I think the MCC agreement with Nepal is a total trap for Nepal. It may seem like a very good opportunity for today, but it will later lead to more difficult situations, We will lose our rights in our own country. It`s the worst scene I can imagine. The signing of the Compact will take place on September 14, 2017 in Washington DC, between Nepal and MCC, in the State Department`s processing room. Finance Minister Gyanendra Bahadur Karki and MCC CEO Jonathan Nash chanted the Pact agreement. The MCC pact does not say it needs to be ratified by the Nepalese parliament. However, the text of the agreement stipulates that in the event of a conflict, the provisions of the Covenant take precedence over nepal`s existing laws, which requires parliamentary ratification under the Nepal Treaty Act. The MCC is the first grant agreement submitted to Parliament for approval. However, it is also the largest financial assistance agreement ever signed by Nepal. However, another part of the ruling party, led by Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, has defended the pact and wants the current session of the House to ratify it. Nepal`s opposition Congress also argued that the agreement should be approved without delay. Since MCC assistance must be approved by the U.S. Congress, the U.S.
government seeks the same degree of commitment from recipient countries. This is why most countries ratify the MCC Pact through their parliaments. However, their agreements do not say that in the event of contraction, the provisions of the pact would prevail over national laws, according to the expert who once worked for the MCA. Under conditions, Nepal will have to restore a lot of credibility to the MCC. In a certain sense, the rewriting of laws. In history, we have seen mcc had agreements with Srilanka in our closest neighborhood, but MCC agreements have also been concluded with many countries in Africa and the Middle East. Nepal was the first south Asian country to qualify for the compact after completing 16 of the 20 policy indicators. Then-Joint Secretary Baikuntha Aryal and Jonathan Nash, MCC`s current Director General, signed an agreement in Washington in September 2017, in the presence of then-Secretary of State Gyandera Bahadur Karki and U.S. Assistant Secretary of State John J. Sullivan. The U.S.
government has agreed to allocate $500 million in grants, while Nepal would spend US$130 million on the project that prioritizes energy and roads. This is the largest grant ever received by Nepal. As the Nepalese government did not ratify the agreement, the Ministry of Finance requested an extension of the ratification deadline. The MCC agreement, in section 2.7, makes it clear that funds cannot be used for the military, but some readers look at section 6.8, which provides for the immunity of MCC employees in “all courts and tribunals of Nepal,” and fear that this will be used for military purposes. There is no doubt that diplomats should continue to enjoy diplomatic immunity, but should immunity be granted for other activities? Isn`t this a violation of Nepal`s sovereignty? “Only when the agreement enters into force will the actual construction work begin,” said Khadga Bahadur Bisht, Director General of MCA-Nepal. Foreign Minister Gyawali has repeatedly denied that the MCC Nepal Compact talks about IPS. He said there was no need to worry, given that the implementation of projects under the MCC is exclusively driven by the pact. The Nepali Congress, under whose leadership the pact was first signed, adopts the same position. Congress says the government must abide by the agreement that doesn`t talk about ipS, no matter what officials, including U.S.
officials, say. Congress asked the government to prioritize the ratification pact at this session of the House of Representatives and expand its cooperation in this process. Opposition leaders even warned that it would be “suicidal” for Nepal if parliament rejected the pact, as it would have lasting consequences for diplomatic relations between Nepal and the United States.