This is with reference to the news story “CA in hurry to resolve row over federalism” (THT, July 7, Page 1). Despite the Supreme Court’s interim order to halt the drafting process of the new constitution, the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) continued drafting it and presented it to the CA for deliberation. Many CA members strongly suggested naming and demarcating boundaries of the federal units before finalizing the draft constitution. Now, the draft copy will be sent to the general public for feedback. Protesting the 16-point deal reached among the four major political forces, four Madhes-based parties boycotted the CA deliberations and have even threatened to quit the CA if their demands are not addressed while preparing the final draft of the new constitution. Undermining the importance of CA role, the four major political forces had signed a 16-point-deal on June 8 in order to facilitate the drafting process of the new statute. The first CA could not fulfill its mandated job because of the major political parties’ failure to agree on the number of federal units. The recent devastating earthquake forced them to act swiftly in order to save their face for not being able to handle the post-quake situation. The people of the affected areas and the general public were furious with the political leaders for their sluggishness and irresponsiveness. Time has come for all to extensively deliberate on the draft constitution and exert positive pressure on the CA members to incorporate all the relevant elements in the final draft constitution to make it a document of compromises. A high level commission for naming and demarcating the federal units should be immediately formed in order to complete the process of demarcating the Pradeshes before promulgating the new constitution. Going by the experience of the first failed CA, the feedback being collected from the people will just be a formality.

Rai Biren Bangdel, Kathmandu

I agree with Pratik Shrestha in his letter to the editor “Take punitive action” (THT, July 8, Page 8) that the government should be more responsive. Otherwise his letter is a mishmash of damaging, inaccurate and woefully ill-formed prejudice regarding this non-issue of WFP and the very small number of sacks of spoiled rice. He neatly has an issue with WFP, carries the party line without asking some difficult questions. Where was the rice stored before it went to the WFP? Which agents and merchants supplied the rice to the WFP? Was the rice already rotten when it was sold to the WFP? Could the leader of this vendetta against the WFP have any business or family connections to the agents and merchants? Not comfortable questions to ask, but they should be posed publicly. For Shrestha to imply, as he does, that the WFP deliberately set out with deliberate intent to damage the health of earthquake victims is a scandalous, untrue and damaging statement for which there is no grain of evidence, rotten or otherwise.

Cole Porter, Kathmandu