KATHMANDU, DECEMBER 26
Usha Kiran Timilsina was returning from an oath-taking ceremony for the Shivpuri Rural Municipality Committee, Nuwakot Constituency No. 1. She had just returned home after completing the programme, but the six-month suspension decisions shocked her, and she wrote, comparing the decision with the autocratic panchayat regime in Nepal on social media, "The decision has been taken to suspend me for six months. It would have been preferable if the leaders who opposed the Panchayat had not emulated the Panchayat style."
In a dramatic development, CPN-UML took action against three members who opposed CPN-UML's decision.
Yesterday, holding a central committee meeting, CPN-UML decided to expel its former vice chair Bhim Rawal and members Binda Pandey and Usha Kiran Timilsina for six months.
The commonality among the three of them is that all had disagreed with the decision to build the party headquarters with the land worth billions of donations from the controversial businessman Min Bahadur Gurung, the owner of Bhatbhateni supermarket.
UML then asked them for an explanation. Pandey and Timilsina submitted explanations, but Rawal didn't. UML said that action was taken against them after their answers were deemed 'unsatisfactory'.
Following the UML decision, many have expressed signalling that dissenting voices are not welcome inside CPN-UML. Rawal termed the action against him as the result of Oli's autocratic, arbitrary, dictatorial mindset.
Pandey took to Facebook to solicit suggestions, writing, "We were working in the party and learnt that the leader had given us a six-month vacation. This period should be used constructively and creatively. Leave your suggestions."
Meanwhile, a debate has erupted among political observers and netizens over the CPN-UML's decision to relieve Rawal and suspend Pandey and Timilsina.
Bharati Silwal Giri took to Facebook and wrote, "It is a sad day that an honest and respected UML senior leader like Bhim Rawal has been ousted from the UML party, and dedicated cadres like Binda Pandey and Usha have been suspended for six months for opposing wrongdoing within the party."
"Now Bimala Rai Poudel has objected to this. Will she also be punished?" She questioned, adding, "Such intolerance does not bode well for democracy!"
She also shared her previous post, saying, "Sharing my Facebook post of 16 December. 2024, Oli, is trying to play monopoly! By stifling dissent in his party, he wants to establish his oligopoly. Which portends ill not only for UML but also for the country's harmony! Impressed by Xi Jinping's iron grip modus operandi."
The Himalayan Times interacted with experts, and they also responded something similar to Giri.
"Oli's modus operandi has always been so. The recent events are just a reminder of his persistent style," said political analyst Binay Mishra. "He has always been a representative of non-progressive political ideology, even if his party is named after Marxism and Communism. He values monolithic, centralised, and parochial policies. His last tenure and move to dissolve the house are testimony to his anti-democratic credentials."
Political commentator Chandra Kishore also stated that Oli has a long history of crushing dissenting voices. For instance, Durga Prasai, Rabi Lamichhane, and, most recently, Bhim Rawal. "What they all had in common was that Oli entertained them when they spoke his words. Similarly, Oli's tendency has always existed, and Oli has never liked opposing thoughts about himself. Look at their (Lamichhane, Prasai and Rawal present situation."
In an interesting twist, many people have questioned the ChatGPT about the CPN-UML's current decision, asking, "What do you say to a political party that punishes a leader for raising questions when the leadership is wrong?"
ChatGPT response reads that "A political party that punishes leaders who raise questions when leadership is wrong can be considered intolerant, undemocratic, and selfish. Such a party shows an inability to accept criticism, a lack of internal democracy, and a tendency to suppress the truth. This can create an atmosphere of fear within the party, which in the long run weakens the party and can lead to a loss of public confidence."
