TMCnet News
NEPAL: LAWMAKERS DRAG FEET ON TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION BILL(English IPS News Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) KATHMANDU, Nepal, Sep. 5, 2008 (IPS/GIN) -- Nepal's Supreme Court extended hope to many survivors in June 2007, when it directed the government to form a commission to investigate cases of forced disappearances committed during the 1996-2006 civil war. More than a year later, however, the idea of a truth and reconciliation commission is still in limbo. For Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Nepal's new prime minister, a major concern is the integration of his Maoist fighters with the Nepal Army, which he fought bitterly for 10 years. Dahal's Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) emerged victorious in the constituent assembly elections held in April. So far the bill to create the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, introduced immediately after the Supreme Court ruling, appears to have stalled through poor coordination between the home and peace ministries, preoccupation with the April elections and lack of sufficient political initiative. "It is the sheer lack of political will," said Jitendra Bohara of the Advocacy Forum, a Nepali human rights group. The bill for the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, drafted by the Peace Ministry, has undergone a fourth revision because of a controversy over a clause concerning amnesty for perpetrators of war crimes. "You can't establish a truth commission in a hurry," rights experts have warned, adding that the environment is still not safe for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to begin work. However, other activists say time is quickly running out and that if nothing is done, valuable evidence will be lost. With the Maoists getting a majority in the election and now leading the new government, victims and their families are also afraid that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission may never be formed. Ramesh Shrestha, a former Maoist, lost his right arm in a grenade attack in Kathmandu in 2000 and was in and out of military custody for 17 months during the war. He is not hopeful for the families of the disappeared. "In the Nepal Army as well as the [People's Liberation Army], those responsible for war crimes during the war are all high-level officers," Shrestha said. "If a disappearance commission is formed, they will all be exposed -- the Maoists will never let that happen." Bhaikaji Ghimire, managing editor of the monthly Sama Drishti, was secretly held for 15 months and moved between the Bhairabnath, Shivapuri and Nakkhu Prisons in Kathmandu from 2003-2005. He said it is the responsibility of the state and the Maoists to make public all who were disappeared, killed and tortured during the war, and get the perpetrators to ask for forgiveness in public. Ghimire added, "No one has the right to forgive the perpetrators but the victims." He was convicted under an anti-terrorism law, tortured, made to sleep on the bare floor and put through regular death threats and mock executions. He was freed in August 2005 when Nepal's Supreme Court ruled that his detention was illegal and ordered an immediate release. Although the Maoists are now hesitant about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, they did support the idea of a disappearances commission before the election. "Perhaps the Maoist leaders now feel there is a lot of evidence against them, which is why they want to push this issue under the rug," Bohara said. The Maoists have told the families of those abducted by the state that all such victims will be declared martyrs, and that they should keep quiet for now. Meanwhile, rights groups are disturbed by a memo from the United States-based law firm of Holland and Knight (H&K) that proposes a blanket amnesty for perpetrators of human rights violations. The memo states that Nepal does not have a "clear, binding, general duty" under international customary law or Nepali law to prosecute rights violations. It said there is no firm support for claims that Nepal must prosecute violations of human rights and humanitarian law. The memo added that amnesty is common in times of political transition, especially when truth commissions are set up. Advocate Mandira Sharma said the memo has many flaws. "Impunity has been the biggest challenge in Nepal, reports like the one H&K prepared can only strengthen this culture," she said. But Hannes Siebert, a South African consultant with the USAID-funded Nepal's Transition to Peace Initiative, said the memo does not state, recommend or imply that international law permits blanket amnesties for serious crimes. "That is a terrible misreading, or non-reading, of the report," added Siebert, who is also chairman of the Appeal Foundation of the Nobel Peace Laureates, for whom the memo was written pro bono by H&K. The group aims to enable Nepali stakeholders to develop common ground within their often opposed positions and provide support to the Peace Secretariat and political parties. About the controversy over amnesty provisions in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission bill, Siebert said this should be an internal Nepali debate and "not the place of international advisers to take positions or prescribe." Joint secretary at the peace ministry, Madhu Regmi, said the H&K memo was an independent study and its recommendations are not binding. "We did not ask H&K to write a report in our favor. We are not obligated in any way to implement their suggestions. Since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is a living document, we have left it open for experts to comment, and H&K's memo is just that," he said. Devi Sunuwar, the mother of Maina Sunuwar, a 15-year-old who was tortured and killed in 2004 while in the Nepal Army's custody, is outraged at all the talk of amnesty. "The report says not all crimes committed during the war are eligible for prosecution -- they need to clarify what kinds of crimes get amnesty," Sunuwar said. "They killed my little daughter; forgiveness is out of question. If they killed once, they will kill again." Copyright ? 2008 Global Information Network |