Accountability Watch Committee (AWC) is deeply troubled by the recent government decision to withdraw all cases filed against Maoist cadres from the time of the decade-long armed conflict. We are concerned that this interference in the due process of justice to let criminals escape accountability poses a serious challenge to the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law. Flying in the face of the demand for justice for the widespread conflict-era excesses, we condemn this attempt to further institutionalize the rapidly expanding state of impunity in Nepal.
The urgency today is to investigate all cases of human rights abuse by both the Maoists and the state forces during the armed conflict. AWC reiterates its stance that the government should firmly stand in favor of the aspirations for justice and accountability of the people and stresses that in a democratic state there is no space for impunity, where serious breaches of human rights are allowed to go scot-free time and again. We strongly condemn any action promoting impunity which fuels instability and insecurity and thus deplore the Attorney General's (AG's) intention to withdraw criminal cases in this light. The AG in his constitutional role as the chief legal advisor to the government should oppose the government's decision and refuse to implement it. We view the announcement of the AG to withdraw all cases against Maoists as one more step toward impunity and blatant disregard of the rights of victims who are ever waiting for justice.
It is important to recall that Nepal is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which mandates each State to ensure that victims of human rights violations have a right to effective remedy (article 2-3). Withdrawing cases of rape, torture, murder and disappearance would undoubtedly constitute a grave breach of this international obligation, as well as of the commitments Nepal has made during the recent Universal Periodic Review. There, the government stated it was "fully committed to establishing Constitutional supremacy, ensuring the rule of law, good governance and human rights, as well as providing a positive conclusion to the peace process by eliminating insecurity and addressing impunity."
The AG's explanation for the decision is that all cases from the conflict were inherently "politically motivated" and that the cases related to conflict time are against the spirit of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and they should be withdrawn. This position disregards the commitments in the CPA made both parties not to encourage impunity and to ensure the rights of victims (Article 7.1.3).
Concerns for justice, accountability and the rights to remedy for the victims were at the heart of the CPA and were considered part of the bedrock of the democratic system fostering the peace process. Withdrawing criminal cases amount to granting amnesty for conflict crimes including for gross human rights violations. Such move deprives the people of their ownership of the peace process by encroaching on their legitimate aspirations for redress and justice.
The practice of withdrawing cases is not new. It started in 2008 under the previous government led by the UCPN-M and has continued despite a Supreme Court interim order in 2008 directing the suspension of further withdrawals. The latest plan for mass withdrawal will have a disastrous effect to safeguarding human rights and justice, badly erodes public confidence with the government and hampers the due course of justice. If this mass withdrawal takes place, it will strike a real blow at the rule of law and open the floodgates for more withdrawals and denials of justice to the victims resulting in gross lawlessness. Such practice will further encourage political interference in the rule of law, demoralize police officials, prosecutors and judges working on such cases, contribute to public insecurity by allowing alleged criminals to escape prosecution, and further erode public confidence in law and order institutions and the Government.
In Nepal's protracted post-conflict transition, those who are in power still escape being questioned and function above the law. The commitments on transitional justice in the peace agreements and their non-implementation to date reveal a fundamental tension between Nepal's stated wish to end impunity and its clear reluctance of those in power to be held accountable, whether politicians, members of the security forces or of the UCPN-M. It is unfortunate that Nepalese politics have turned into an industry producing a host of wrongdoers who are allowed to go scot-free. This politics of appeasement and compromise has led to increased impunity and decreased accountability.
Given that over thousands of people have died and thousands of others disappeared, been physically or mentally injured, incapacitated and displaced, it is high time the state acknowledged those abuses, sincerely tried to heal the wounds of the victims and bring perpetrators to justice. No process can bring about sustainable peace, if serious crimes and abuses are condoned or victims are forgotten.
International law is against blanket amnesty, especially amnesty to perpetrators of systematic crimes (war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity) and serious violation of human rights. It is the obligation of the state under national and international law to bring criminals to justice. But the trend of case withdrawal has violated this responsibility, challenging the right to effective remedy. If this filthy tendency of impunity is to continue, the fear and insecurity among the public will increase, and the mental anguish of the direct sufferers of the wrongdoings of the past will be amplified.
We appeal to political leaders, the international community, victims/survivors of the conflict and the general public to be extra alert to protect the right to justice of the victims of conflict, at a time when the government seems intent on providing a political cover for instances of grave conflict-era human rights abuses. In this context, we do appreciate the position taken by the main opposition parties in the parliament and call upon the Government:
1. To halt the trend to withdraw cases in order to preserve the trust of the people on the justice system;
2. To ensure respect for court orders and initiate investigation into human rights violations during the conflict and ensure punishment for the culprits and justice to the victims;
3. To refrain from calling for pardons and the withdrawal of any criminal cases that would be contrary to Nepal's commitments under international human rights law since such actions send a contradictory message to the country about the real purpose of transitional justice and the need for accountability for past crimes;
4. To establish the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances without further delay in accordance with the international standards and best practices to allow the commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations.
http://newsblaze.com/story/20110924085426zzzz.nb/topstory.html
Monday, September 26, 2011
मानव अधिकार
दबाबी दौडाहा
"मेरा दुई छोरालाई सेनाले मारे, मलाई र कान्छो छोरालाई कुटेर अपांग बनाए," सशस्त्र द्वन्द्वका पीडितहरूलाई भेट्न मंसिर २४ गते नेपालगन्ज आएका नेपालस्िथत विदेशी कूटनीतिक नियोगका प्रमुखहरूसँग न्यायका लागि गुहार माग्दै बर्दियाकी जगतकुमारी बस्नेत, ६०, ले भनिन् ।
उनले २०५८ फागुन २७ गते आफ्ना दुई छोरा केशर र गणेशलाई तत्कालीन शाही नेपाली सेनाले बर्दिया राष्ट्रिय निकुञ्जको सैनिक मुख्यालयमा लगेर हत्या गरेको बताउँदै दोषीमाथि न्यायोचित कारबाही नभएको बिलौना पनि गरनि् । विदेशी राजदूतहरूसामु देवीसरा वलीले पनि आफ्नै देशमा आफ्नै सरकार, प्रशासन र प्रहरीबाट न्याय नपाएको दुःखेसो पोखिन् । उनका छोरा सुरेश ०५९ पुस ७ गते प्रहरीद्वारा मारएिका थिए । यसैगरी बालकृष्ण शर्मा रजिालले बिलौना गरे, "माओवादीहरूले मेरा छोरा धर्मराजलाई ०६० भदौ ९ गते मारे, मलाई पनि अपहरण गरेर चरम यातना दिए । तर, हालसम्म कसैलाई पनि कारबाही भएको छैन ।"
१० वर्षे सशस्त्र विद्राेहका बेला हत्या गरएिका र बेपत्ता पारएिकाहरूका परविारजनलाई भेट्न यसपटक सम्पन्न र शक्तिशाली राष्ट्रका राजदूतहरू बर्दिया जिल्लाका गाउँगाउँ पुगे । संयुक्त राज्य अमेरकिा, संयुक्त अधिराज्य बेलायत, अस्टे्रलिया, जर्मनी, स्वीट्जरल्यान्ड, डेनमार्क, फिनल्यान्ड, नर्वे र युरोपियन युनियनका कूटनीतिज्ञहरूले मानव अधिकार दिवसको सन्दर्भ पारेर बर्दियाको संयुक्त भ्रमण गरेका हुन् । उनीहरूले एकातिर राज्य पक्षले हत्या गरएिका परविारजनको बिलौना सुने भने अर्कातिर माओवादीद्वारा घाँटी रेटिएका र बेपत्ता पारएिकाहरूको परविारजनको आँसु देखे । राज्य र माओवादीबाट पाएको कहालीलाग्दो यातना र पीडाका कथा सुनेकी जर्मन राजदूत भेरेना ग्राफिन भोन रोडेर्नले पीडितहरूको बयान हृदयविदारक भएको बताइन् ।
भेटघाट र प्रत्यक्ष संवादपछि उनीहरूले पीडितको पक्षमा वकालत गर्ने प्रयास मात्र गरेनन्, ती अपराधहरूमा संलग्नमाथि कानुनी कारबाहीका लागि सरकारलाई दबाब दिने वचन पनि दिएका छन् । दण्डहीनताको पराकाष्ठालाई प्रत्यक्ष देखेर फर्केका शक्तिशाली पश्चिमा राष्ट्रका प्रतिनिधिहरू अब यसको अन्त्य गर्नुपर्ने समय आएको बताउँछन् । भ्रमण दलकी प्रमुख तथा जर्मन राजदूत रोडेर्न भन्छिन्, "यस सम्बन्धमा हामी मौन बस्न सक्तैनाँै किनभने नेपाली सेना, प्रहरी र माओवादीले दण्डहीनता अन्त्य गर्न देखाएको अनिच्छाबाट पीडितहरूको दुःख अझ लम्बिएको छ । उनीहरूका मागलाई सम्बन्धित निकायमा पुर्याउने छौँ ।"
विदेशी कूटनीतिज्ञहरूको टोलीसँग पीडित पक्षले बेपत्ता पारएिका आफन्तजनको लास वा सासका लागि पहल गरििदन आग्रह गरे । उनीहरूले नेपाल सरकारसँग गर्दै आएको मागहरूको लामो सूची नै राजदूत समूहलाई बुझाउँदै भनेका छन्, "दोषीलाई छिटो सजाय होस् ।" संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयका प्रतिनिधिसहितको भ्रमण टोलीले नेपाली तथा अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय कानुनविपरीत हुने गरी बर्दियामा पक्राउ वा अपहरण गरी शारीरकि र मनोवैज्ञानिक यातना दिएका १ सय ७० मध्ये धेरैलाई मारएिको अनुमान गरेको छ । मानव अधिकार रक्षाको सवालमा हालसम्मका सबै सरकारप्रति निकै असन्तुष्ट देखिएका यी कूटनीतिज्ञहरूले नेपालगन्जमा प्रेस विज्ञप्ति जारी गर्दै भनेका छन्, "मानव अधिकारका यी गम्भीर उल्लंघनका सम्बन्धमा सरकारबाट कुनै अनुसन्धान पनि भएको छैन ।"
खासमा उनीहरू बर्दियालाई पहिलो भ्रमण स्थल बनाएर नेपालभरकिै दण्डहीनताका विरुद्ध अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय दबाब सिर्जनाका लागि मैदानमै उत्रेका हुन् । करबि एक दर्जन राजदूत र कूटनीतिक नियोग प्रमुखहरू बर्दियामा मानिस पुरेको भनिएका स्थलहरूमा समेत पुगेका थिए । यी विदेशी कूटनीतिज्ञ पुगेको भालपुलमा माओवादी भएको आरोपमा सेनाले हत्या गरेर नौ जनाको लास पुरेको सात वर्ष भएको छ । नेपालगन्जस्िथत उच्च्ाायुक्तको कार्यालयले बर्दियामा बेपत्ता पार्ने कार्यसम्बन्धी विस्तृत प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गरेको ठीक एक वर्षमा कूटनीतिज्ञहरूको यस समूहले स्थलगत भ्रमण गरेको हो ।
उच्च्ाायुक्तको कार्यालयले गत वर्षको मंसिरमा प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गर्दै बेपत्ता पार्नेमाथि अनुसन्धान र कारबाहीका लागि सरकारलाई सिफारसि गरेको थियो । तर, सरकारले बेवास्ता गरेकाले दबाबका लागि राजदूतहरूले बर्दिया भ्रमण गरेका हुन् । यतिले पनि नपुगे उनीहरू उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले सिफारसि गरेका नेपाली सेना, प्रहरी, माओवादी कार्यकर्ता र नेतालाई दण्डित गर्न अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय लबिङ् गर्ने सोचमा छन् ।
राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले आफ्नो प्रतिवेदनलाई अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय समर्थन दिलाएर कार्यान्वयन गराउन शक्तिशाली राजदूतहरूलाई चिहानहरू देखाउन पहल गरेको हो । बारम्बारको प्रतिबद्धताविपरीत आफ्नो सिफारसिलाई कार्यान्वयन गर्न सरकार र माओवादी दुवै पक्षले देखाएको उदासीनतालाई उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले अस्वीकृतिका रूपमा लिएको छ । सिफारसि गरेको एक वर्ष बित्दा पनि सरकार र माओवादीबाट कुनै औपचारकि प्रतिक्रिया नआएकामा उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालय निकै असन्तुष्ट रहेको राजदूत टोलीले नेपालगन्जमा जारी गरेको विज्ञप्तिको भाषाबाटै बुझ्न सकिन्छ । विज्ञप्तिमा उल्लेख छ, 'विगतमा भएका अपराधहरूलाई प्रस्ट पार्दै डरलाग्दा घटनामा मुछिएका सैनिक, प्रहरी र माओवादीहरूलाई दण्डित गर्ने बेला आएको छ ।'
विज्ञप्तिमा अपराधका पीडित तथा साक्षीहरूको संरक्षणको उपाय अपनाउने कुरा सुनिश्चित गर्न सरकारलाई आह्वान पनि गरएिको छ । यसैगरी अपहरणमा परेका व्यक्तिको स्िथति सार्वजनिक गर्न र अपहरण वा नरसंहारमा संलग्नताको आरोप लागेका कार्यकर्तालाई राज्यका अधिकारीसमक्ष उपलब्ध गराउन एकीकृत माओवादीलाई दबाब दिइएको छ ।
