New Delhi: A group of 14 civil society members met Nepal President Ramchandra Paudel on Thursday, September 18, voiced support for the Gen Z movement against corruption while urging that a solution be sought through elections. According to Nepal-based New Spotlight magazine, the group argued that the dissolution of parliament on the recommendation of interim Prime Minister Sushila Karki was unconstitutional and emphasised the need to hold free and fair elections on time as the primary responsibility of the interim government.Meanwhile, the President explained the reason behind his decision to appoint Sushila Karki as the interim prime minister, and the subsequent decision to dissolve parliament for elections in six months. Below is a readout of the meeting between the citizens’ group and President Paudel.Readout of 14 citizens’ meeting with President Ramchandra PaudelThere was such a huge protest on 8 September, and great destruction of life and property that day and the next. It was a fearful situation everywhere, and it became important to talk to the protestors and as well as the parties. The question then arose, who to talk to among those who had come on the street. I requested the Army Chief to please identify the Gen Z representatives. The Army Chief knew that his job was not to conduct talks, but he began effort to locate the representatives. In the beginning many names were put forth, but then the name of Sushil Karki came to the fore.Meanwhile, I met the constitutionalists Bhimarjun Acharya, Bipin Adhikari and others for their advice. There were the obvious dangers of going beyond Article 276, but also the need to consider the situation and practicality of the moment. In the end, the suggestion was to apply the Article 61, under the President’s inherent obligation to protect the Constitution and to safeguard national unity. I was firm that the Constitution must be protected. An individual may move on, but the Constitution must live.Thereafter, I spoke to the political party leaders, Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’, Madhav Nepal and others. I did contact Sher Bahadur Deuba, but the line was not clear. Then I met with KP Oli, who then made the recommendation for appropriate resolution amidst the challenging situation, after which I proceeded to appoint the new Prime Minister. Having understood the various aspects, I was clear on the path ahead. I told Sushila Karki that the background work was complete and she should become Prime Minister. She was under great pressure, and the protestors had pinned great hopes on her. There were those who did not even want to hear of the political parties and Parliament, and one suggestion was to appoint the Prime Minister subsequent to dissolution of Parliament. I said only a Prime Minister has the right to dissolve Parliament under the Constitution, and it was preferable for the Head of State to die on the street than to become constitutionally irrelevant.Seeing the complications, Sushila Karki wondered what was to be done. I replied, “Who am I to appoint if you refuse? The problems will only multiply.” I added, as a former Chief Justice you may also have ideas of a way out. Someone in the group said, one way or the other we have to resolve this. She then agreed, and that is how the settlement was reached.It was under these circumstances that the decision was taken to hold elections within six months. Sushila Karki became Prime Minister, with the date for elections set for 5 March. I came out with a brief statement.If there has been a small amount of violence done to the Constitution, it has been only with regard to appointment of the Prime Minister. The rest of the constitutional system is intact. As far as Parliament is concerned, it will be restored within six months. We will not allow any more departures from the Constitution. Tomorrow, we will have the Constitution Day event. The Prime Minister will also be there. In the afternoon, there is a programme at Shital Niwas, where I will speak.Thank you for coming and raising your concerns. We need everyone’s assistance in the successful holding of the elections.(Readout prepared on behalf of 14 citizens.)