Merosansar writes that the person who called had a serious tone and that he is largely assumed to be the same person the police has been searching in relation to the incident of Dr. Hemang. Acharya is concerned about his security but the government is yet to respond to that.
Hari Bansha Acharya’s group “maha” had recently started a fund to help cure the victims of the protests against the king’s autocracy with a donation of 100,000 rupees from their side. The threat has come at a time when people have been contemplating about getting rid of the King. Hari Bansha Acharya was highly keen in helping the injured in the protests. Is this the reason he was threatened?
Nothing can be said for certain at the moment, but definitely there are some criminal forces within the country who are against the right of people to decide their future.
(ps:to read more visit http://www.mysansar.com/)
Our Dream- a Prosperous Nepal 
मे 10, 2006 मा 8:34 अपराह्न |
I wonder why the government is not providing him the security that he is requesting.
मे 11, 2006 मा 12:18 बिहान |
I don’t think your article should be implying that Mr. Acharya’s incident is anything to do with him helping out the injured, therefore implying that royalists or the palace may be involved. I’m afraid this sort of speculation is not only misleading but uncalled for.
I say this because we know that the people who threatened Mr. Acharya is the same who shot Dr. Dixit. Dr. Dixit is not a republican as far we know, nor has he spoken against anyone. Further, this is the same group who shot at and missed Dr. Rana from the same hospital as Dr. Dixit’s several month’s back. I don’t see how both these doctors have anything to do with the republican drive or politics in general?
There has been implications that it is either maoists or extortionists.
I would seriously refrain from such implications, when the sequence of events don’t add up.
All we know is that this is the same group who have attacked Dr. Rana, Dr. Dixit and now Mr. Acharya, and they are all directors of private hospitals.
Maoists are extortionists so it could be them.
But I personally believe it is an “inside job”, that is, from within the private hospital business – maybe a competitor.
Your last paragraph I must say makes me want to say – what the hell are you talking about? I think you should refrain from getting carried away and linking everything to dermocracy.
मे 11, 2006 मा 12:24 बिहान |
yes, well said st
मे 11, 2006 मा 12:51 बिहान |
Yes st,
I agree. Already the government has wasted a lot of money in calling the ambassadors back. It is one thing to scrap this ordinance and that ordinance, but ambassadors are there to serve whoever is in government. Instead of calling them back which costs money, they should be asked to follow the govt. line, if they refuse or do not then call them back. Also, just scrapping everything because it was done under the royal regime is another waste of tax payers money. I suggest they scrap the ridiculous and keep what is useful. I think the labour ordinance was pretty good for instance. Blaming everything on the attempt to supress the andolan is ridiculous. Tommorrow, there could be another andolan called by the maoists for instance, what do you think this govt. will do in the name of security?
I think the King has correctly bowed down, now let us tackle the greater threat to democracy and “right of people to decide their future” – the maoists.
They have to lay down their arms and they have to accept multiparty democracy. MOAISM HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEMOCRACY.
मे 11, 2006 मा 12:54 बिहान |
st, oh no and ck2,
Agreed. Sometimes I get too carried away with the news and given the present scenario, I tend to relate things to democratic movements. However, I do not wish to edit the main post for it will make the comments made on it invalid.
मे 11, 2006 मा 12:55 बिहान |
Sonobhai,.
You have asked a very interesting question. However, I think Mr. Acharya should use his own resources to give himself security. Otherwise, everytime a citizen is threatened they will be asking the govt. for security. This is obviously not possible. What the govt. should do is provide higher levels of general security, and what Mr. Acharya should do is get himself some security and be very careful with his movements.
मे 11, 2006 मा 2:02 अपराह्न |
How do you provide for your own security? Pay for the security guards who walk along with you everywhere? Which people should you hire? Should they be allowed to carry guns? So, does this mean we need to legalize the possession of guns(or do we already have it?).
I think this issue is more complex than obvious. Agreed, government cannot provide security in an individual basis but how are individuals to maintain private security?
मे 11, 2006 मा 11:27 अपराह्न |
If the government is still providing security to Kamal Thapa, why not Hari Bansa? HB is a public enough figure to want some protection, especially after the threat.
मे 12, 2006 मा 12:31 बिहान |
Mr. Acharya may be a well known comediam but so is Johhny Lever in India. I don’t see the govt. of India providing personal security for Johnny if he were threatened. I’m afraid this sort of self importance to certain people are not to be given. Politicians and govt. officials get security because they are supposed to serve the people and their interest. Making people laugh is a career that Mr. Acharya chose, he has done very well by it. He has been fortunate enough to get the opportunity to do what he likes,. there are millions in our country who do not even have general security from many threats, and we are here discussinb personal security given by the govt. to comedians; And before you mention that he donated to the victims of the andolan etc, well I hate to be the joykill but many others also have helped not only in the andolan but in other ways to the improvement of this country and donated anonymously, and have not gained or seeked popularity out of it. You can call me a gaunt individual, but I always view entertainers as people who look out for publicity whenever they can get it.
So again, no Mr. Acharya should not be given personal security guards by the govt. We all face the maoists and extorironist threat. Dr. Dixit even got shot, he still does not have personal body guards and his work as a child doctor and writer has been priceless for the nation.
मे 12, 2006 मा 10:08 बिहान |
If someone made an explicit threat of bodily harm on a private citizen, should the government not care about it?
I agree with gp’s argument that all the private citizens should be given general security and nothing beyond. But I am still not convinced that extra steps should not be taken if the threats are credible. Maybe the threat is not considered credible?