बर्दिया भ्रमणमा संलग्न कूटनीतिज्ञहरूले सरकारका मन्त्रीहरूलाई दबाब दिने प्रक्रिया सुरु गरसिकेका छन् । उनीहरूले पछिल्लो समयमा मन्त्रीहरूसँग गरेका विभिन्न भेटमा नेपालमा दण्डहीनताको अवस्था कायम रहे सहयोग गर्न असमर्थ रहने जनाउ दिनथालेका छन् । उनीहरू माओवादीका उपल्ला तहका नेताहरूलाई पनि पुराना गल्तीहरू सच्चिनुपर्नेमा समेत दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । कूटनीतिक स्रोतहरूका अनुसार, माओवादी नेताहरूलाई पश्चिमा राजदूतहरूको सुझाव छ, "तपाइर्ंहरूको अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय रेकर्ड ठीक छैन, छिटो सुधार्नुहोस् ।"
सशस्त्र द्वन्द्वका बेला माओवादीहरूले पनि ठूला नरसंहार गरेका छन् । तर, युद्ध अपराधमा संलग्न आफ्ना त्यस्ता कार्यकर्ताहरूलाई नेतृत्वले कानुनको दायरामा ल्याउनुको साटो पार्टी बढुवा गरेर अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय दबाब निम्त्याएको छ । आफ्नो पटक-पटकको आग्रहलाई बेवास्ता गरएिकाले शक्तिसम्पन्न मुलुकका राजदूतहरू एकीकृत माओवादीका केन्द्रीय नेताहरूसँग हुने हरेक भेटमा संरक्षित अपराधीलाई सजायका लागि राज्यका निकायमा सुम्पँदा सबैलाई सजिलो हुने बताउन थालेका मात्र छैनन्, त्यसो नगरे राजनीतिक सहयोगको ढोका खुला राख्न मुस्िकल पर्ने चेतावनी पनि दिन थालेका छन् ।
विदेशी राजदूतहरू बेपत्ता नागरकिका सम्बन्धमा ०६४ जेठ १४ गते सर्वोच्च अदालतले गरेको आदेश कार्यान्वयन गराउन पनि सरकारलाई दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । अदालतले बेपत्ता पार्नेलाई अपराधी घोषित गर्न र त्यससम्बन्धी छानबिन आयोग गठनका लागि सरकारलाई आदेश दिएको छ । तर, विदेशी राजदूतहरू अदालतको यस आदेश कार्यान्वयनसँगै सशस्त्र विद्रोहका बेला भएका अपराध र त्यसमा संलग्नलाई अपराधी मानेर सजायको व्यवस्था गर्ने नयाँ कानुनमा नै बनाउन सरकारलाई दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । शान्ति प्रक्रियामा ठूलो आकारको प्राविधिक र आर्थिक सहयोगसमेत गर्दै आएका यी मुलुकका राजदूतहरूले दण्डहीनता अन्त्य नभएसम्म नयाँ नेपाल नबन्ने बताएको धेरै भइसकेको छ ।
नेपालमा छिटोभन्दा छिटो अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मापदण्ड अनुरूपको बेपत्ता आयोग र सत्य निरूपण तथा मेलमिलाप आयोग गठन गरी छानबिन प्रक्रिया थालियोस् भन्ने उनीहरूको चाहना र दबाब पनि पुरानै हो । उनीहरूको यस्तो दबाबमा अधिकारकर्मी संघ-संस्था र द्वन्द्वपीडितहरूले पनि सरकारी निकाय, माओवादी र अन्य राजनीतिक दलबाट प्रभावकारी सहयोग खोजिरहेका छन् । द्वन्द्वपीडित समितिका अध्यक्ष भागीराम चौधरी संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघको बेपत्तासम्बन्धी कार्यदललाईर् नेपालमा ल्याएर काम थाले मात्र पीडितले न्याय पाउने बताउँछन् । भन्छन्, "राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको प्रतिवेदनको सिफारसि तत्काल कार्यान्वयन हुनुपर्छ ।"
चौधरीका दाजु चैतेलाल र भाउजू सीताजानकीलाई सेनाले ०५८ पुस ५ गते मगरागाडी जब्दहवामा समातेर बेपत्ता बनाएको छ । बेपत्तासम्बन्धी कानुन नबनेसम्म न्याय सम्भव नहुने उनको भनाइ छ । माओवादी नौ महिना सरकारमा रहँदा कानुन बनाएर पीडितलाई न्याय दिलाउने प्रयास नगरेकाले राज्य पक्षबाट पीडित भएकाहरू पनि अहिले माओवादीसँग रुष्ट भएको चौधरी बताउँछन् ।
द्वन्द्वपीडितहरूको समर्थन पाएका अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय अधिकारवादी, दातृ निकाय र दाता मुलुकका राजदूतहरू अहिले बेपत्ता नागरकिका परविारलाई एकजुट गराई आन्तरकि र बाह्य रूपमा सरकार र माओवादीमाथि दबाब सिर्जना गर्ने काममा खुलेर लागेका देखिन्छन् । राजदूतहरूको पछिल्लो बर्दिया भ्रमण त्यही बाटोमा एक कदम हो, जसले सरकारलाई जारी आर्थिक सहयोग कतौटी गर्ने संकेतका साथ द्वन्द्वपीडितहरूको संस्थामा लगानी जारी राख्ने जनाएको छ ।
भोलिपल्टै लोप्पा
पश्चिमा राजदूतहरूले दण्डहीनताको अन्त्य र संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले किटान गरेका सेना, प्रहरी र सरकारी अधिकारीहरूलाई न्यायको कठघरामा उभ्याउनुपर्छ भनेको भोलिपल्ट बाँके, बर्दिया र सुर्खेतमा प्रहरीले मानव अधिकार हननसँग सम्बन्धित मुद्दा दर्ता गर्न अस्वीकार गरे ।
अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मानव अधिकार दिवसका दिन मंसिर २४ गते प्रहरीको यस्तो रवैया भोग्नुपर्यो, बर्दिया खैरीचन्दनपुरका कुमराज चौधरी र घुमनिया चौधरीले । उनीहरू तत्कालीन शाही नेपाली सेनाको मध्यपश्चिम पृतना हेडक्वार्टर राँझाका पृतनापति र अपरेसन डेस्कका तत्कालीन सैनिक अधिकृतहरू, सुर्खेतस्िथत शाही नेपाली सेनाको चौथो बाहिनीका बाहिनीपति, रणशुर गुल्म बर्दिया, ठाकुरद्वारका सेनानी पुष्करजंग थापा, इलाका प्रहरी कार्यालय, ढोढरी बेलवा बर्दियाका तत्कालीन प्रमुख, जिल्ला प्रहरी कार्यालय, बर्दियाका तत्कालीन प्रमुख रविप्रताप राणा, सर्चमा गएका टोलीका सुरक्षाकर्मीहरू, हत्यामा संलग्न अन्य सुरक्षाकर्मी र पदाधिकारीमाथि कर्तव्य ज्यान मुद्दा दर्ता गराउन गएका थिए । तर, प्रहरीले माथिको आदेश नभई दर्ता गर्न मिल्दैन भनेर फर्कायो । प्रहरी उपरीक्ष्ाक रामलगनप्रसाद यादव भन्छन्, "एक साताभित्र माथि सोधेर यस्तो मुद्दा दर्ता गर्ने वा नगर्ने टुंगो लगाउँछौँ ।"
सेनाले नियन्त्रणमा लिएपछि हत्या गरेका सात जनाको परविारका सदस्यहरू पनि त्यसै दिन बाँके जिल्ला प्रहरीमा जाहेरी दिन गएका थिए । तर, चिसापानी ब्यारेकका तत्कालीन मेजर अजित थापा र क्याप्टेन रमेश स्वारको नाममा उनीहरूले दिन चाहेको किटानी जाहेरी लिन प्रहरीले अस्वीकार गरेर दण्डहीनता अन्त्यका लागि शक्तिशाली मुलुकका प्रतिनिधिहरूले दिएको दबाबलाई चुनौती दिएको छ ।
उता सुर्खेतमा पनि पतिका हत्यारालाई कारबाहीको माग गर्दै सात वर्षपछि किटानी जाहेरी दिन जिल्ला प्रहरी कार्यालय पुगेकी देवीसरा पौडेलले निराश भएर र्फकनुपर्यो । प्रहरीले जाहेरी नलिएपछि दण्डहीनता अन्त्यका लागि देवीसराले गरेको प्रयास असफल भयो । उनले तत्कालीन शाही नेपाली सेनाको मंगलगढी ब्यारेकका उपसेनानी शरद लामिछाने र जमदार रामबहादुर महतसहित १६ जनाविरुद्ध हत्याको मुद्दा दर्ता गर्न चाहेकी थिइन् ।
http://www.ekantipur.com/nepal/article/?id=567
"मेरा दुई छोरालाई सेनाले मारे, मलाई र कान्छो छोरालाई कुटेर अपांग बनाए," सशस्त्र द्वन्द्वका पीडितहरूलाई भेट्न मंसिर २४ गते नेपालगन्ज आएका नेपालस्िथत विदेशी कूटनीतिक नियोगका प्रमुखहरूसँग न्यायका लागि गुहार माग्दै बर्दियाकी जगतकुमारी बस्नेत, ६०, ले भनिन् ।
उनले २०५८ फागुन २७ गते आफ्ना दुई छोरा केशर र गणेशलाई तत्कालीन शाही नेपाली सेनाले बर्दिया राष्ट्रिय निकुञ्जको सैनिक मुख्यालयमा लगेर हत्या गरेको बताउँदै दोषीमाथि न्यायोचित कारबाही नभएको बिलौना पनि गरनि् । विदेशी राजदूतहरूसामु देवीसरा वलीले पनि आफ्नै देशमा आफ्नै सरकार, प्रशासन र प्रहरीबाट न्याय नपाएको दुःखेसो पोखिन् । उनका छोरा सुरेश ०५९ पुस ७ गते प्रहरीद्वारा मारएिका थिए । यसैगरी बालकृष्ण शर्मा रजिालले बिलौना गरे, "माओवादीहरूले मेरा छोरा धर्मराजलाई ०६० भदौ ९ गते मारे, मलाई पनि अपहरण गरेर चरम यातना दिए । तर, हालसम्म कसैलाई पनि कारबाही भएको छैन ।"
१० वर्षे सशस्त्र विद्राेहका बेला हत्या गरएिका र बेपत्ता पारएिकाहरूका परविारजनलाई भेट्न यसपटक सम्पन्न र शक्तिशाली राष्ट्रका राजदूतहरू बर्दिया जिल्लाका गाउँगाउँ पुगे । संयुक्त राज्य अमेरकिा, संयुक्त अधिराज्य बेलायत, अस्टे्रलिया, जर्मनी, स्वीट्जरल्यान्ड, डेनमार्क, फिनल्यान्ड, नर्वे र युरोपियन युनियनका कूटनीतिज्ञहरूले मानव अधिकार दिवसको सन्दर्भ पारेर बर्दियाको संयुक्त भ्रमण गरेका हुन् । उनीहरूले एकातिर राज्य पक्षले हत्या गरएिका परविारजनको बिलौना सुने भने अर्कातिर माओवादीद्वारा घाँटी रेटिएका र बेपत्ता पारएिकाहरूको परविारजनको आँसु देखे । राज्य र माओवादीबाट पाएको कहालीलाग्दो यातना र पीडाका कथा सुनेकी जर्मन राजदूत भेरेना ग्राफिन भोन रोडेर्नले पीडितहरूको बयान हृदयविदारक भएको बताइन् ।
भेटघाट र प्रत्यक्ष संवादपछि उनीहरूले पीडितको पक्षमा वकालत गर्ने प्रयास मात्र गरेनन्, ती अपराधहरूमा संलग्नमाथि कानुनी कारबाहीका लागि सरकारलाई दबाब दिने वचन पनि दिएका छन् । दण्डहीनताको पराकाष्ठालाई प्रत्यक्ष देखेर फर्केका शक्तिशाली पश्चिमा राष्ट्रका प्रतिनिधिहरू अब यसको अन्त्य गर्नुपर्ने समय आएको बताउँछन् । भ्रमण दलकी प्रमुख तथा जर्मन राजदूत रोडेर्न भन्छिन्, "यस सम्बन्धमा हामी मौन बस्न सक्तैनाँै किनभने नेपाली सेना, प्रहरी र माओवादीले दण्डहीनता अन्त्य गर्न देखाएको अनिच्छाबाट पीडितहरूको दुःख अझ लम्बिएको छ । उनीहरूका मागलाई सम्बन्धित निकायमा पुर्याउने छौँ ।"
विदेशी कूटनीतिज्ञहरूको टोलीसँग पीडित पक्षले बेपत्ता पारएिका आफन्तजनको लास वा सासका लागि पहल गरििदन आग्रह गरे । उनीहरूले नेपाल सरकारसँग गर्दै आएको मागहरूको लामो सूची नै राजदूत समूहलाई बुझाउँदै भनेका छन्, "दोषीलाई छिटो सजाय होस् ।" संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयका प्रतिनिधिसहितको भ्रमण टोलीले नेपाली तथा अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय कानुनविपरीत हुने गरी बर्दियामा पक्राउ वा अपहरण गरी शारीरकि र मनोवैज्ञानिक यातना दिएका १ सय ७० मध्ये धेरैलाई मारएिको अनुमान गरेको छ । मानव अधिकार रक्षाको सवालमा हालसम्मका सबै सरकारप्रति निकै असन्तुष्ट देखिएका यी कूटनीतिज्ञहरूले नेपालगन्जमा प्रेस विज्ञप्ति जारी गर्दै भनेका छन्, "मानव अधिकारका यी गम्भीर उल्लंघनका सम्बन्धमा सरकारबाट कुनै अनुसन्धान पनि भएको छैन ।"
खासमा उनीहरू बर्दियालाई पहिलो भ्रमण स्थल बनाएर नेपालभरकिै दण्डहीनताका विरुद्ध अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय दबाब सिर्जनाका लागि मैदानमै उत्रेका हुन् । करबि एक दर्जन राजदूत र कूटनीतिक नियोग प्रमुखहरू बर्दियामा मानिस पुरेको भनिएका स्थलहरूमा समेत पुगेका थिए । यी विदेशी कूटनीतिज्ञ पुगेको भालपुलमा माओवादी भएको आरोपमा सेनाले हत्या गरेर नौ जनाको लास पुरेको सात वर्ष भएको छ । नेपालगन्जस्िथत उच्च्ाायुक्तको कार्यालयले बर्दियामा बेपत्ता पार्ने कार्यसम्बन्धी विस्तृत प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गरेको ठीक एक वर्षमा कूटनीतिज्ञहरूको यस समूहले स्थलगत भ्रमण गरेको हो ।
उच्च्ाायुक्तको कार्यालयले गत वर्षको मंसिरमा प्रतिवेदन सार्वजनिक गर्दै बेपत्ता पार्नेमाथि अनुसन्धान र कारबाहीका लागि सरकारलाई सिफारसि गरेको थियो । तर, सरकारले बेवास्ता गरेकाले दबाबका लागि राजदूतहरूले बर्दिया भ्रमण गरेका हुन् । यतिले पनि नपुगे उनीहरू उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले सिफारसि गरेका नेपाली सेना, प्रहरी, माओवादी कार्यकर्ता र नेतालाई दण्डित गर्न अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय लबिङ् गर्ने सोचमा छन् ।
राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले आफ्नो प्रतिवेदनलाई अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय समर्थन दिलाएर कार्यान्वयन गराउन शक्तिशाली राजदूतहरूलाई चिहानहरू देखाउन पहल गरेको हो । बारम्बारको प्रतिबद्धताविपरीत आफ्नो सिफारसिलाई कार्यान्वयन गर्न सरकार र माओवादी दुवै पक्षले देखाएको उदासीनतालाई उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले अस्वीकृतिका रूपमा लिएको छ । सिफारसि गरेको एक वर्ष बित्दा पनि सरकार र माओवादीबाट कुनै औपचारकि प्रतिक्रिया नआएकामा उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालय निकै असन्तुष्ट रहेको राजदूत टोलीले नेपालगन्जमा जारी गरेको विज्ञप्तिको भाषाबाटै बुझ्न सकिन्छ । विज्ञप्तिमा उल्लेख छ, 'विगतमा भएका अपराधहरूलाई प्रस्ट पार्दै डरलाग्दा घटनामा मुछिएका सैनिक, प्रहरी र माओवादीहरूलाई दण्डित गर्ने बेला आएको छ ।'
विज्ञप्तिमा अपराधका पीडित तथा साक्षीहरूको संरक्षणको उपाय अपनाउने कुरा सुनिश्चित गर्न सरकारलाई आह्वान पनि गरएिको छ । यसैगरी अपहरणमा परेका व्यक्तिको स्िथति सार्वजनिक गर्न र अपहरण वा नरसंहारमा संलग्नताको आरोप लागेका कार्यकर्तालाई राज्यका अधिकारीसमक्ष उपलब्ध गराउन एकीकृत माओवादीलाई दबाब दिइएको छ ।
बर्दिया भ्रमणमा संलग्न कूटनीतिज्ञहरूले सरकारका मन्त्रीहरूलाई दबाब दिने प्रक्रिया सुरु गरसिकेका छन् । उनीहरूले पछिल्लो समयमा मन्त्रीहरूसँग गरेका विभिन्न भेटमा नेपालमा दण्डहीनताको अवस्था कायम रहे सहयोग गर्न असमर्थ रहने जनाउ दिनथालेका छन् । उनीहरू माओवादीका उपल्ला तहका नेताहरूलाई पनि पुराना गल्तीहरू सच्चिनुपर्नेमा समेत दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । कूटनीतिक स्रोतहरूका अनुसार, माओवादी नेताहरूलाई पश्चिमा राजदूतहरूको सुझाव छ, "तपाइर्ंहरूको अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय रेकर्ड ठीक छैन, छिटो सुधार्नुहोस् ।"
सशस्त्र द्वन्द्वका बेला माओवादीहरूले पनि ठूला नरसंहार गरेका छन् । तर, युद्ध अपराधमा संलग्न आफ्ना त्यस्ता कार्यकर्ताहरूलाई नेतृत्वले कानुनको दायरामा ल्याउनुको साटो पार्टी बढुवा गरेर अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय दबाब निम्त्याएको छ । आफ्नो पटक-पटकको आग्रहलाई बेवास्ता गरएिकाले शक्तिसम्पन्न मुलुकका राजदूतहरू एकीकृत माओवादीका केन्द्रीय नेताहरूसँग हुने हरेक भेटमा संरक्षित अपराधीलाई सजायका लागि राज्यका निकायमा सुम्पँदा सबैलाई सजिलो हुने बताउन थालेका मात्र छैनन्, त्यसो नगरे राजनीतिक सहयोगको ढोका खुला राख्न मुस्िकल पर्ने चेतावनी पनि दिन थालेका छन् ।
विदेशी राजदूतहरू बेपत्ता नागरकिका सम्बन्धमा ०६४ जेठ १४ गते सर्वोच्च अदालतले गरेको आदेश कार्यान्वयन गराउन पनि सरकारलाई दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । अदालतले बेपत्ता पार्नेलाई अपराधी घोषित गर्न र त्यससम्बन्धी छानबिन आयोग गठनका लागि सरकारलाई आदेश दिएको छ । तर, विदेशी राजदूतहरू अदालतको यस आदेश कार्यान्वयनसँगै सशस्त्र विद्रोहका बेला भएका अपराध र त्यसमा संलग्नलाई अपराधी मानेर सजायको व्यवस्था गर्ने नयाँ कानुनमा नै बनाउन सरकारलाई दबाब दिन थालेका छन् । शान्ति प्रक्रियामा ठूलो आकारको प्राविधिक र आर्थिक सहयोगसमेत गर्दै आएका यी मुलुकका राजदूतहरूले दण्डहीनता अन्त्य नभएसम्म नयाँ नेपाल नबन्ने बताएको धेरै भइसकेको छ ।
नेपालमा छिटोभन्दा छिटो अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मापदण्ड अनुरूपको बेपत्ता आयोग र सत्य निरूपण तथा मेलमिलाप आयोग गठन गरी छानबिन प्रक्रिया थालियोस् भन्ने उनीहरूको चाहना र दबाब पनि पुरानै हो । उनीहरूको यस्तो दबाबमा अधिकारकर्मी संघ-संस्था र द्वन्द्वपीडितहरूले पनि सरकारी निकाय, माओवादी र अन्य राजनीतिक दलबाट प्रभावकारी सहयोग खोजिरहेका छन् । द्वन्द्वपीडित समितिका अध्यक्ष भागीराम चौधरी संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघको बेपत्तासम्बन्धी कार्यदललाईर् नेपालमा ल्याएर काम थाले मात्र पीडितले न्याय पाउने बताउँछन् । भन्छन्, "राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको प्रतिवेदनको सिफारसि तत्काल कार्यान्वयन हुनुपर्छ ।"
