House obstructed yet again, postponed till Wednesday
December 4, 2016 01:40 PM NPT
Photo: Dipesh Shrestha
KATHMANDU, Dec 5: The opposition parties obstructed the meeting of Parliament for the third consecutive time on Sunday demanding to withdraw the constitution amendment bill.
Following the obstruction, the meeting was deferred till 1 pm on Wednesday afternoon.
Lawmakers from the main opposition party, CPN-UML, CPN (ML), Nepal Workers and Peasants Party (NWPP), Rartriya Janamorcha and Nepa Party stood from their respective seats to obstruct the proceeding following the commencement of the meeting.
Earlier speaking at the meeting, NWPP lawmaker Anuradha Thapa Magar argued that the Article 274(1) of the constitution bars constitution amendment against national interest and sovereignty.
Referring to a book ‘Mission R&AW' of former Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), the foreign intelligence of India, RK Yadav, lawmaker Thapa Magar claimed that the amendment bill was a step toward splitting Tarai from Nepal as a part of a plan by RAW.
She further expressed her objection to the recent activities of Indian Ambassador to Nepal, Ranjit Rae.
The Indian envoy, summoning the top leaders of United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF), yesterday had urged them to support the constitution amendment bill.
Thapa Magar added that former RAW chief Alok Joshi is in Kathmandu since 15 days to press the political parties to endorse the bill. She claimed the unification of Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal (RPP-N) was designed by Joshi, adding that he was plotting to bring a split in UML.
Then, RPP lawmaker Sushil Kumar Shrestha had objected to the statement by Thapa Magar on the unification. He demanded with the Speaker to erase the statement from the House’s record as all the RPP parliamentarians stood from their respective seats.
Thapa Magar was quick to defend her statement arguing that she had quoted news in an online news portal. Speaker Onsari Gharti then instructed the Parliament Secretariat to delete the controversial statement.