Referendum, not plebiscite

Apropos of the news report “Prachanda proposes plebiscite on republic” (THT, Oct. 8), you have confused the term ‘plebiscite’ with ‘referendum’. ‘Plebiscite’, as reportedly understood by Prachanda, means an expression of people’s will through direct vote over matters concerning change of constitution or government or historical institutions. ‘Referendum’ means referring matters decided or being considered for decision by the legislature (parliament) for approval or rejection by the public through direct or indirect vote. For example, in India, Kashmiris want plebiscite, not referendum, to decide their fate as a nation once and for all; the Hindus of Nepal want a referendum on the secular state decision by Parliament. We should be clear on this matter so that it will not be an excuse for further postponement of the CA elections.

Finally, with reference to Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay’s op-ed article “Poll postponement” on the same date, I would like to point out that if the King creates mischief to derail the CA elections, and if proven guilty, it is the King who can be removed by a two-thirds majority of Parliament, not the institution of monarchy. Some other legitimate means will have to be found for that purpose.

Madhukar SJB Rana, via e-mail

Save cost

The CPN-UML has recently been proposing a national referendum for a formal announcement of a republic. I would like to say that a referendum on a republican constitution that is drafted by a special committee of national and international experts on constitutional law and human rights would be an easier choice. It would save the cost of election by 50 per cent, since a huge amount of money has already been wasted by the Election Commission on the polls which have been postponed.

R Sayami, Kathmandu

Traffic rules

Rules are meant to be followed. However, it has been noticed that people cross the road right under the overhead bridge and zebra crossings are being ignored; pedestrians

overlook traffic signals; vehicles are parked in no parking zone. And these violations often happen in the presence of traffic police. Traffic rules ought to be followed not only for one’s own safety but also for the safety of other people.

Each of us can make a difference.

Rhea Gurung, Shital Marg, Maharajgunj

Cosmetic

This is in reference to the news report “Lhasa culture attracting tourists” (THT, Oct. 5). I don’t agree with Nyima Tsering, TAR vice chairman, that the credit for Tibet’s prosperity goes to Qinhai-Lhasa railway line. While China’s outright political repression in Tibet has failed, China is now attempting to wipe out Tibet’s unique way of life through cosmetic modernisation. The massive presence of Chinese settlers throughout Tibet has prevented the Tibetans from getting the benefits of economic boom. Tibetans are losing their jobs and other opportunities to the Chinese settlers. Much of the ‘development’ in Tibet programme consists of Qinhai-Lhasa railway, construction of roads and airports geared towards exploitation of Tibet’s natural resources.

Nyima Gyalpo, via e-mail