चौधरीका दाजु चैतेलाल र भाउजू सीताजानकीलाई सेनाले ०५८ पुस ५ गते मगरागाडी जब्दहवामा समातेर बेपत्ता बनाएको छ । बेपत्तासम्बन्धी कानुन नबनेसम्म न्याय सम्भव नहुने उनको भनाइ छ । माओवादी नौ महिना सरकारमा रहँदा कानुन बनाएर पीडितलाई न्याय दिलाउने प्रयास नगरेकाले राज्य पक्षबाट पीडित भएकाहरू पनि अहिले माओवादीसँग रुष्ट भएको चौधरी बताउँछन् ।
द्वन्द्वपीडितहरूको समर्थन पाएका अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय अधिकारवादी, दातृ निकाय र दाता मुलुकका राजदूतहरू अहिले बेपत्ता नागरकिका परविारलाई एकजुट गराई आन्तरकि र बाह्य रूपमा सरकार र माओवादीमाथि दबाब सिर्जना गर्ने काममा खुलेर लागेका देखिन्छन् । राजदूतहरूको पछिल्लो बर्दिया भ्रमण त्यही बाटोमा एक कदम हो, जसले सरकारलाई जारी आर्थिक सहयोग कतौटी गर्ने संकेतका साथ द्वन्द्वपीडितहरूको संस्थामा लगानी जारी राख्ने जनाएको छ ।
भोलिपल्टै लोप्पा
पश्चिमा राजदूतहरूले दण्डहीनताको अन्त्य र संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघीय मानव अधिकार उच्चायुक्तको कार्यालयले किटान गरेका सेना, प्रहरी र सरकारी अधिकारीहरूलाई न्यायको कठघरामा उभ्याउनुपर्छ भनेको भोलिपल्ट बाँके, बर्दिया र सुर्खेतमा प्रहरीले मानव अधिकार हननसँग सम्बन्धित मुद्दा दर्ता गर्न अस्वीकार गरे ।
अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मानव अधिकार दिवसका दिन मंसिर २४ गते प्रहरीको यस्तो रवैया भोग्नुपर्यो, बर्दिया खैरीचन्दनपुरका कुमराज चौधरी र घुमनिया चौधरीले । उनीहरू तत्कालीन शाही नेपाली सेनाको मध्यपश्चिम पृतना हेडक्वार्टर राँझाका पृतनापति र अपरेसन डेस्कका तत्कालीन सैनिक अधिकृतहरू, सुर्खेतस्िथत शाही नेपाली सेनाको चौथो बाहिनीका बाहिनीपति, रणशुर गुल्म बर्दिया, ठाकुरद्वारका सेनानी पुष्करजंग थापा, इलाका प्रहरी कार्यालय, ढोढरी बेलवा बर्दियाका तत्कालीन प्रमुख, जिल्ला प्रहरी कार्यालय, बर्दियाका तत्कालीन प्रमुख रविप्रताप राणा, सर्चमा गएका टोलीका सुरक्षाकर्मीहरू, हत्यामा संलग्न अन्य सुरक्षाकर्मी र पदाधिकारीमाथि कर्तव्य ज्यान मुद्दा दर्ता गराउन गएका थिए । तर, प्रहरीले माथिको आदेश नभई दर्ता गर्न मिल्दैन भनेर फर्कायो । प्रहरी उपरीक्ष्ाक रामलगनप्रसाद यादव भन्छन्, "एक साताभित्र माथि सोधेर यस्तो मुद्दा दर्ता गर्ने वा नगर्ने टुंगो लगाउँछौँ ।"
सेनाले नियन्त्रणमा लिएपछि हत्या गरेका सात जनाको परविारका सदस्यहरू पनि त्यसै दिन बाँके जिल्ला प्रहरीमा जाहेरी दिन गएका थिए । तर, चिसापानी ब्यारेकका तत्कालीन मेजर अजित थापा र क्याप्टेन रमेश स्वारको नाममा उनीहरूले दिन चाहेको किटानी जाहेरी लिन प्रहरीले अस्वीकार गरेर दण्डहीनता अन्त्यका लागि शक्तिशाली मुलुकका प्रतिनिधिहरूले दिएको दबाबलाई चुनौती दिएको छ ।
उता सुर्खेतमा पनि पतिका हत्यारालाई कारबाहीको माग गर्दै सात वर्षपछि किटानी जाहेरी दिन जिल्ला प्रहरी कार्यालय पुगेकी देवीसरा पौडेलले निराश भएर र्फकनुपर्यो । प्रहरीले जाहेरी नलिएपछि दण्डहीनता अन्त्यका लागि देवीसराले गरेको प्रयास असफल भयो । उनले तत्कालीन शाही नेपाली सेनाको मंगलगढी ब्यारेकका उपसेनानी शरद लामिछाने र जमदार रामबहादुर महतसहित १६ जनाविरुद्ध हत्याको मुद्दा दर्ता गर्न चाहेकी थिइन् ।
http://www.ekantipur.com/nepal/article/?id=567
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Mass Case Withdrawal: Blatant Violation of Rights and Remedies
September 23 , 2011
Accountability Watch Committee (AWC) is deeply troubled by the recent government decision to withdraw all cases filed against Maoist cadres from the time of the decade-long armed conflict. We are concerned that this interference in the due process of justice to let criminals escape accountability poses a serious challenge to the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law. Flying in the face of the demand for justice for the widespread conflict-era excesses, we condemn this attempt to further institutionalize the rapidly expanding state of impunity in Nepal.
The urgency today is to investigate all cases of human rights abuse by both the Maoists and the state forces during the armed conflict. AWC reiterates its stance that the government should firmly stand in favor of the aspirations for justice and accountability of the people and stresses that in a democratic state there is no space for impunity, where serious breaches of human rights are allowed to go scot-free time and again. We strongly condemn any action promoting impunity which fuels instability and insecurity and thus deplore the Attorney General’s (AG’s) intention to withdraw criminal cases in this light. The AG in his constitutional role as the chief legal advisor to the government should oppose the government’s decision and refuse to implement it. We view the announcement of the AG to withdraw all cases against Maoists as one more step toward impunity and blatant disregard of the rights of victims who are ever waiting for justice.
It is important to recall that Nepal is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which mandates each State to ensure that victims of human rights violations have a right to effective remedy (article 2-3). Withdrawing cases of rape, torture, murder and disappearance would undoubtedly constitute a grave breach of this international obligation, as well as of the commitments Nepal has made during the recent Universal Periodic Review. There, the government stated it was “fully committed to establishing Constitutional supremacy, ensuring the rule of law, good governance and human rights, as well as providing a positive conclusion to the peace process by eliminating insecurity and addressing impunity.”
The AG’s explanation for the decision is that all cases from the conflict were inherently “politically motivated" and that the cases related to conflict time are against the spirit of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and they should be withdrawn. This position disregards the commitments in the CPA made both parties not to encourage impunity and to ensure the rights of victims (Article 7.1.3).
Concerns for justice, accountability and the rights to remedy for the victims were at the heart of the CPA and were considered part of the bedrock of the democratic system fostering the peace process. Withdrawing criminal cases amount to granting amnesty for conflict crimes including for gross human rights violations. Such move deprives the people of their ownership of the peace process by encroaching on their legitimate aspirations for redress and justice.
The practice of withdrawing cases is not new. It started in 2008 under the previous government led by the UCPN-M and has continued despite a Supreme Court interim order in 2008 directing the suspension of further withdrawals. The latest plan for mass withdrawal will have a disastrous effect to safeguarding human rights and justice, badly erodes public confidence with the government and hampers the due course of justice. If this mass withdrawal takes place, it will strike a real blow at the rule of law and open the floodgates for more withdrawals and denials of justice to the victims resulting in gross lawlessness. Such practice will further encourage political interference in the rule of law, demoralize police officials, prosecutors and judges working on such cases, contribute to public insecurity by allowing alleged criminals to escape prosecution, and further erode public confidence in law and order institutions and the Government.
In Nepal’s protracted post-conflict transition, those who are in power still escape being questioned and function above the law. The commitments on transitional justice in the peace agreements and their non-implementation to date reveal a fundamental tension between Nepal’s stated wish to end impunity and its clear reluctance of those in power to be held accountable, whether politicians, members of the security forces or of the UCPN-M. It is unfortunate that Nepalese politics have turned into an industry producing a host of wrongdoers who are allowed to go scot-free. This politics of appeasement and compromise has led to increased impunity and decreased accountability.
Given that over thousands of people have died and thousands of others disappeared, been physically or mentally injured, incapacitated and displaced, it is high time the state acknowledged those abuses, sincerely tried to heal the wounds of the victims and bring perpetrators to justice. No process can bring about sustainable peace, if serious crimes and abuses are condoned or victims are forgotten.
International law is against blanket amnesty, especially amnesty to perpetrators of systematic crimes (war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity) and serious violation of human rights. It is the obligation of the state under national and international law to bring criminals to justice. But the trend of case withdrawal has violated this responsibility, challenging the right to effective remedy. If this filthy tendency of impunity is to continue, the fear and insecurity among the public will increase, and the mental anguish of the direct sufferers of the wrongdoings of the past will be amplified.
We appeal to political leaders, the international community, victims/survivors of the conflict and the general public to be extra alert to protect the right to justice of the victims of conflict, at a time when the government seems intent on providing a political cover for instances of grave conflict-era human rights abuses. In this context, we do appreciate the position taken by the main opposition parties in the parliament and call upon the Government:
1. To halt the trend to withdraw cases in order to preserve the trust of the people on the justice system;
2. To ensure respect for court orders and initiate investigation into human rights violations during the conflict and ensure punishment for the culprits and justice to the victims;
3. To refrain from calling for pardons and the withdrawal of any criminal cases that would be contrary to Nepal's commitments under international human rights law since such actions send a contradictory message to the country about the real purpose of transitional justice and the need for accountability for past crimes;
4. To establish the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances without further delay in accordance with the international standards and best practices to allow the commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations.
Source: email circulation: AWC Statement on Case Withdrawl - 23 Sept 2011
Friday, September 23, 2011 7:59 AM From: "Accountability Watch Committee (AWC) human rights"
Accountability Watch Committee (AWC) is deeply troubled by the recent government decision to withdraw all cases filed against Maoist cadres from the time of the decade-long armed conflict. We are concerned that this interference in the due process of justice to let criminals escape accountability poses a serious challenge to the independence of the judicial system and the rule of law. Flying in the face of the demand for justice for the widespread conflict-era excesses, we condemn this attempt to further institutionalize the rapidly expanding state of impunity in Nepal.
The urgency today is to investigate all cases of human rights abuse by both the Maoists and the state forces during the armed conflict. AWC reiterates its stance that the government should firmly stand in favor of the aspirations for justice and accountability of the people and stresses that in a democratic state there is no space for impunity, where serious breaches of human rights are allowed to go scot-free time and again. We strongly condemn any action promoting impunity which fuels instability and insecurity and thus deplore the Attorney General’s (AG’s) intention to withdraw criminal cases in this light. The AG in his constitutional role as the chief legal advisor to the government should oppose the government’s decision and refuse to implement it. We view the announcement of the AG to withdraw all cases against Maoists as one more step toward impunity and blatant disregard of the rights of victims who are ever waiting for justice.
It is important to recall that Nepal is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which mandates each State to ensure that victims of human rights violations have a right to effective remedy (article 2-3). Withdrawing cases of rape, torture, murder and disappearance would undoubtedly constitute a grave breach of this international obligation, as well as of the commitments Nepal has made during the recent Universal Periodic Review. There, the government stated it was “fully committed to establishing Constitutional supremacy, ensuring the rule of law, good governance and human rights, as well as providing a positive conclusion to the peace process by eliminating insecurity and addressing impunity.”
