Roshan S Nepal
The
government and parties are in a deep slumber. We are of the view that
meaningful participation of victims should be ensured in the entire
transitional justice process — Suman Adhikari, former chairman, Conflict
Victims Common Platform
From the very
beginning of the transitional justice process in June 2007 when the then
Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction unveiled the first draft TRC bill,
conflict victims have, among other things, one constant discontent: The
government does not hold consultations with them while drafting/amending laws
concerned or taking crucial decisions related to transitional justice.
The
last time the government came up with a draft amendment to the Enforced
Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act 2014 was in
June last year. But the victims again rejected it, and one of the major reasons
they furnished was that the government prepared the draft without holding any
consultation with them.
The
government is again preparing to amend the act to address its shortcomings on
the basis of six factors—the Comprehensive Peace Accord; Nepal’s national and
international obligations related to human rights; fundamental principles of
transitional justice; decisions and orders of the Supreme Court; sentiments of
conflict victims; and Nepal’s legal and political processes.
But
this time around too, consultations with victims are unlikely, given the
government has only three week’s time for the job as the tenure of the two
transitional justice mechanisms — Truth and Reconciliation Commission and
Commission of Investigation of Enforced Disappeared Persons — expires on
February 9 without the two bodies completing their job.
Addressing
the Parliament, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli today said consultations were
still under way among political parties and stakeholders on whether to bring a
new act, what kind of legal arrangements were to be made, and whether to keep
the two commissions intact or reconstitute them.
Acknowledging
that ‘nursing of wounds inflicted during the conflict’ was yet to be done, the
PM said the government was actively and carefully working on ‘ending
vestiges of the conflict and completing the process of establishing
peace’. All these mean that the government and political parties are
still undecided on the issue, and chances of consultations with victims are
very slim on act amendment.
This
also means the government and political parties now have two options — either
fast-tracking the act amendment process, or extending the tenure of the two
commissions leaving everything as they are and amending the act later by
addressing concerns of the victims.
However,
fast-tracking the amendment is not going to be feasible at this time, said
Nepali Congress lawmaker Minendra Rijal, who is actively involved in the
ongoing cross-party consultations.
Conceding
that many things were yet to be done before reaching the stage of holding
consultations with the victims, Rijal said they were very cautious this time
about avoiding any major discontent.
“Yes,
it has already been late for holding discussions on amendment with the victims
or in the Parliament,” Rijal told THT. “On the other hand, pushing
the act amendment without holding consultations with the victims would again
not work.”
When
asked whether the government would then just extend the tenure of the two
commissions and amend the act later by addressing the victims’ concerns, Rijal
said they had yet to reach a phase where they’d consider the option. “We are
very seriously working on a solution.”
Consultations
with victims had almost begun when the government in June last year came up
with a draft act and even sought feedback from stakeholders concerned. However,
the process got stuck after a section of victims, backed by a section of rights
activists, demanded restructuring of the commissions and formation of a
high-level mechanism to oversee the entire transitional justice process.
This
also diverted the entire discourse from what should actually have been done,
according to Ram Kumar Bhandari, Founder and Director of National Network of
the Families of the Disappeared and Missing Nepal. Bhandari is leading a
section of conflict victims who are opposed to the idea of the high-level
mechanism.
“Those
advocating for the high-level mechanism sabotaged the consultations,” he told THT. “They
failed themselves, and also failed the consultation process.”
He also
warned if the act was amended just on the basis of political understanding, it
would further weaken the commissions and boost political domination in the
entire transitional justice process that should have actually been
victim-centric.
Suman
Adhikari, former chairman of Conflict Victims Common Platform that demanded the
restructuring of the commissions, also said they were waiting for reply as they
had presented their views to the government and parties. “But the government
and parties are in a deep slumber,” he said. “We are of the view that
meaningful participation of victims should be ensured in the entire
transitional justice process.”
