Maoists behind killing of Nepali Journalist?

Nava Thakuria

New Delhi

Tue, 20 Jan 2009: 

As Nepal welcomes 2009 as a secular democratic republic after shedding its earlier identity of a Hindu kingdom, bad news poured from the land of Maoists. The first two weeks of the new year brought the news of killing of a young woman journalist, suspected by the supporters of Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), whicis in power at Kathmandu now.

The government led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) came to face serious criticism from the political parties to media following the incident of murder of Uma Singh on January 12. Uma, who worked for a private radio, was hacked to death at her house in Janakpur under the southern district of Dhanusha by a group of unidentified armed men. The Federation of Nepalese Journalists, an umbrella organization of Nepal based journalists, claimed that Maoists were involved in the brutal murder of the journalist cum women rights activist.

The federation president Dharmendra Jha spoke in clear voice that Maoist hands in the killing was suspected as her father (Ranjit Singh) and elder brother (Sanjay Singh) were also abducted and killed by them few years back.

Prachanda, the supreme leader of CPN-M, was sworn in as the Prime Minister in August, as his party emerged as the largest party in the Constituent Assembly after the April 10 polls. The government has been supported by five other parties including the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist), which is the third largest party in the Assembly after Nepali Congress (now in the opposition).

The primary objective of the present government is to draft the constitution for the poverty stricken country of around 27 million population and go for a general election within three years. But the first five months of Maoist-led government turned out to be a mere failure as the government has not progressed in its mission. Rather the Prime Minister Prachanda, who led a decade long armed movement in Nepal that killed more than 15,000 people to dethrone the monarchy, found himself amidst unnecessary controversies because of inexperience, intolerance and casual comments.

“If Nepal is to uphold the two basic human rights of freedom of expression and equal rights of men and women, it will need to bring the culprits of this crime to justice,” commented UNECO director general Koichiro Matsuura. Earlier the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Nepal also condemned the brutal murder of Uma. It also urged the Nepal government to investigate and book the culprits, who were responsible for Uma’s death.

The Nepal government had earlier faced unprecedented hue and cry when activists belonged to CPN-M vandalized a prestigious media group in Kathmandu on December 21. The attack on the Himal Media Pvt Ltd resulted in the injury of scribes and other employees and also damage of properties.

An unruly group of over 50 Maoists even did not spare a senior most Nepali journalist and the editor of Nepali Times, Kunda Dixit. They threatened to repeat the acts and target other newspaper house as well, if the media continued publishing articles critical to Maoists.

The incident was strongly condemned by the media, both national and international, and the socio-political organisations of Nepal. The Nepali journalist federation protested the acts by leaving the editorials of the daily newspapers blank on December 23. They were joined in denouncing the incident by the International Federation of Journalists and the Reporter Sans Border saying, that ‘the government must guarantee the right of every voice to be heard by punishing violators and by not allowing its supporters to act with the impunity’.

The intolerance of Maoists in various aspects was highlighted by the UN Secretary-General too. In a recent remark on Nepal, Ban Ki-moon expressed apprehension that the Maoist party might had continued ‘using arms and violence’ for their political scores.

The UN chief, who paid a visit to Nepal last year observed, “The internal debate held during the national gathering (of the Maoists) and some public statements by Maoist leaders also resonated outside the party, giving rise to further questioning of the Maoists' commitment to multi-party democracy and concern that the party has not abandoned its military past.”