The AG’s explanation for the decision is that all cases from the conflict were inherently “politically motivated" and that the cases related to conflict time are against the spirit of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and they should be withdrawn. This position disregards the commitments in the CPA made both parties not to encourage impunity and to ensure the rights of victims (Article 7.1.3).
Concerns for justice, accountability and the rights to remedy for the victims were at the heart of the CPA and were considered part of the bedrock of the democratic system fostering the peace process. Withdrawing criminal cases amount to granting amnesty for conflict crimes including for gross human rights violations. Such move deprives the people of their ownership of the peace process by encroaching on their legitimate aspirations for redress and justice.
The practice of withdrawing cases is not new. It started in 2008 under the previous government led by the UCPN-M and has continued despite a Supreme Court interim order in 2008 directing the suspension of further withdrawals. The latest plan for mass withdrawal will have a disastrous effect to safeguarding human rights and justice, badly erodes public confidence with the government and hampers the due course of justice. If this mass withdrawal takes place, it will strike a real blow at the rule of law and open the floodgates for more withdrawals and denials of justice to the victims resulting in gross lawlessness. Such practice will further encourage political interference in the rule of law, demoralize police officials, prosecutors and judges working on such cases, contribute to public insecurity by allowing alleged criminals to escape prosecution, and further erode public confidence in law and order institutions and the Government.
In Nepal’s protracted post-conflict transition, those who are in power still escape being questioned and function above the law. The commitments on transitional justice in the peace agreements and their non-implementation to date reveal a fundamental tension between Nepal’s stated wish to end impunity and its clear reluctance of those in power to be held accountable, whether politicians, members of the security forces or of the UCPN-M. It is unfortunate that Nepalese politics have turned into an industry producing a host of wrongdoers who are allowed to go scot-free. This politics of appeasement and compromise has led to increased impunity and decreased accountability.
Given that over thousands of people have died and thousands of others disappeared, been physically or mentally injured, incapacitated and displaced, it is high time the state acknowledged those abuses, sincerely tried to heal the wounds of the victims and bring perpetrators to justice. No process can bring about sustainable peace, if serious crimes and abuses are condoned or victims are forgotten.
International law is against blanket amnesty, especially amnesty to perpetrators of systematic crimes (war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity) and serious violation of human rights. It is the obligation of the state under national and international law to bring criminals to justice. But the trend of case withdrawal has violated this responsibility, challenging the right to effective remedy. If this filthy tendency of impunity is to continue, the fear and insecurity among the public will increase, and the mental anguish of the direct sufferers of the wrongdoings of the past will be amplified.
We appeal to political leaders, the international community, victims/survivors of the conflict and the general public to be extra alert to protect the right to justice of the victims of conflict, at a time when the government seems intent on providing a political cover for instances of grave conflict-era human rights abuses. In this context, we do appreciate the position taken by the main opposition parties in the parliament and call upon the Government:
1. To halt the trend to withdraw cases in order to preserve the trust of the people on the justice system;
2. To ensure respect for court orders and initiate investigation into human rights violations during the conflict and ensure punishment for the culprits and justice to the victims;
3. To refrain from calling for pardons and the withdrawal of any criminal cases that would be contrary to Nepal's commitments under international human rights law since such actions send a contradictory message to the country about the real purpose of transitional justice and the need for accountability for past crimes;
4. To establish the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances without further delay in accordance with the international standards and best practices to allow the commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations.
Source: email circulation: AWC Statement on Case Withdrawl - 23 Sept 2011
Friday, September 23, 2011 7:59 AM From: "Accountability Watch Committee (AWC) human rights"
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Nepal’s inert Civil Society leaders open their lips…finally
Telegraph Nepal
Addressing a program in Kathmandu organized to commemorate the International Day of Peace, September 21, 2011 Nepal’s renowned human rights activists and Civil Society members have come to the conclusion that the current government led by Unified Maoists’ Party vice chairman Baburam Bhattarai was too much nonchalant towards peace and constitutional processes.
The program was organized by Human Rights and Peace Society-Nepal.
Nepal, according to reports, may have now the existence of some five thousands HR “pocket” organizations.
Former Nepali Congress leader turned Civil Society leader Mr. Daman Nath Dhungana opined that peace and constitutional processes have been halted due to the uninterrupted quarrel between the political parties.
Dhungana was also of the view that parties need to sort-out their differences at the earliest or the country will have to face a disaster.
“To preserve the territorial integrity of Nepal, federalism is the only remedy”, he said.
“We will take to the streets if the decision to withdraw criminal charges against the political leadership is not scrapped by the government. The decision will institutionalize impunity”, said HR activist Mr. Krishna Pahadi.
Pahadi has come out from a long hibernation.
He was of the view that if parties fail to forge consensus in the contentious issues related to peace process and constitution drafting, the Unified Maoists party will be held responsible.
Professor Lok Raj Baral was of the view that the idea to sideline Maoists will block the peace and constitutional processes.
Professor Krishna Khanal on the other hand claimed that with the CA term being extended each time the people become hopeful but the continuous brawl between parties has made the population already pessimistic.
Better late than never, they have begun to speak.
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-22/nepals-inert-civil-society-leaders-open-their-lips-finally.html
Addressing a program in Kathmandu organized to commemorate the International Day of Peace, September 21, 2011 Nepal’s renowned human rights activists and Civil Society members have come to the conclusion that the current government led by Unified Maoists’ Party vice chairman Baburam Bhattarai was too much nonchalant towards peace and constitutional processes.
The program was organized by Human Rights and Peace Society-Nepal.
Nepal, according to reports, may have now the existence of some five thousands HR “pocket” organizations.
Former Nepali Congress leader turned Civil Society leader Mr. Daman Nath Dhungana opined that peace and constitutional processes have been halted due to the uninterrupted quarrel between the political parties.
Dhungana was also of the view that parties need to sort-out their differences at the earliest or the country will have to face a disaster.
“To preserve the territorial integrity of Nepal, federalism is the only remedy”, he said.
“We will take to the streets if the decision to withdraw criminal charges against the political leadership is not scrapped by the government. The decision will institutionalize impunity”, said HR activist Mr. Krishna Pahadi.
Pahadi has come out from a long hibernation.
He was of the view that if parties fail to forge consensus in the contentious issues related to peace process and constitution drafting, the Unified Maoists party will be held responsible.
Professor Lok Raj Baral was of the view that the idea to sideline Maoists will block the peace and constitutional processes.
Professor Krishna Khanal on the other hand claimed that with the CA term being extended each time the people become hopeful but the continuous brawl between parties has made the population already pessimistic.
Better late than never, they have begun to speak.
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-22/nepals-inert-civil-society-leaders-open-their-lips-finally.html
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Gender-based violence promoting impunity
Wednesday, 14 September 2011 08:49
At least 17 incidents of gender-based violence (GBV) occurred in Saptari district over the past eight months, informed Samagra Janautthan Kendra Lahan and HimRights crusading against GBV.
Human Rights Saptari Coordinator, Dilip Singh, told RSS, among the incidents of GBV occurred during the period from January to August, 2011 are murder (4), rape (6), misbehave on the charge of practicing witchcraft (5), manhandle (1) and threat (1).
Participating speakers at a social dialogue programme on 'Stakeholders' Role for Reduction of Gender based Violence' noted that the magnitude of GBV will not be lessened until and unless key stakeholders including local police and administration are not sensitive to the incidents of violence based on gender.
It is informed that women victims in most of the cased are not dispensed with justice, which has been key to promote impunity thereby gender-based violence.
The local administration has made nominal progress in the act of guaranteeing human rights and accountability and putting impunity to end, according to the GBV monitoring report released on the occasion. nepalnews.com
http://www.nepalnews.com/home/index.php/news/2/13136-gender-based-violence-promoting-impunity.html
At least 17 incidents of gender-based violence (GBV) occurred in Saptari district over the past eight months, informed Samagra Janautthan Kendra Lahan and HimRights crusading against GBV.
Human Rights Saptari Coordinator, Dilip Singh, told RSS, among the incidents of GBV occurred during the period from January to August, 2011 are murder (4), rape (6), misbehave on the charge of practicing witchcraft (5), manhandle (1) and threat (1).
Participating speakers at a social dialogue programme on 'Stakeholders' Role for Reduction of Gender based Violence' noted that the magnitude of GBV will not be lessened until and unless key stakeholders including local police and administration are not sensitive to the incidents of violence based on gender.
It is informed that women victims in most of the cased are not dispensed with justice, which has been key to promote impunity thereby gender-based violence.
The local administration has made nominal progress in the act of guaranteeing human rights and accountability and putting impunity to end, according to the GBV monitoring report released on the occasion. nepalnews.com
http://www.nepalnews.com/home/index.php/news/2/13136-gender-based-violence-promoting-impunity.html
Gender-based violence promoting impunity
Gender-based violence promoting impunity
Wednesday, 14 September 2011
Twitter Myspace Mister Wong Digg Del.icio.us Jumptags StumbleUpon Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Blinkbits Ma.Gnolia Smarking Googlize this Blinklist Facebook WikioExport PDFPrintE-mail
At least 17 incidents of gender-based violence (GBV) occurred in Saptari district over the past eight months, informed Samagra Janautthan Kendra Lahan and HimRights crusading against GBV.
Human Rights Saptari Coordinator, Dilip Singh, told RSS, among the incidents of GBV occurred during the period from January to August, 2011 are murder (4), rape (6), misbehave on the charge of practicing witchcraft (5), manhandle (1) and threat (1).
Participating speakers at a social dialogue programme on 'Stakeholders' Role for Reduction of Gender based Violence' noted that the magnitude of GBV will not be lessened until and unless key stakeholders including local police and administration are not sensitive to the incidents of violence based on gender.
It is informed that women victims in most of the cased are not dispensed with justice, which has been key to promote impunity thereby gender-based violence.
The local administration has made nominal progress in the act of guaranteeing human rights and accountability and putting impunity to end, according to the GBV monitoring report released on the occasion. nepalnews.com
http://www.nepalnews.com/home/index.php/news/2/13136-gender-based-violence-promoting-impunity.html
Wednesday, 14 September 2011
Twitter Myspace Mister Wong Digg Del.icio.us Jumptags StumbleUpon Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Blinkbits Ma.Gnolia Smarking Googlize this Blinklist Facebook WikioExport PDFPrintE-mail
At least 17 incidents of gender-based violence (GBV) occurred in Saptari district over the past eight months, informed Samagra Janautthan Kendra Lahan and HimRights crusading against GBV.
Human Rights Saptari Coordinator, Dilip Singh, told RSS, among the incidents of GBV occurred during the period from January to August, 2011 are murder (4), rape (6), misbehave on the charge of practicing witchcraft (5), manhandle (1) and threat (1).
Participating speakers at a social dialogue programme on 'Stakeholders' Role for Reduction of Gender based Violence' noted that the magnitude of GBV will not be lessened until and unless key stakeholders including local police and administration are not sensitive to the incidents of violence based on gender.
It is informed that women victims in most of the cased are not dispensed with justice, which has been key to promote impunity thereby gender-based violence.
The local administration has made nominal progress in the act of guaranteeing human rights and accountability and putting impunity to end, according to the GBV monitoring report released on the occasion. nepalnews.com
http://www.nepalnews.com/home/index.php/news/2/13136-gender-based-violence-promoting-impunity.html
Thursday, September 15, 2011
In Nepal, killers of journalists could go free
September 15, 2011
Prime Minister Dr. Baburam Bhattarai
c/o Embassy of Nepal
2131 Leroy Place, NW
Washington, DC 20008
Via facsimile: 202-667-5534
Dear Prime Minister Bhattarai:
We are alarmed by recent reports regarding the planned amnesty of criminal cases pending from past political violence in Nepal and are writing to express our concern that people convicted of killing journalists could go free based on political decisions made by your government.
On August 25, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), of which you are vice-chairman, proposed withdrawing "politically motivated" cases filed against party leaders for crimes they committed during the decade-long armed insurgency, local and international news sites reported. This proposal, which would pardon those already convicted, was allegedly part of an agreement you made with the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF), a coalition of parties representing ethnic Madhesis, news reports said. Madhesi activists advocate autonomy or independence for the Terai plains, where CPJ has documented attacks against journalists as part of a frequently violent political movement. Political cases filed against Madhesi activists resulting from this movement will also be retracted under your proposal, news reports said.
In return for this proposal, you gained support from the UDMF in the parliamentary prime-ministerial elections on August 28 and were elected, news reports said.
You have assured critics that your government will not grant amnesty to criminals, according to local news reports. Yet the proposal, as analyzed in public reports, includes no definition of a politically motivated indictment, no plans to investigate which cases qualify, and no compensation or appeal for victims. As such, it has disturbing ramifications for the prosecution of any crime committed in the past 15 years. If this proposal is realized, it would codify the existing climate of impunity for the murders of journalists and others, both before and since the insurgency.
On Tuesday, Attorney General Mukti Pradhan, whom you appointed on September 9, said that all cases against Maoists and the state for conflict-related violence constitute political cases, and would thus be withdrawn, The Himalayan Times reported. He said in an interview with Republica the decision was justified under Clause 5.2.7 of the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which states that both sides guarantee the withdrawal of cases filed on political grounds. "Neither the Supreme Court nor any law prohibits us" from implementing this clause, he said. "We ask national and international human rights watchdogs to abide by provisions incorporated in the CPA."
We believe that a blanket withdrawal of criminal cases would be abusing and not adhering to the peace accord. Opposition politicians, civil-society groups, and journalists within Nepal also say that your proposal undermines the peace process.
Maoists have already invoked the peace agreement to evade prosecution. The government, under Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, withdrew in February the case of the 2007 disappearance and possible murder of pro-monarchy freelancer Prakash Singh Thakuri, as well as 349 others that it said were political crimes committed during the conflict, The Kathmandu Post reported. Nepal's Supreme Court--during opposition Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) chair Jhalnath Khanal's brief tenure as prime minister--however, overruled the withdrawal and said that since Thakuri was abducted more than seven months after the insurgency was over, the case did not qualify under the terms laid out in the peace accord, according to the Post. The court reinstated the Thakuri case on August 23, local press freedom group Freedom Forum said.
Nepal already has an appalling record for prosecuting killers of journalists, 7th worst in the world, according to CPJ's 2011 Impunity Index, which calculates unsolved murders as a percentage of the country's population. Withdrawing any cases relating to the six unsolved or partially solved media killings CPJ has documented in Nepal since 2002 would be an injustice to those who were slain reporting on both sides of the country's brutal conflict. It would also encourage a continuance of the attacks, threats, and harassment that journalists face nationwide in Nepal today, by implying that your government places no value on defending press freedom.
This May, you told local press freedom group the Federation of Nepali Journalists that your party would "not make any compromise on press freedom." This planned amnesty would be such a compromise. We urge you not to sacrifice justice for political interest, but to use your influence with the Maoist and Madhesi groups to ensure a full and fair accounting for past crimes against the press.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Joel Simon
Executive Director
September 15, 2011 3:27 PM ET
http://www.cpj.org/2011/09/september-15-2011-prime-minister.php
Prime Minister Dr. Baburam Bhattarai
c/o Embassy of Nepal
2131 Leroy Place, NW
Washington, DC 20008
Via facsimile: 202-667-5534
Dear Prime Minister Bhattarai:
We are alarmed by recent reports regarding the planned amnesty of criminal cases pending from past political violence in Nepal and are writing to express our concern that people convicted of killing journalists could go free based on political decisions made by your government.
