I am ready. However, let this parliament decide what kind of parliamentary dignity we should go with.' On the one hand, he said to investigate, on the other hand, he himself expressed that the parliamentary dignity will be undermined by the issues he raised.

Democracy is stronger when, after a public question is raised, an honest person paves the way for inquiry. If there was honesty and accountability in Lamichhane, the issue of embezzlement of cooperative savings would not have become so complicated. The Parliament, which raised all the problems of the people, would not have been held hostage for so long because of a single issue. As far as the parliamentary precedent is concerned, this is not the first time such an inquiry has been demanded. Two years ago, when Janardhan Sharma was the finance minister, there was a controversy over the revision of tax rates in the budget. After the voice of the then opposition UML, a parliamentary inquiry committee was formed. The Sudan scandal is a fact pointed out by the parliamentary inquiry committee. UML and RSVP were in the opposition some time ago and stood in favor of an inquiry into the gold scandal. Based on their demand, a judicial committee was formed, due to which new evidence was revealed in gold smuggling.

In the parliamentary history of Nepal, there have been many committees inside and outside the parliament which have revealed new facts. Several committees have been formed on the basis of the news reported in the media because the media is supposed to reveal the facts. Guilty and innocent are the contracting states. Therefore, the subject of cooperative investigation can also be a means of uncovering a new fact. If transparency and accountability are considered to be the main thing, there is no need to worry about how the parliamentary investigation will look in the parliament. He will be found innocent if he did not commit the scam as he said. He must be sure that the inquiry recommends further investigation of the guilty and acquittal of the innocent.