Your article 'Monitoring the monitors' (#321), though harsh, did reflect public concern and even the discontent of some important members of the committee. But this doesn't necessarily reflect badly on individual members, or on the concept of monitoring.

As you mention, while they are eminent in their own fields, few members of the committee have practical experience of monitoring. Those who do work in human rights are clearly concerned about the lack of clarity in the committee's approach.

It is also clear that the mandate of the monitoring is so vast and vague as to be impossible to implement. This reflects badly not on the committee members, but on the talks teams, which lack practical experience. What good has come out of it so far is that ordinary Nepalis have got a glimpse of what is going on in what is their process.

With the proper ceasefire agreement in place-in the drafting of which the ceasefire monitoring committee members should have had a say-the NMCC has a chance to put right its 'bungling'.

Everyone needs to get into the act now-the committee, which must turn its mandate into something objectively monitorable; the negotiating teams, which must make a clear agreement; and donors and diplomats, who must make the monitoring process key, not to denounce the parties, but to forward the process.

Six members of the committee were nominated with no warning and did not want to join. Those posts could now be filled with six highly respected members of civil society. If all were women, that would go some way in rectifying the exclusion of women, dalits, and janajatis.

The quality of the society that emerges from the peace process will in part be determined by the quality of those who participate in it. Making the committee more representative, and functional, would help give the people ownership in the peace process.

Anita Sharma,
email

. What was the point of your piece on the ceasefire monitoring committee? More negative journalism with no solutions. When it comes to issues like hydropower, Bhutani refugees, and electric cars, you're happy to play the activist. Why not for all things that really matter?

SK Gurung,
email