On August 25, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), of which you are vice-chairman, proposed withdrawing "politically motivated" cases filed against party leaders for crimes they committed during the decade-long armed insurgency, local and international news sites reported. This proposal, which would pardon those already convicted, was allegedly part of an agreement you made with the United Democratic Madhesi Front (UDMF), a coalition of parties representing ethnic Madhesis, news reports said. Madhesi activists advocate autonomy or independence for the Terai plains, where CPJ has documented attacks against journalists as part of a frequently violent political movement. Political cases filed against Madhesi activists resulting from this movement will also be retracted under your proposal, news reports said.
In return for this proposal, you gained support from the UDMF in the parliamentary prime-ministerial elections on August 28 and were elected, news reports said.
You have assured critics that your government will not grant amnesty to criminals, according to local news reports. Yet the proposal, as analyzed in public reports, includes no definition of a politically motivated indictment, no plans to investigate which cases qualify, and no compensation or appeal for victims. As such, it has disturbing ramifications for the prosecution of any crime committed in the past 15 years. If this proposal is realized, it would codify the existing climate of impunity for the murders of journalists and others, both before and since the insurgency.
On Tuesday, Attorney General Mukti Pradhan, whom you appointed on September 9, said that all cases against Maoists and the state for conflict-related violence constitute political cases, and would thus be withdrawn, The Himalayan Times reported. He said in an interview with Republica the decision was justified under Clause 5.2.7 of the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which states that both sides guarantee the withdrawal of cases filed on political grounds. "Neither the Supreme Court nor any law prohibits us" from implementing this clause, he said. "We ask national and international human rights watchdogs to abide by provisions incorporated in the CPA."
We believe that a blanket withdrawal of criminal cases would be abusing and not adhering to the peace accord. Opposition politicians, civil-society groups, and journalists within Nepal also say that your proposal undermines the peace process.
Maoists have already invoked the peace agreement to evade prosecution. The government, under Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, withdrew in February the case of the 2007 disappearance and possible murder of pro-monarchy freelancer Prakash Singh Thakuri, as well as 349 others that it said were political crimes committed during the conflict, The Kathmandu Post reported. Nepal's Supreme Court--during opposition Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) chair Jhalnath Khanal's brief tenure as prime minister--however, overruled the withdrawal and said that since Thakuri was abducted more than seven months after the insurgency was over, the case did not qualify under the terms laid out in the peace accord, according to the Post. The court reinstated the Thakuri case on August 23, local press freedom group Freedom Forum said.
Nepal already has an appalling record for prosecuting killers of journalists, 7th worst in the world, according to CPJ's 2011 Impunity Index, which calculates unsolved murders as a percentage of the country's population. Withdrawing any cases relating to the six unsolved or partially solved media killings CPJ has documented in Nepal since 2002 would be an injustice to those who were slain reporting on both sides of the country's brutal conflict. It would also encourage a continuance of the attacks, threats, and harassment that journalists face nationwide in Nepal today, by implying that your government places no value on defending press freedom.
This May, you told local press freedom group the Federation of Nepali Journalists that your party would "not make any compromise on press freedom." This planned amnesty would be such a compromise. We urge you not to sacrifice justice for political interest, but to use your influence with the Maoist and Madhesi groups to ensure a full and fair accounting for past crimes against the press.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Joel Simon
Executive Director
September 15, 2011 3:27 PM ET
http://www.cpj.org/2011/09/september-15-2011-prime-minister.php
Government's Apathy Leaving Conflict Victims in Dire Needs
By Bed Prakash Dhakal
Walking around homes in the village with swollen feet and foraging for food for the family was not the future Laxman Das dreamed of when he decided to join the rank of the then rebel party. The ideal of an egalitarian society where everything will be better now holds little meaning for Laxman as he goes through the struggle to get by each day.
Laxman Das was born in Phulkahakatti VDC-5 of Siraha district 45 years ago. He used to work as a waged worker before he joined the then CPN-M in October 1997. Soon, he was Phulkahakatti chief of the party.
In the course of his involvement in the party, he was entrusted with different responsibilities. He joined the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and was also given duty of Front Guard leader. He fell in the hands of the security personnel on December 3, 2003. "They inflicted severe torture on me," Das related. He had been detained at the District Police Office before he was taken to Indradwoj Company of Nepal Army in Siraha. "The brutal beating and torture continued in the army barrack," recalled Das at a meeting of Phulkahakatti Victim Reconciliation Forum on May 17, 2011, adding, "The army men used to kick at my waist and chest everyday inflicting immense pain leaving me virtually immobile."
After three months of detention, Das was released from the barrack. However, his physical condition continued to deteriorate. His entire body had swollen and he had difficulty in speaking. Though he received minor treatment, he did not recuperate from physical pain. His legs are still swollen and he stammers due to the torture he was subjected to by the security forces.
The former PLA fighter is forced to manage square meals for his five family members, including him by asking alms in the village. "My swollen body does not help me to walk for long because of which I cannot take care of my family by working," Das said, adding that he visited different organizations, including his party CPN-Maoist seeking help, but to no avail.
In August 2010, he became member of Phulkahakatti Reconciliation Forum (RF) which was formed by INSEC's Grassroots Initiatives for Rights, Democracy and Peace (RDP) programme with the objective of organizing conflict victims and initiating steps to restore peace and harmony in the society. Das said that he had been empowered and came to realize that he was deprived of various facilities available to the conflict victims after attending the three-day training organized for the RF for its capacity building and to make RF members aware about various aspects, including reconciliation, reparation, mediation, government provision of relief. He realized that the government has set provision of free treatment to the conflict victims. He has now access to district level authorities with the help of INSEC district office.
Phulkahakatti RF and INSEC district office have raised his concerns through radio programs, newsletters (published by INSEC district office) and articles published in the broadsheet dailies like Samacharpatra. However, Das has not received concrete relief from the service delivery agencies till May 2011. He, however, received assurances of support from different agencies.
When asked, Bilat Narayan Chaudhari, secretary of Phulkahakatti VDC said that the VDC could not help him so far as political parties have not made decision in connection with providing support to ailing Das. He further said, "Since allocating budget to Das solely depends on the decision of the VDC level political mechanism, I cannot alone provide support to Das." He is of the view of providing support to Das by urging the mechanism to make decision on this regard.
UCPN-M district in-charge, Hari Narayan Chaudhari said that despite his attempts to provide support to Das from various agencies, he has not received any relief. Chaudhari said he has recommended his name from the Local Peace Committee for relief and facilities provided by the government.
The Local Peace Committee in Siraha said that it had also recommended the Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction (MoPR) to provide support to Das but he has not received any support yet. LPC secretary, Shiva Dayal Yadav came to know about Das's condition only after INSEC highlighted his case. Saying that LPC has recommended his name to the MoPR for relief, Yadav said he will take further steps after the ministry responds over the issue.
Das's wife had just given birth to a baby when a joint monitoring team from INSEC central office, Eastern Regional Office and district office met him on May 17, 2011. As he has to take care of his four-year-old daughter and 70-year-old mother, the team provided a support of Rs 4000 to Das.
"The support provided by INSEC has value of more than four lakh rupees since the amount has become a great relief to his wife," Ramjatan Kamaut, treasurer of the RF said, adding that the support extended by INSEC has set a good example that all stakeholders should be united to provide humanitarian support to ailing victims.
ERO Coordinator handing over support to victim Das
INSEC ERO coordinator, Somraj Thapa had handed over the amount to Das in the meeting of the RF held in the VDC office on May 17. Like Das, there are several conflict victims with same plight in various conflict-hit areas across the country. Condition of other members of Phulkakatti RF is not different from Das. Neither the government agencies nor any I/NGOs have helped them. They have no means to make ends meet but to lead difficult lives recalling their bitter past.
"Several conflict victims are awaiting treatment and relief from the government. Though the government has made some provisions for conflict victims, they are not able to benefit from them due to lengthy process," says INSEC district coordinator Devraj Pokharel.
High ranking officials like Prime Minister and ministers have been visiting various districts for inauguration of seminars and conferences over the issue of conflict victims frequently; however, they have not provided concrete support to the conflict victims so far. If some fund meant for such visits could be given to the conflict victims in dire needs, it would be great relief for them. There are several instances of freezing of budget meant to be distributed to the conflict victims due to ineffective distribution system in various districts. The government has formed Local Peace Committee in various districts. However, the LPCs are not functioning as expected. LPC coordinators in various districts complained that they are not the final authority to provide relief to the victims; however, they have just an authority to recommend names of the victims to the District Administration Office.
In such a context, the government should make relief distribution to the conflict victims effective so that genuine victims must not be deprived of enjoying the facilities allocated for them. Moreover, it is necessary to ensure that the fund allocated for the real victim does not go to the fake ones.
Meanwhile, Laxman Das, despite no help in sight, continue his struggle to support his family, as decided to work for encouraging the conflict victims of both sides to reconcile with their past and move ahead for better days.
http://www.inseconline.org/index.php?type=features&id=4&lang=en
Walking around homes in the village with swollen feet and foraging for food for the family was not the future Laxman Das dreamed of when he decided to join the rank of the then rebel party. The ideal of an egalitarian society where everything will be better now holds little meaning for Laxman as he goes through the struggle to get by each day.
Laxman Das was born in Phulkahakatti VDC-5 of Siraha district 45 years ago. He used to work as a waged worker before he joined the then CPN-M in October 1997. Soon, he was Phulkahakatti chief of the party.
In the course of his involvement in the party, he was entrusted with different responsibilities. He joined the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and was also given duty of Front Guard leader. He fell in the hands of the security personnel on December 3, 2003. "They inflicted severe torture on me," Das related. He had been detained at the District Police Office before he was taken to Indradwoj Company of Nepal Army in Siraha. "The brutal beating and torture continued in the army barrack," recalled Das at a meeting of Phulkahakatti Victim Reconciliation Forum on May 17, 2011, adding, "The army men used to kick at my waist and chest everyday inflicting immense pain leaving me virtually immobile."
After three months of detention, Das was released from the barrack. However, his physical condition continued to deteriorate. His entire body had swollen and he had difficulty in speaking. Though he received minor treatment, he did not recuperate from physical pain. His legs are still swollen and he stammers due to the torture he was subjected to by the security forces.
The former PLA fighter is forced to manage square meals for his five family members, including him by asking alms in the village. "My swollen body does not help me to walk for long because of which I cannot take care of my family by working," Das said, adding that he visited different organizations, including his party CPN-Maoist seeking help, but to no avail.
In August 2010, he became member of Phulkahakatti Reconciliation Forum (RF) which was formed by INSEC's Grassroots Initiatives for Rights, Democracy and Peace (RDP) programme with the objective of organizing conflict victims and initiating steps to restore peace and harmony in the society. Das said that he had been empowered and came to realize that he was deprived of various facilities available to the conflict victims after attending the three-day training organized for the RF for its capacity building and to make RF members aware about various aspects, including reconciliation, reparation, mediation, government provision of relief. He realized that the government has set provision of free treatment to the conflict victims. He has now access to district level authorities with the help of INSEC district office.
Phulkahakatti RF and INSEC district office have raised his concerns through radio programs, newsletters (published by INSEC district office) and articles published in the broadsheet dailies like Samacharpatra. However, Das has not received concrete relief from the service delivery agencies till May 2011. He, however, received assurances of support from different agencies.
When asked, Bilat Narayan Chaudhari, secretary of Phulkahakatti VDC said that the VDC could not help him so far as political parties have not made decision in connection with providing support to ailing Das. He further said, "Since allocating budget to Das solely depends on the decision of the VDC level political mechanism, I cannot alone provide support to Das." He is of the view of providing support to Das by urging the mechanism to make decision on this regard.
UCPN-M district in-charge, Hari Narayan Chaudhari said that despite his attempts to provide support to Das from various agencies, he has not received any relief. Chaudhari said he has recommended his name from the Local Peace Committee for relief and facilities provided by the government.
The Local Peace Committee in Siraha said that it had also recommended the Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction (MoPR) to provide support to Das but he has not received any support yet. LPC secretary, Shiva Dayal Yadav came to know about Das's condition only after INSEC highlighted his case. Saying that LPC has recommended his name to the MoPR for relief, Yadav said he will take further steps after the ministry responds over the issue.
Das's wife had just given birth to a baby when a joint monitoring team from INSEC central office, Eastern Regional Office and district office met him on May 17, 2011. As he has to take care of his four-year-old daughter and 70-year-old mother, the team provided a support of Rs 4000 to Das.
"The support provided by INSEC has value of more than four lakh rupees since the amount has become a great relief to his wife," Ramjatan Kamaut, treasurer of the RF said, adding that the support extended by INSEC has set a good example that all stakeholders should be united to provide humanitarian support to ailing victims.
ERO Coordinator handing over support to victim Das
INSEC ERO coordinator, Somraj Thapa had handed over the amount to Das in the meeting of the RF held in the VDC office on May 17. Like Das, there are several conflict victims with same plight in various conflict-hit areas across the country. Condition of other members of Phulkakatti RF is not different from Das. Neither the government agencies nor any I/NGOs have helped them. They have no means to make ends meet but to lead difficult lives recalling their bitter past.
"Several conflict victims are awaiting treatment and relief from the government. Though the government has made some provisions for conflict victims, they are not able to benefit from them due to lengthy process," says INSEC district coordinator Devraj Pokharel.
High ranking officials like Prime Minister and ministers have been visiting various districts for inauguration of seminars and conferences over the issue of conflict victims frequently; however, they have not provided concrete support to the conflict victims so far. If some fund meant for such visits could be given to the conflict victims in dire needs, it would be great relief for them. There are several instances of freezing of budget meant to be distributed to the conflict victims due to ineffective distribution system in various districts. The government has formed Local Peace Committee in various districts. However, the LPCs are not functioning as expected. LPC coordinators in various districts complained that they are not the final authority to provide relief to the victims; however, they have just an authority to recommend names of the victims to the District Administration Office.
In such a context, the government should make relief distribution to the conflict victims effective so that genuine victims must not be deprived of enjoying the facilities allocated for them. Moreover, it is necessary to ensure that the fund allocated for the real victim does not go to the fake ones.
Meanwhile, Laxman Das, despite no help in sight, continue his struggle to support his family, as decided to work for encouraging the conflict victims of both sides to reconcile with their past and move ahead for better days.
http://www.inseconline.org/index.php?type=features&id=4&lang=en
Politics of land
SEP 14 - 2011
Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai appears to be doing all he can to gain the trust of the Nepali Congress and the UML. After trying hard to reach a deal on integration, his government has now directed party cadres and District Administration Officers to immediately start the process of returning property that the Maoists had seized during the conflict. This, of course, has been a long-standing demand of the Congress and other parliamentary parties, and the failure of the Maoists to return property
has been portrayed as one among a number of reasons for bad relations between parties in recent years. As such, Bhattarai’s decision is to be welcomed. It is to be hoped that the property will be returned steadily, and the Nepali Congress and UML will come around to actively cooperating with the government on such matters such as reaching agreement on outstanding constitutional issues.
