|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Sunday, June 17, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
International
| Previous
| Next
Public opinion turning against Dipendra?
KATHMANDU, JUNE 16. The late crown prince, Dipendra, argued with
his parents over his plans to marry Ms. Devyani Rana, before
shooting them, the official report of the two-member commission
probing Nepal's royal massacre revealed today. The commission set
up by King Gyanendra, made its report public on Thursday but
revealed more details in a 140-page report posted on the
Internet. Prince Paras, the new crown prince, said marriage was
the motive for the massacre. ``As far as I am concerned, the
problem was the issue of marriage. Whatever happened I always
agreed with what my brother (Dipendra) ordered.''
The report also talks about the close relationship that Dipendra
and Ms. Rana enjoyed. They had been dating for seven years,
according to Dipendra's aide-de-camp, Capt. R.K. Karki, who was
on leave on the night of the shootings. He added that Dipendra
used to bring Ms. Rana to the palace and ``the first time was
probably two years ago.''
A friend of Dipendra's, Ms. Supriya Shah, who he is believed to
have dated at school, told the commission, ``I had spoken to
Dipendra over phone that day at around 11.00 a.m. He said that he
would call me that night, but he did not.'' Ms. Shah, who is said
to have had a `friendly relationship' with Dipendra, told the
committee that ``he wished to marry Ms. Devyani.''
Meanwhile, in the first-ever open criticism of Dipendra, the
English daily The Kathmandu Post in a hard-hitting editorial on
the commission report said, ``not so upbeat is the image of the
then crown prince that emerges from the committee's findings. The
image is one of a dual persona, one cultivated by the palace for
public consumption and another that was less savoury.''
Had the public known more about this, there would have been less
astonishment and incredulity over what happened in the end, it
said, adding ``it is now incumbent upon the palace to make the
public privy to the shadier side of things so that it all adds
up. Greater transparency is the word even when it comes to the
palace.''
The newspaper also said that in the palace premises, there was an
urgent need to keep lethal weapons out of the hands of all but
those who have a legitimate need for carrying them. ``If this
means frisking everyone including royalty who seek access to the
monarch or his spouse, so be it.'' The views expressed by the
newspaper seems to be slowly gaining ground among the masses too,
who had initially refused to believe that Dipendra could have
killed his parents and other royals.
``It is a good thing that he (Dipendra) did not become our king.
What would have happened to the kingdom under a monarch, who was
an alcoholic and a drug addict? asked Jang Bahadur Thapa, a
commoner.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : International Previous : Jatiya's assurance to Indians in U.K. Next : Germany not for hasty E.U. expansion | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|