It certainly becomes ‘a talking point’ when an incumbent President’s ‘closeness’ to a particular party is a bit too apparent

Incumbent President Bidya Devi Bhandari yesterday filed nomination for the presidential election set for March 13. Her candidacy was backed by the ruling CPN-UML. Bhandari was elected President on October 28, 2015, a little over a month after the promulgation of the constitution. Bhandari was then fielded by the UML where she was serving as party’s vice-chairperson and as a UML lawmaker. In the run-up to the nomination filing day, there were talks within the UML that senior leader and former prime minister Jhala Nath Khanal was making a pitch for the presidential post. However, a standing committee meeting of the party on Tuesday night decided not to field Khanal, and a faction led by party Chairman and Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli threw its weight behind Bhandari. It is said that the UML decided to support Bhandari as per “her wish for a second term in Sheetal Niwas”.

Bhandari has served as Head of State for more than two years now. While there are no constitutional barriers for her to file nomination and become the President for a second term, the way things played out show some signs of a political subterfuge. Bhandari’s political allegiance, in principle, came to an end the day she had filed nomination for the presidential post earlier in 2015. Her tenure, however, has not remained free from controversies. Some of her actions during the last days of the erstwhile Nepali Congress-led government had run into controversy. Her decision to delay an ordinance on the National Assembly election and recommendation for three NA members had called into question her intent. Her swift action in the latter case after Oli assumed office had raised many an eyebrow. In this context, the question that is looming is whether Bhandari, if elected for a second term (which she will be) will be able to keep herself “detached” and “above” a particular party and its interest. There is no denying that in a multi-party democracy, the party at the helm fields a person of its choice for the highest office. That’s why the UML’s 2015 decision to field its then vice-chairperson, Bhandari, for the post of president was not a matter of debate.

It certainly becomes ‘a talking point’ when an incumbent President’s ‘closeness’ to a particular party is a bit too apparent.  The holder of the highest office in the federal set-up we have adopted must be kept above partisan interest. Does the way the UML, particularly Chairman Oli, has acted show the Office of the President—custodian of the Constitution—is free from controversy? Within the UML, it is reported, a faction opposing Bhandari’s nomination has accused her of “promoting” factionalism in the party. How good is that? A counter argument that Bhandari could not serve a full five-year term and hence the UML decided to back her for a second term does not make a strong ground. The government and the party leading it should steer clear of dragging the Office of the President into controversy of any sort. Nor should the ruling or any other party make the high office part of any political manoeuvrings. The ruling UML should have, at the very least, explained the rationale behind its decision to back Bhandari in words and manners the people understand, and relate to.

Idols coming back

Two stone-carved lifesize idols of Uma Maheshor and Lord Buddha will be brought back to Nepal soon from Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. The image of Uma Maheshor, which dates back to 12th century, was stolen from its abode in Tangalthali, Patan and the image of Lord Buddha was stolen from Yatkhatol, Kathmandu. The Buddha image is believed to have carved in the 11th or 12th century. Both the idols of archaeological and historical significance had gone missing in the 1980s. The image of Uma Maheshor was given to the museum by “a donor” in 1983. The museum received Lord Buddha’s image from someone in 2015.

The museum has already removed both the idols from its exhibition hall after the American authorities were convinced that the idols were stolen from Nepal. An MoU to return the idols was signed by Madhu Prasad Marasini, consulate general at the Consular General of Nepal in New York, and Daniel H Weiss, president of the museum, on Tuesday. The idols will be repatriated to Nepal within this month. It is good news that the idols will find their abodes after going missing for a long time.