The process of returning property, however, is not as simple as it has been made to appear and there are certain aspects regarding it that need to be taken into consideration. First of all, it is untrue that the Maoists have made no movement towards returning property. Over the past five years, a lot of property has been returned. The problem is that no systematic records have been kept about how much has been returned and what remains. In order for the process to succeed completely, a reliable database of all property captured and returned needs to be formed at the central level. This will enable the parties and the public to measure how far the Maoists have fulfilled their commitments and will put pressure on them to return property in places where they haven’t yet done so. In addition, by making the facts transparent, such a database will force all parties to deal with reality and prevent them from using the issue in their rhetoric to achieve political gain or justify their continuing lack of cooperation.
Second, although the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 states clearly that the Maoists will return property, there is another clause that holds that large-scale land reform will also take place. The Maoists had, in fact, insisted on the second clause as a counterweight for the first. In many areas, the land they captured has been given to poor farmers and if the property is returned, these farmers will be displaced. Land reform is necessary if alternative means of survival are to be found for these farmers. This is an issue that has not received much attention. This is unfortunate. Land holdings in Nepal continue to be highly unequal and this is a source of conflict in Nepali society. As the process of returning captured property starts, land reform too should occupy the attentions of Nepal’s political class, Maoists and non-Maoists alike.
Posted on: 2011-09-15 09:16
http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2011/09/14/editorial/politics-of-land/226317.html
Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai appears to be doing all he can to gain the trust of the Nepali Congress and the UML. After trying hard to reach a deal on integration, his government has now directed party cadres and District Administration Officers to immediately start the process of returning property that the Maoists had seized during the conflict. This, of course, has been a long-standing demand of the Congress and other parliamentary parties, and the failure of the Maoists to return property
has been portrayed as one among a number of reasons for bad relations between parties in recent years. As such, Bhattarai’s decision is to be welcomed. It is to be hoped that the property will be returned steadily, and the Nepali Congress and UML will come around to actively cooperating with the government on such matters such as reaching agreement on outstanding constitutional issues.
The process of returning property, however, is not as simple as it has been made to appear and there are certain aspects regarding it that need to be taken into consideration. First of all, it is untrue that the Maoists have made no movement towards returning property. Over the past five years, a lot of property has been returned. The problem is that no systematic records have been kept about how much has been returned and what remains. In order for the process to succeed completely, a reliable database of all property captured and returned needs to be formed at the central level. This will enable the parties and the public to measure how far the Maoists have fulfilled their commitments and will put pressure on them to return property in places where they haven’t yet done so. In addition, by making the facts transparent, such a database will force all parties to deal with reality and prevent them from using the issue in their rhetoric to achieve political gain or justify their continuing lack of cooperation.
Second, although the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 states clearly that the Maoists will return property, there is another clause that holds that large-scale land reform will also take place. The Maoists had, in fact, insisted on the second clause as a counterweight for the first. In many areas, the land they captured has been given to poor farmers and if the property is returned, these farmers will be displaced. Land reform is necessary if alternative means of survival are to be found for these farmers. This is an issue that has not received much attention. This is unfortunate. Land holdings in Nepal continue to be highly unequal and this is a source of conflict in Nepali society. As the process of returning captured property starts, land reform too should occupy the attentions of Nepal’s political class, Maoists and non-Maoists alike.
Posted on: 2011-09-15 09:16
http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2011/09/14/editorial/politics-of-land/226317.html
Beware, Attorney-General
DAMAKANT JAYSHI
The new Attorney-General Mukti Pradhan is the latest among those who want "politically motivated" cases against Maoist cadres withdrawn.
“All politically motivated and baseless cases against Maoists will be withdrawn, including cases against leaders and cadres of Madhesi parties,” Pradhan told media persons at an interaction program in the capital on Tuesday.
Pradhan is a member of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). So it is natural for his heart to beat for the accused in his party and those among the ranks of the political coalition, the Madhesi parties.
He also said that murder conviction against Maoist lawmaker Bal Krishna Dhungel would be reviewed. His reasons? "People are biased against Dhungel just because he is a Maoist leader." In June this year, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no legal barrier to arrest and jail Dhungel, who has been convicted with life imprisonment on a murder charge. Dhungel still roams free.
If Pradhan´s logic for amnesty and review is applied – that all cases are politically motivated and baseless if they are brought against Maoist cadres/leaders – then every single Maoist, irrespective of the severity of the crimes they committed, will walk free. Either Pradhan needs to go back to law school or is actually himself politically motivated. For, he is trying to give clean chit to his people for which neither he nor the government has authority to do so. Those who argue that the government has this authority do not understand national and international laws as well as some of the agreements that have been signed since 2006.
Pradhan referred to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of Nov 21, 2006, saying it has provisions for withdrawal of cases against Maoists. He is being selective. One of the provisions under Article 5 of CPA reads: "Both sides agree to set up with mutual consent a High-level Truth and Reconciliation Commission in order to probe into those involved in serious violation of human rights and crime against humanity in course of the armed conflict for creating an atmosphere for reconciliation in the society." (Emphasis mine).
The attorney-general also claimed that governments, in the past, had withdrawn cases against the state side. This is nonsense.
If Attorney-General Mukti Pradhan´s logic for amnesty and review is applied – that all cases are politically motivated and baseless if they are brought against Maoist cadres/leaders – then every single Maoist, irrespective of the severity of the crimes they committed, will walk free. Either Pradhan needs to go back to law school or is actually himself politically motivated.
Cases against state security forces are pending in various civilian courts in the country. Some of these include cold-blooded murder of over 25 arrested Maoists cadres in Doramba in 2003 by soldiers of (Royal) Nepal Army, torture and murder of Maina Sunar in army barracks in Kavre in 2004, and the notorious ´disappearance´ of about 150 detained Maoists in Bhairabnath Battalion in Kathmandu. All these 150 detainees are feared murdered in custody.
In cases where the army´s tribunal is said to have "punished" the perpetrators (like in Maina´s case), the verdict has not been accepted and will not be accepted. This tribunal court´s verdict on its four army officers is akin to ´justice´ by Maoists´ kangaroo courts they had set up during their armed insurgency. An army tribunal simply has no right to decide a case involving torture and murder of a civilian.
Just an aside here. Army tribunals have demoted and even dismissed officers and soldiers for serious crimes. For example, Major Ram Mani Pokharel who led the massacre of Maoists in Doramba was dismissed from service and jailed for two years. This was not enough, of course.
But the attorney-general should consider what his party has done. Kali Bahadur Kham, the then third division commander of Shaktikhor cantonment of the Maoist army, allegedly tortured and murdered a businessman Ram Hari Shrestha with the help of some of the combatants. Kham was subsequently promoted to an expanded Central Committee of the party. Did anyone utter the word ´punishment´ here?
There are many atrocities – including murder, rape, torture and disappearances – committed by both security forces and Maoists that need to be tried in courts. Some of the cases besides the ones mentioned above are the Madi massacre (which was a result of Maoist deliberately blowing up a bus carrying over 100 passengers in June 2005 in Chitwan district), burning of eight-year-old Kajol Khatun and her relatives in a bus in Chitwan in 2002 by Maoists for defying their banda, and murder in cold blood of at least eight policemen in Naulmule in Dailekh district in 2001 after asking them to surrender during the Maoist attack on Dailekh police headquarters.
Besides these mass murders by Maoists, there are scores of individual cases of murder and other serious crimes by both sides to the conflict. Many of these are based on eye-witness accounts of family members and locals, not concocted in the confines of a government office as Attorney-General Pradhan seems to imply. These are not politically motivated or baseless cases.
If an effective Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) is set up and starts its work on delivery of justice, then only the victims have the right to grant amnesty, if at all. No one else has that right. It looks like that the Maoists are in haste to absolve their cadre of crimes before a TRC is formed.
The attorney-general, having studied law, may have heard or read about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948. "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law." (Article 8).
The UDHR, which is a foundation of international human rights law, recognizes that "whatever our nationality, place of residence, gender, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status, the international community on 10 December 1948 made a commitment to upholding dignity and justice for all of us."
Also, reinstated House of Representatives had unanimously endorsed a proposal to accede to the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2006, just three months after the People´s Movement II. Although Nepal has not yet signed the Rome Statute (the reasons are very obvious), the UN Security Council, if convinced, can refer cases to ICC if a State fails to provide justice to victims in cases of gross abuses of human rights, including crimes against humanity and war crimes. Some of the cases that have occurred in Nepal are gross abuses.
Besides, the attorney-general needs to keep in mind something called universal jurisdiction. Though it is a controversial concept, some countries have acted on it. In 1993, Belgium passed a law of universal jurisdiction to give its courts jurisdiction over crimes against humanity in other countries. In 1998, Chilean dictator, Augusto Pinochet was arrested in London following an indictment by Spanish court under the universal jurisdiction principle.
If justice is denied within the confines of a national boundary, there are means to get it by appealing to international institutions. Attorney-General Pradhan should have no doubt that this would be done.
So, Mr Attorney-General, think seriously before you – and the government – act on this front.
damakant@gmail.com
Published on 2011-09-15 01:15:42
http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=36015&show_comments=true
The new Attorney-General Mukti Pradhan is the latest among those who want "politically motivated" cases against Maoist cadres withdrawn.
“All politically motivated and baseless cases against Maoists will be withdrawn, including cases against leaders and cadres of Madhesi parties,” Pradhan told media persons at an interaction program in the capital on Tuesday.
Pradhan is a member of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). So it is natural for his heart to beat for the accused in his party and those among the ranks of the political coalition, the Madhesi parties.
He also said that murder conviction against Maoist lawmaker Bal Krishna Dhungel would be reviewed. His reasons? "People are biased against Dhungel just because he is a Maoist leader." In June this year, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no legal barrier to arrest and jail Dhungel, who has been convicted with life imprisonment on a murder charge. Dhungel still roams free.
If Pradhan´s logic for amnesty and review is applied – that all cases are politically motivated and baseless if they are brought against Maoist cadres/leaders – then every single Maoist, irrespective of the severity of the crimes they committed, will walk free. Either Pradhan needs to go back to law school or is actually himself politically motivated. For, he is trying to give clean chit to his people for which neither he nor the government has authority to do so. Those who argue that the government has this authority do not understand national and international laws as well as some of the agreements that have been signed since 2006.
Pradhan referred to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of Nov 21, 2006, saying it has provisions for withdrawal of cases against Maoists. He is being selective. One of the provisions under Article 5 of CPA reads: "Both sides agree to set up with mutual consent a High-level Truth and Reconciliation Commission in order to probe into those involved in serious violation of human rights and crime against humanity in course of the armed conflict for creating an atmosphere for reconciliation in the society." (Emphasis mine).
The attorney-general also claimed that governments, in the past, had withdrawn cases against the state side. This is nonsense.
If Attorney-General Mukti Pradhan´s logic for amnesty and review is applied – that all cases are politically motivated and baseless if they are brought against Maoist cadres/leaders – then every single Maoist, irrespective of the severity of the crimes they committed, will walk free. Either Pradhan needs to go back to law school or is actually himself politically motivated.
Cases against state security forces are pending in various civilian courts in the country. Some of these include cold-blooded murder of over 25 arrested Maoists cadres in Doramba in 2003 by soldiers of (Royal) Nepal Army, torture and murder of Maina Sunar in army barracks in Kavre in 2004, and the notorious ´disappearance´ of about 150 detained Maoists in Bhairabnath Battalion in Kathmandu. All these 150 detainees are feared murdered in custody.
In cases where the army´s tribunal is said to have "punished" the perpetrators (like in Maina´s case), the verdict has not been accepted and will not be accepted. This tribunal court´s verdict on its four army officers is akin to ´justice´ by Maoists´ kangaroo courts they had set up during their armed insurgency. An army tribunal simply has no right to decide a case involving torture and murder of a civilian.
Just an aside here. Army tribunals have demoted and even dismissed officers and soldiers for serious crimes. For example, Major Ram Mani Pokharel who led the massacre of Maoists in Doramba was dismissed from service and jailed for two years. This was not enough, of course.
But the attorney-general should consider what his party has done. Kali Bahadur Kham, the then third division commander of Shaktikhor cantonment of the Maoist army, allegedly tortured and murdered a businessman Ram Hari Shrestha with the help of some of the combatants. Kham was subsequently promoted to an expanded Central Committee of the party. Did anyone utter the word ´punishment´ here?
There are many atrocities – including murder, rape, torture and disappearances – committed by both security forces and Maoists that need to be tried in courts. Some of the cases besides the ones mentioned above are the Madi massacre (which was a result of Maoist deliberately blowing up a bus carrying over 100 passengers in June 2005 in Chitwan district), burning of eight-year-old Kajol Khatun and her relatives in a bus in Chitwan in 2002 by Maoists for defying their banda, and murder in cold blood of at least eight policemen in Naulmule in Dailekh district in 2001 after asking them to surrender during the Maoist attack on Dailekh police headquarters.
Besides these mass murders by Maoists, there are scores of individual cases of murder and other serious crimes by both sides to the conflict. Many of these are based on eye-witness accounts of family members and locals, not concocted in the confines of a government office as Attorney-General Pradhan seems to imply. These are not politically motivated or baseless cases.
If an effective Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) is set up and starts its work on delivery of justice, then only the victims have the right to grant amnesty, if at all. No one else has that right. It looks like that the Maoists are in haste to absolve their cadre of crimes before a TRC is formed.
The attorney-general, having studied law, may have heard or read about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948. "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law." (Article 8).
The UDHR, which is a foundation of international human rights law, recognizes that "whatever our nationality, place of residence, gender, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status, the international community on 10 December 1948 made a commitment to upholding dignity and justice for all of us."
Also, reinstated House of Representatives had unanimously endorsed a proposal to accede to the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2006, just three months after the People´s Movement II. Although Nepal has not yet signed the Rome Statute (the reasons are very obvious), the UN Security Council, if convinced, can refer cases to ICC if a State fails to provide justice to victims in cases of gross abuses of human rights, including crimes against humanity and war crimes. Some of the cases that have occurred in Nepal are gross abuses.
Besides, the attorney-general needs to keep in mind something called universal jurisdiction. Though it is a controversial concept, some countries have acted on it. In 1993, Belgium passed a law of universal jurisdiction to give its courts jurisdiction over crimes against humanity in other countries. In 1998, Chilean dictator, Augusto Pinochet was arrested in London following an indictment by Spanish court under the universal jurisdiction principle.
If justice is denied within the confines of a national boundary, there are means to get it by appealing to international institutions. Attorney-General Pradhan should have no doubt that this would be done.
So, Mr Attorney-General, think seriously before you – and the government – act on this front.
damakant@gmail.com
Published on 2011-09-15 01:15:42
http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=36015&show_comments=true
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
AG backs govt plan to withdraw war-era cases
KATHMANDU, SEP 13 -
Newly-appointed Attorney General Mukti Pradhan on Tuesday supported the government’s plan to withdraw cases filed during the insurgency that have indicted Maoist cadres in different crimes.
Pradhan, however, said only cases registered against individuals “due to political reasons” can be withdrawn. Cases concerning serious crimes committed for purely criminal motives but apparently under political cover will not be withdrawn, he added.
The statement from the government’s chief legal advisor supporting the plan comes amid growing criticism from human rights defenders over the government decision. Any decision on the case withdrawals will breach international laws and treaties, of which Nepal is a party, the rights activists say.
The ruling coalition partners—Maoists and the Madhesi Morcha—had signed a four-point deal, which, among other things, commits to withdraw cases and grant amnesty to cadres of the two parties in the coalition who have been charged with crimes committed during the Maoist insurgency and the Madhes movement. Speaking at a programme at the Reporters’ Club, Pradhan said, “All cases filed for working against the then authority (monarchy) are political cases. Questions should not be raised on the decision to scrap the cases that were filed against persons while they fought for reformation.”
