Interview with the chief guest

What are your thoughts on these new student and youth-led programs that aim to generate awareness and develop the aspects of learning?

The role of the UN, in today’s context, seems to have become insignificant, mainly due to the war and conflicts that are taking place, and (evidently) the organization has not been able to work towards its solution, except for the deployment of the peacekeeping forces after the war. In the committees, delegates will be discussing about various issues regarding Nepal and South-East Asia as well as the role of the UN in the global context, which I believe holds significance in creating awareness amongst such youths, especially due to the situation they are put in while representing different nations.

1. What are your views regarding the prioritization of (such) issues on an international and national basis?

As far as Nepal is concerned, we have granted a lot of fundamental rights to our citizens, but as I pointed out earlier, there is no state mechanism to monitor or systems to implement a provision that has been enshrined in the constitution. As I referred to the incident where a thirteen-year old girl was raped and killed and the person they put forth as a convict didn’t convince the public, which implies that the people don’t really believe in the system. Unless and until we make people confident and believe in the system that we have established and developed, it is not going to work.

1. We know traditionally that there is an absence of consensus. While such situation prevails, how do you lead your organization in this case?

It’s very hard to develop a unanimous consensus in each and every issue because right after the introduction/initiation of the multiparty system, the republican system that was established, the political parties had been (partially) intervening in each and every issue, from the appointment of officials that should be purely based on merit, is now based on nepotism and familiarity of the candidate. If you can’t refine that system or appoint a person the basis of merit, it is not going to work. For example, the committee that I am heading, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, needs non-partition members because we have to create insurgents as well as state forces on a non-partition basis in a very neutral way.When members are appointed by (their own) political parties, they will undoubtedly favor the political party they belong to, which makes it challenging to develop a consensus.

1. What would you suggest to our delegates and participants when such circumstances do arise during committee sessions?

The main task of the chair is to forge a unanimous consensus, and for that you should give them time to discuss/confer the issue and vent their views and opinions, but if you can’t force a consensus, you have no other choice but to go into voting and accept the simple majority votes. The delegate opposing the topic or common point of view has a right to express their opinion-as much as they want, but there must be some form of discussion that allows the committee to progress towards the solution.

1. Lastly, what suggestions would you like to give to the participants of this conference?

I think my main concern in this particular event will be, apart from discussing the working procedures of the un and its system, is to restructure the organization and of course redefine its role and objectives. The trusteeship council, which is redundant at the moment, was relevant after the Second World War. But now, all countries are handling matters in their own way, and the environment that we had in 1945 and the environment we have now in 2018 is totally/completely different. The UN may not have been able to contain the conflict and war in different parts of the world, but I hope these delegates can.