Surprisingly, several political parties have also expressed their concern about this matter.

The interim stay order of the Supreme Court has definitely provided a short relief to the eight brigadier generals who got their marching orders by the government before they reached their retiring age. On March 24, 2009 the Apex Court, in its order, has advised the government not to execute its decision on this score and has sought written explanation from the officials within fifteen days. The issue of retirement has drawn the attention of different stakeholders. Some diplomats of the friendly countries have intimated their fear of the fragile peace process getting derailed to the Prime Minister. Surprisingly, several political parties have also expressed their concern about this issue. This has become a subject of conversation in every nook and corner of the country and a matter of worry also.

The issue has brought on board some vital aspects of the functioning of the army and the Defence Ministry. The government states to have acquired discretionary powers through the Military Act of 2006 whether or not to extend the tenure of any military official. First of all, one wonders as to why such provisions are incorporated in any Act that can be misused by the authority in favor of one and against the other. Such provisions provide opportunities for corruption to both, the ministry deciding arbitrarily and the seeker can use unfair means to please the higher authorities for their favor.

Secondly, the ministry appears to have ignored the contextual meaning of the Act, which does not allow the government to extend the tenure of one and not of others, as discretionary power

does not mean arbitrary use of it. The Act does permit the government to extend the tenure of honest, competent and faithful officials, not to those who are charged with dereliction, incompetency and insincerity. The democratic functioning warrants this power to be used transparently and objectively based on some criteria. The very provision of extending the tenure

itself suggests that these Brig. Generals have every right to get their extensions provided they are competent, honest, and dutiful. They have their claim as individuals or employees of the government, provided the Chief of the Army Staff (CoAS) has recommend their cases objectively. The minister is supposed to act accordingly and not arbitrarily.

Apparently, it seems that the issue has not only been ballooned out of proportion but in a wrong

direction too. There are some more important aspects of this case, which should have been considered as well. It can be presumed that the Army chief might have recommended the cases of all the generals for their extension of tenure on objective and reasonable grounds and has looked into the justification of each and every case on its merit. If the recommendations were factual, there could not have been any hesitations in taking affirmative action; otherwise, undeserving generals could have been shown the doors as well by the defence minister in consultation with the CoAS, resulting in dissatisfying only those generals who did not deserve.

Relevantly, the other side of the problem has to be considered also. The country is passing through the transition period. During the insurgency the army and the rebels were fighting with each other. With the people’s movement three years ago, there was a change of guard at the national level. Monarchy paved the way for the republican order. The king is no more its supreme commander-in-chief. The president, who has replaced the king, has to act as per advice of the cabinet. The Prime Minister, who is the president of the UCPN-Maoist, now heads the cabinet. Moreover, the defence minister too belongs to the same party. The issue of adjustment and rehabilitation of about twenty thousand Maoist combatants languishing in their cantonments is still in limbo. The CoAS is against the integration of the combatants into the Nepal Army on the ground that political indoctrinated cadets will politicize the disciplined army; whereas the defence minister wants their militias to be integrated into the army at any cost, as has been repeatedly committed to them. However, the army cannot oppose the decision of the government.

Hence, there is unbridgeable gap between the two. Political parties are very apprehensive that the Maoists may take over the army and demoralize it if the combatants are integrated. The present case can also be considered from a practical perspective. The inflated number of the National army is the by-product of insurgency. We have to ponder over our national requirement: whether we actually need to have an army of a hundred thousand with many high-ranking officers. We have to make an assessment of our national security requirement within the next few months to right size the army accordingly. Till such time, there are reasons for the tenure of the generals to be extended. This will solve the vexed problem that has its genesis in the decade long armed conflict.

Mishra is former Election Commissioner