Stating that the trend of withdrawing cases of political nature started after the restoration of democracy in 1990, Pradhan said leaders like KP Oli, Jhala Nath Khanal and Madhav Kumar Nepal would have been serving time in prison had cases of such nature not been taken back. He said the life imprisonment sentence against UCPN (Maoist) lawmaker Bal Krishna Dhungel will also be annulled as the verdict was issued during the insurgency. “If Dhungel is convicted, the state has to take the responsibility of all the lives lost from the Maoist side during the insurgency. It is a political case and, hence, it should be scrapped,” he said.
Rights defenders, including the OHCHR, say that though the government has the authority to withdraw cases and grant amnesty, it cannot do so in cases involving serious crimes, which according to international laws, have universal jurisdiction.
Posted on: 2011-09-14 08:59
http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2011/09/13/top-story/ag-backs-govt-plan-to-withdraw-war-era-cases/226254.html
Newly-appointed Attorney General Mukti Pradhan on Tuesday supported the government’s plan to withdraw cases filed during the insurgency that have indicted Maoist cadres in different crimes.
Pradhan, however, said only cases registered against individuals “due to political reasons” can be withdrawn. Cases concerning serious crimes committed for purely criminal motives but apparently under political cover will not be withdrawn, he added.
The statement from the government’s chief legal advisor supporting the plan comes amid growing criticism from human rights defenders over the government decision. Any decision on the case withdrawals will breach international laws and treaties, of which Nepal is a party, the rights activists say.
The ruling coalition partners—Maoists and the Madhesi Morcha—had signed a four-point deal, which, among other things, commits to withdraw cases and grant amnesty to cadres of the two parties in the coalition who have been charged with crimes committed during the Maoist insurgency and the Madhes movement. Speaking at a programme at the Reporters’ Club, Pradhan said, “All cases filed for working against the then authority (monarchy) are political cases. Questions should not be raised on the decision to scrap the cases that were filed against persons while they fought for reformation.”
Stating that the trend of withdrawing cases of political nature started after the restoration of democracy in 1990, Pradhan said leaders like KP Oli, Jhala Nath Khanal and Madhav Kumar Nepal would have been serving time in prison had cases of such nature not been taken back. He said the life imprisonment sentence against UCPN (Maoist) lawmaker Bal Krishna Dhungel will also be annulled as the verdict was issued during the insurgency. “If Dhungel is convicted, the state has to take the responsibility of all the lives lost from the Maoist side during the insurgency. It is a political case and, hence, it should be scrapped,” he said.
Rights defenders, including the OHCHR, say that though the government has the authority to withdraw cases and grant amnesty, it cannot do so in cases involving serious crimes, which according to international laws, have universal jurisdiction.
Posted on: 2011-09-14 08:59
http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2011/09/13/top-story/ag-backs-govt-plan-to-withdraw-war-era-cases/226254.html
NEPAL: Plan to withdraw criminal cases is a serious blow to the rule of law
NEPAL: Plan to withdraw criminal cases is a serious blow to the rule of law
September 14, 2011
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) wishes to express its concern regarding the Attorney General of Nepal's recent announcement that the government is preparing to go ahead with its plan to withdraw cases filed against members of the Maoist and Madesh movements.
This announcement comes in the wake of an agreement signed between the Maoist party and the United Democratic Madhesi Front prior to the election of Baburam Bhattarai as the Prime Minister of Nepal in which both parties have agreed to withdraw cases pending against those involved in the Maoist party, the Madhesi, Janajati, Tharuhat, Dalit, and Pichadabarga movements.
Voices from all sides of the human rights community, including from the national human rights organisations and individual activists, the OHCHR, the NHRC and foreign diplomats, have recalled that provision of amnesty for human rights violations would be contrary to Nepal's human rights obligations, promote impunity in the country and violate the victims' fundamental right to a legal remedy. The AHRC notes with appreciation that in response the Prime Minister sought to give assurance that his office would only seek to withdraw political cases without touching upon criminal or human rights cases.
Nevertheless, the Attorney General's declaration that it will seek to withdraw the case for which Maoist Constituent Assembly member Balkrishna Dhungel was convicted of murder casts doubts about the commitment not to touch upon criminal cases in the withdrawal process. Balkrishna Dhungel was convicted of the 1998 murder of Ujjawan Kumar Shrestha, a shopkeeper from Okhaldhunga, by the District Court of Okhaldhunga and sentenced to life imprisonment and confiscation of his property. On September 2010, the Supreme Court found that commitments to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission did not supersede the criminal justice system authority to judge this case and upheld the life sentence. Nevertheless, Dhungel remained a member of the Constituent Assembly and remained free, although the Supreme Court found in June 2011 that there were no obstacles to his arrest.
The Attorney General was quoted as saying "We ask national and international human rights watchdogs to abide by provisions incorporated in the CPA" Indeed, the CPA contains provisions to withdraw cases who were obviously politically motivated, but it also incorporates several provisions in which the parties committed not to condone impunity. Both parties have stated "that necessary investigation will be undertaken against any individual involved in violating the rights mentioned in the agreement and action will be taken against ones that are found guilty. Both parties also ascertain that they will not protect impunity and along with it, the rights of the people affected by the conflict and torture and the families of the people who have been disappeared will be safeguarded." (Article 7.1.3).
Abiding by the letter and spirit of the CPA therefore entails acknowledging that the CPA endorsed accountability and justice as essential components to the peace process and rigorously limited withdrawal of cases to those of a strictly political nature. In so far as the government plan includes reconsidering convictions of murder upheld by the Supreme Court, there are serious concerns that the withdrawal will not be restricted to political cases and extend amnesty to criminal cases, possibly pertaining to human rights cases. Amnesty for human rights violations such as rape, extrajudicial killings, torture or enforced disappearances would constitute per se a violation of international human rights law, as the State is mandated to provide victims of human rights violations with an effective remedy and hence to ensure that criminal proceedings are made available when human rights violations have occurred.
Ujjawan Kumar Shrestha's case is illustrative of what is problematic in the government decision to withdraw criminal charges. If the case was to be reconsidered, it would be a grave denial of the rights of the victim's family to a legal remedy after having had to wait for 12 years and facing innumerable obstacles to see the murderer of their relative convicted. Now a governmental decision could turn back the court verdict and officially authorize the convict to remain scot free, effectively dismantling their right to justice. That situation could concern many more families as newspapers report that hundreds of applications to withdraw cases have already been filed to the Home Ministry. This decision would come and topple the long list of irremovable obstacles that those families face to access justice and contribute to entrench more deeply the impunity which benefits the perpetrators.
Moreover, the government's questioning of decisions rendered by the highest judicial authority raises concerns on the reality of the independence of the judiciary, a fundamental principle inscribed in the 2007 Interim Constitution. Judging which cases are politically motivated and which cases are indeed criminal cases, in other words judging the veracity of the nature of the accusations brought against an individual, is not a governmental prerogative but falls within the authority of the courts of justice. By intervening in that equation, the government is altering the principles of the separation of the judiciary and executive powers, a founding principle to the notion of rule of law and democracy itself. It denies the law of its role as a shield against abuses of power.
The argument that that case should be withdrawn and reviewed by the yet-to-be-established Truth and Reconciliation Commission is flawed and with no legal basis, as was repeatedly found by the Supreme Court. As per international best practices, the TRC does not have a vocation to supersede or overlook decisions taken by the criminal justice system but should limit itself to play a complementary role to help the truth to emerge and to smoothen the reconciliation process. On the contrary, its role is not to reopen the scars of society or to further debilitate the regular justice system by overruling judicial decisions already made.
In its address to the journalists, the Attorney General referred to previous waves of cases withdrawals since Nepal first established democracy in 1990. Indeed, since the end of the conflict in particular, governments have repeatedly withdrawn cases pertaining to that era, including criminal cases, causing long-term damages to the country's rule of law and criminal justice system and eroding public confidence in the State. Prime Minister Baburam Battharai has been elected on commitments to complete the peace and constitution drafting process. Upholding the rule of law framework has been long recognized as one of the major task which would determine the outcome of that double-process and the government is therefore expected to devote more energy to strengthen it than to shield its supporters from prosecutions.
In light of the above, the AHRC therefore urges the government to make sure any withdrawal of cases will be done according to the procedures stated in the law and in conformity with the Supreme Court jurisprudence and guidelines and that it will be subjected to permission from the concerned District Court concerned. Cases amounting to human rights violations such as torture, extrajudicial killings, rape and enforced disappearance cannot be withdrawn under any circumstances. In addition, those commitments must be coupled with guarantees that all the human rights cases filed will be thoroughly investigated, that the perpetrators will be prosecuted and that all court orders will be duly implemented as promptly as possible.
The responsibility is now incumbent upon the new government to decide on which track it will put Nepal's peace process, a decision which will be significant to shape the future of Nepal. The peace process can remain on the track of impunity, instability and insecurity or it can be built upon concerns for the rights of the victims, accountability, rule of law and justice. Experience has shown that the latter proves the longest-lasting.
http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-STM-119-2011
September 14, 2011
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) wishes to express its concern regarding the Attorney General of Nepal's recent announcement that the government is preparing to go ahead with its plan to withdraw cases filed against members of the Maoist and Madesh movements.
This announcement comes in the wake of an agreement signed between the Maoist party and the United Democratic Madhesi Front prior to the election of Baburam Bhattarai as the Prime Minister of Nepal in which both parties have agreed to withdraw cases pending against those involved in the Maoist party, the Madhesi, Janajati, Tharuhat, Dalit, and Pichadabarga movements.
Voices from all sides of the human rights community, including from the national human rights organisations and individual activists, the OHCHR, the NHRC and foreign diplomats, have recalled that provision of amnesty for human rights violations would be contrary to Nepal's human rights obligations, promote impunity in the country and violate the victims' fundamental right to a legal remedy. The AHRC notes with appreciation that in response the Prime Minister sought to give assurance that his office would only seek to withdraw political cases without touching upon criminal or human rights cases.
Nevertheless, the Attorney General's declaration that it will seek to withdraw the case for which Maoist Constituent Assembly member Balkrishna Dhungel was convicted of murder casts doubts about the commitment not to touch upon criminal cases in the withdrawal process. Balkrishna Dhungel was convicted of the 1998 murder of Ujjawan Kumar Shrestha, a shopkeeper from Okhaldhunga, by the District Court of Okhaldhunga and sentenced to life imprisonment and confiscation of his property. On September 2010, the Supreme Court found that commitments to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission did not supersede the criminal justice system authority to judge this case and upheld the life sentence. Nevertheless, Dhungel remained a member of the Constituent Assembly and remained free, although the Supreme Court found in June 2011 that there were no obstacles to his arrest.
The Attorney General was quoted as saying "We ask national and international human rights watchdogs to abide by provisions incorporated in the CPA" Indeed, the CPA contains provisions to withdraw cases who were obviously politically motivated, but it also incorporates several provisions in which the parties committed not to condone impunity. Both parties have stated "that necessary investigation will be undertaken against any individual involved in violating the rights mentioned in the agreement and action will be taken against ones that are found guilty. Both parties also ascertain that they will not protect impunity and along with it, the rights of the people affected by the conflict and torture and the families of the people who have been disappeared will be safeguarded." (Article 7.1.3).
Abiding by the letter and spirit of the CPA therefore entails acknowledging that the CPA endorsed accountability and justice as essential components to the peace process and rigorously limited withdrawal of cases to those of a strictly political nature. In so far as the government plan includes reconsidering convictions of murder upheld by the Supreme Court, there are serious concerns that the withdrawal will not be restricted to political cases and extend amnesty to criminal cases, possibly pertaining to human rights cases. Amnesty for human rights violations such as rape, extrajudicial killings, torture or enforced disappearances would constitute per se a violation of international human rights law, as the State is mandated to provide victims of human rights violations with an effective remedy and hence to ensure that criminal proceedings are made available when human rights violations have occurred.
Ujjawan Kumar Shrestha's case is illustrative of what is problematic in the government decision to withdraw criminal charges. If the case was to be reconsidered, it would be a grave denial of the rights of the victim's family to a legal remedy after having had to wait for 12 years and facing innumerable obstacles to see the murderer of their relative convicted. Now a governmental decision could turn back the court verdict and officially authorize the convict to remain scot free, effectively dismantling their right to justice. That situation could concern many more families as newspapers report that hundreds of applications to withdraw cases have already been filed to the Home Ministry. This decision would come and topple the long list of irremovable obstacles that those families face to access justice and contribute to entrench more deeply the impunity which benefits the perpetrators.
Moreover, the government's questioning of decisions rendered by the highest judicial authority raises concerns on the reality of the independence of the judiciary, a fundamental principle inscribed in the 2007 Interim Constitution. Judging which cases are politically motivated and which cases are indeed criminal cases, in other words judging the veracity of the nature of the accusations brought against an individual, is not a governmental prerogative but falls within the authority of the courts of justice. By intervening in that equation, the government is altering the principles of the separation of the judiciary and executive powers, a founding principle to the notion of rule of law and democracy itself. It denies the law of its role as a shield against abuses of power.
The argument that that case should be withdrawn and reviewed by the yet-to-be-established Truth and Reconciliation Commission is flawed and with no legal basis, as was repeatedly found by the Supreme Court. As per international best practices, the TRC does not have a vocation to supersede or overlook decisions taken by the criminal justice system but should limit itself to play a complementary role to help the truth to emerge and to smoothen the reconciliation process. On the contrary, its role is not to reopen the scars of society or to further debilitate the regular justice system by overruling judicial decisions already made.
In its address to the journalists, the Attorney General referred to previous waves of cases withdrawals since Nepal first established democracy in 1990. Indeed, since the end of the conflict in particular, governments have repeatedly withdrawn cases pertaining to that era, including criminal cases, causing long-term damages to the country's rule of law and criminal justice system and eroding public confidence in the State. Prime Minister Baburam Battharai has been elected on commitments to complete the peace and constitution drafting process. Upholding the rule of law framework has been long recognized as one of the major task which would determine the outcome of that double-process and the government is therefore expected to devote more energy to strengthen it than to shield its supporters from prosecutions.
In light of the above, the AHRC therefore urges the government to make sure any withdrawal of cases will be done according to the procedures stated in the law and in conformity with the Supreme Court jurisprudence and guidelines and that it will be subjected to permission from the concerned District Court concerned. Cases amounting to human rights violations such as torture, extrajudicial killings, rape and enforced disappearance cannot be withdrawn under any circumstances. In addition, those commitments must be coupled with guarantees that all the human rights cases filed will be thoroughly investigated, that the perpetrators will be prosecuted and that all court orders will be duly implemented as promptly as possible.
The responsibility is now incumbent upon the new government to decide on which track it will put Nepal's peace process, a decision which will be significant to shape the future of Nepal. The peace process can remain on the track of impunity, instability and insecurity or it can be built upon concerns for the rights of the victims, accountability, rule of law and justice. Experience has shown that the latter proves the longest-lasting.
http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-STM-119-2011
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Nepal: UN calls for no pardons or impunity in cases of human rights abuses
13 September 2011 – Hailing the Nepalese Government’s commitment to establish long awaited transitional justice mechanisms to address the abuses of its decade-long civil war, the United Nations today warned against granting pardons or case withdrawals that would violate international human rights law.
“As Nepal moves forward in its peace process and strengthens its democratic institutions to build a strong and stable future, calls for amnesties or for case withdrawals involving serious crimes would be steps in the wrong direction,” UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator Robert Piper said in a statement, urging political parties to pass the requisite bills in Nepal.
“These would deny victims justice at a time when the rule of law should be the foundation of the transitional justice process and of the new constitutional order that is being built.”
Some 13,000 people were killed and countless disappearances and cases of torture and other abuses were reported in the civil war between the then-royalist Government and Maoist rebels which ended in 2007.
The Government of Prime Minister Babu Ram Bhattarai of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist (UCPN-M) party, which was formed last month, has pledged to speed up adoption of bills related to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances, and set up the two bodies in what UN officials called “a historic step forward” for human rights in Nepal.
“It is vital that the laws establishing the transitional justice mechanisms are drafted to allow the commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations,” the head of the UN human rights office in Nepal, Jyoti Sanghera, said in the joint statement with Mr. Piper, stressing that local and international rights organizations have condemned any political agreements to endorse impunity.
“The laws must emphasize the impermissibility of any measures that could provide amnesty for the perpetrators of serious human rights violations and war crimes, including rape, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions.”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39523&Cr=Nepal&Cr1=
“As Nepal moves forward in its peace process and strengthens its democratic institutions to build a strong and stable future, calls for amnesties or for case withdrawals involving serious crimes would be steps in the wrong direction,” UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator Robert Piper said in a statement, urging political parties to pass the requisite bills in Nepal.
“These would deny victims justice at a time when the rule of law should be the foundation of the transitional justice process and of the new constitutional order that is being built.”
Some 13,000 people were killed and countless disappearances and cases of torture and other abuses were reported in the civil war between the then-royalist Government and Maoist rebels which ended in 2007.
The Government of Prime Minister Babu Ram Bhattarai of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal – Maoist (UCPN-M) party, which was formed last month, has pledged to speed up adoption of bills related to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances, and set up the two bodies in what UN officials called “a historic step forward” for human rights in Nepal.
“It is vital that the laws establishing the transitional justice mechanisms are drafted to allow the commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations,” the head of the UN human rights office in Nepal, Jyoti Sanghera, said in the joint statement with Mr. Piper, stressing that local and international rights organizations have condemned any political agreements to endorse impunity.
“The laws must emphasize the impermissibility of any measures that could provide amnesty for the perpetrators of serious human rights violations and war crimes, including rape, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions.”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39523&Cr=Nepal&Cr1=
UN: Transitional Justice Process must comply with International Law
Kathmandu, 13 September 2011 – In a joint statement released today the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator and the Head of the UN Human Rights Office in Nepal (OHCHR-Nepal) welcomed the Government’s recent commitment to establish the long awaited transitional justice mechanisms and to address abuses of the conflict era. The UN officials urged political parties to facilitate the passage of these bills and to refrain from calling for pardons and the withdrawal of any criminal cases which would be contrary to Nepal’s commitments under international human rights law. Such actions send a contradictory message to the country about the real purpose of transitional justice and the need for accountability for past crimes.
“As Nepal moves forward in its peace process and strengthens its democratic institutions to build a strong and stable future, calls for amnesties or for case withdrawals involving serious crimes would be steps in the wrong direction,” said Robert Piper, UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Nepal. “These would deny victims justice at a time when the rule of law should be the foundation of the transitional justice process and of the new Constitutional order that is being built.”
As part of its “immediate relief programme” unveiled last week, the Government of Nepal has committed to speed up the adoption of the bills related to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances, and to establish these two commissions immediately”. This would initiate an historic step forward for human rights in Nepal. At the same time it is essential that these mechanisms are established in accordance with international standards and best practices, as reiterated by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), as well as local and international human rights organizations, which have condemned any political agreements to endorse impunity.
“It is vital that the laws establishing the transitional justice mechanisms are drafted to allow the Commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations,” stated Jyoti Sanghera, Head of OHCHR-Nepal. “Furthermore, the laws must emphasize the impermissibility of any measures that could provide amnesty for the perpetrators of serious human rights violations and war crimes, including rape, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions.”
To read the June 2011 joint legal opinion by NHRC and OHCHR-Nepal, “Remedies and Rights Revoked: Case Withdrawals for Serious Crimes in Nepal,” please see:
• English:http://nepal.ohchr.org/en/resources/publications/2011/2011_06_23_Case_Withdrawals_for_Serious_Crimes_in_Nepal_E.pdf
• Nepali:http://nepal.ohchr.org/en/resources/publications/2011/2011_06_23_Case_Withdrawals_for_Serious_Crimes_in_Nepal_N.pdf
If you require more information, please contact:
Ram B. Shah
National Information Officer
Mobile: 98510-49851
E-mail: ram.shah@undp.org
Chun B. Gurung,
OHCHR-Nepal Public Information Officer,
Mobile: 98510-16937
Email: cgurung@ohchr.org,
“As Nepal moves forward in its peace process and strengthens its democratic institutions to build a strong and stable future, calls for amnesties or for case withdrawals involving serious crimes would be steps in the wrong direction,” said Robert Piper, UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Nepal. “These would deny victims justice at a time when the rule of law should be the foundation of the transitional justice process and of the new Constitutional order that is being built.”
As part of its “immediate relief programme” unveiled last week, the Government of Nepal has committed to speed up the adoption of the bills related to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances, and to establish these two commissions immediately”. This would initiate an historic step forward for human rights in Nepal. At the same time it is essential that these mechanisms are established in accordance with international standards and best practices, as reiterated by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), as well as local and international human rights organizations, which have condemned any political agreements to endorse impunity.
“It is vital that the laws establishing the transitional justice mechanisms are drafted to allow the Commissions to effectively respond to the rights of the victims to truth, justice and reparations,” stated Jyoti Sanghera, Head of OHCHR-Nepal. “Furthermore, the laws must emphasize the impermissibility of any measures that could provide amnesty for the perpetrators of serious human rights violations and war crimes, including rape, enforced disappearances, torture and summary executions.”
To read the June 2011 joint legal opinion by NHRC and OHCHR-Nepal, “Remedies and Rights Revoked: Case Withdrawals for Serious Crimes in Nepal,” please see:
• English:http://nepal.ohchr.org/en/resources/publications/2011/2011_06_23_Case_Withdrawals_for_Serious_Crimes_in_Nepal_E.pdf
• Nepali:http://nepal.ohchr.org/en/resources/publications/2011/2011_06_23_Case_Withdrawals_for_Serious_Crimes_in_Nepal_N.pdf
If you require more information, please contact:
Ram B. Shah
National Information Officer
Mobile: 98510-49851
E-mail: ram.shah@undp.org
Chun B. Gurung,
OHCHR-Nepal Public Information Officer,
Mobile: 98510-16937
Email: cgurung@ohchr.org,
All cases filed against Maoists will be withdrawn: AG Pradhan
KATHMANDU: Newly appointed Attorney General Mukti Narayan Pradhan on Tuesday stated that all the cases filed against the UCPN-Maoist leaders during the decade long conflict will be withdrawn.
Speaking at an interaction program organised by Reporter’s Club in Kathmandu, Pradhan said, all those cases lodged against Maoists at a time when they were fighting against the then state governance system are political in nature. “So no one should express their dissent in a contrary opinion,” argued Pradhan, who is affiliated to the Maoist.
While saying that withdrawing cases of political nature is not a new phenomenon, which began since the1990 revolution, Pradhan added “if cases had not been withdrawn, Madhav Kumar Nepal, K P Oli and Jhala Nath Khanal would have been languishing inside the prison.”
Bhattarai’s party UCPN-Maoist had earlier signed a four-point deal with Madhes-based parties saying the government would withdraw criminal charges against Maoist and Madhesi leaders filed during the decade-long conflict and the Madhes movement in the run up to formation of the ruling coalition.
However, opposition parties Nepali Congress and CPN-UML have been vehemently criticizing the deal, terming it a conspiracy hatched against rule of law. Similarly national and international human rights groups have been condemning it, arguing that it would promote the culture of impunity.
http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=All+cases+filed+against+Maoists+will+be+withdrawn%3A+AG+Pradhan&NewsID=302649
Speaking at an interaction program organised by Reporter’s Club in Kathmandu, Pradhan said, all those cases lodged against Maoists at a time when they were fighting against the then state governance system are political in nature. “So no one should express their dissent in a contrary opinion,” argued Pradhan, who is affiliated to the Maoist.
While saying that withdrawing cases of political nature is not a new phenomenon, which began since the1990 revolution, Pradhan added “if cases had not been withdrawn, Madhav Kumar Nepal, K P Oli and Jhala Nath Khanal would have been languishing inside the prison.”
Bhattarai’s party UCPN-Maoist had earlier signed a four-point deal with Madhes-based parties saying the government would withdraw criminal charges against Maoist and Madhesi leaders filed during the decade-long conflict and the Madhes movement in the run up to formation of the ruling coalition.
However, opposition parties Nepali Congress and CPN-UML have been vehemently criticizing the deal, terming it a conspiracy hatched against rule of law. Similarly national and international human rights groups have been condemning it, arguing that it would promote the culture of impunity.
http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=All+cases+filed+against+Maoists+will+be+withdrawn%3A+AG+Pradhan&NewsID=302649
Monday, September 12, 2011
our point Maoists-Madhesh deal against Nepal nationalism: UML
Telegraph Nepal
Out of government for the first time since signing of New Delhi imposed 12-Point Agreement, the restive United Marxist Leninists Party has demanded immediate scrapping of the 4-Point Power sharing deal signed between Madhesi parties and Maoist.
The UML central committee meeting September 12, 2011, has also said that the deal was against Nepali nationalism.
Better late than never the UML found time to remember the fading Nepali nationalism.
The Nepali Congress too has formally demanded scrapping of the same the deal. The NC however, did not refer to ‘nationalism’. Understandable!
Pradip Gyawali of the UML told reporters after the meeting that majority of the leaders analyzed the long-term negative impact of the deal and demanded abrupt scrapping it.
“The deal will encourage impunity because it talks of withdrawing criminal charges, the group based recruitment of Madhesi population in the Army is highly objectionable and refusal to form state-restructuring committee is also not acceptable.”
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-13/four-point-maoists-madhesh-deal-against-nepal-nationalism:-uml.html
Out of government for the first time since signing of New Delhi imposed 12-Point Agreement, the restive United Marxist Leninists Party has demanded immediate scrapping of the 4-Point Power sharing deal signed between Madhesi parties and Maoist.
The UML central committee meeting September 12, 2011, has also said that the deal was against Nepali nationalism.
Better late than never the UML found time to remember the fading Nepali nationalism.
The Nepali Congress too has formally demanded scrapping of the same the deal. The NC however, did not refer to ‘nationalism’. Understandable!
Pradip Gyawali of the UML told reporters after the meeting that majority of the leaders analyzed the long-term negative impact of the deal and demanded abrupt scrapping it.
“The deal will encourage impunity because it talks of withdrawing criminal charges, the group based recruitment of Madhesi population in the Army is highly objectionable and refusal to form state-restructuring committee is also not acceptable.”
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-13/four-point-maoists-madhesh-deal-against-nepal-nationalism:-uml.html
No one should enjoy impunity
By Nirjal Dhungana
The Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) has already termed Nepal Airlines Corporation (NAC)-suspended Chairman Sugat Ratna Kansakar and other senior officials' decision to file a petition at the
Supreme Court (SC) against the anti-graft body as utterly irrational.
A group led by Kansakar filed a petition at the SC charging that CIAA has violated its prerogative by prosecuting them.
The CIAA has filed a case at the Special Court (SC) against Kansakar and other officials on charges of embezzling US$ 750,000.
The Authority sought 8-10 years imprisonment for him and 4-5 years for the other five officials under Clauses 17 and 24 of the Anti-corruption Act 2059 BS.
The CIAA filed the case against Kansakar along with six persons-NAC Deputy Managing Director Raju KC, Ganesh Thaku, Gyanendra Purush Dhakal, Mayur Shumsher Rana, and Keshav Raj Sharma- claiming their involvements regarding the advance provided to Airbus for aircraft purchase were unscrupulous.
The NAC had wired $750,000 to a bank in Paris on November 7, 2009 as commitment money for the purchase of the aircrafts.
In what can be termed as a gross irony, the government has, on the other hand, decided to compensate Indian state owned Security Printing and Mining Corporation for its reported losses due to the annulment of the deal on supply of four million machine readable passports (MRPs) to Nepal.
The cabinet meeting has already decided to fork out a gargantuan US$ 48,000 to offset the "losses" faced by the Indian firm.
In the aborted case of MPR, the already feeble state coffer has been forced to bear additional burden with the country getting not a single amount of benefit.
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sujata Koirala was the major person who had displayed unnaturally high zeal to grant the job of printing the MRPs to the Indian firm.
But, the dodgy way in which the attempts were made to handover the project to the Indian firm resulted in an annulment of the deal. And, it has obviously caused a huge loss to the state coffer.
However, the concerned agencies of the state have shown flippancy towards taking necessary actions against Koirala and others who were involved in scandalous MRP deal, which eventually forced the country to reel under
brutal financial burden.
The decision on the part of the cabinet to sanctify the deputy Prime Minister by deciding to repay the Indian printing firm for its wasted papers and other tools just attests to the vicious circle of impunity dogging the country.
Another fact that validates how the state machineries are shielding powerful persons who have been involved in major financial crimes is the government's lethargy to arrest Rubel Chaudhary, son in law of deputy Prime Minster Koirala.
The Bangladeshi citizen has been facing many charges including call bypassing causing huge financial losses to Nepali telecom operators, misappropriation of Nepal Police Welfare fund during the purchase and supply of logistics to Sudan-based Nepal Police peacekeeping mission, misuse of his family visa and supply of fake Nepali passports to Bangladeshis.
Even the Supreme Court (SC) recently ordered the government authorities to furnish written clarification on the alleged controversial activities of Chaudhary.
The cases of Koirala, Kansakar and Chaudhary merit thorough legal scanning and it would be undoubtedly unfair to give "some special person" an extreme leeway to enjoy impunity . nepalnews.com
http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2011/others/feature/jan/feature_01.php
The Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) has already termed Nepal Airlines Corporation (NAC)-suspended Chairman Sugat Ratna Kansakar and other senior officials' decision to file a petition at the
Supreme Court (SC) against the anti-graft body as utterly irrational.
A group led by Kansakar filed a petition at the SC charging that CIAA has violated its prerogative by prosecuting them.
The CIAA has filed a case at the Special Court (SC) against Kansakar and other officials on charges of embezzling US$ 750,000.
The Authority sought 8-10 years imprisonment for him and 4-5 years for the other five officials under Clauses 17 and 24 of the Anti-corruption Act 2059 BS.
The CIAA filed the case against Kansakar along with six persons-NAC Deputy Managing Director Raju KC, Ganesh Thaku, Gyanendra Purush Dhakal, Mayur Shumsher Rana, and Keshav Raj Sharma- claiming their involvements regarding the advance provided to Airbus for aircraft purchase were unscrupulous.
The NAC had wired $750,000 to a bank in Paris on November 7, 2009 as commitment money for the purchase of the aircrafts.
In what can be termed as a gross irony, the government has, on the other hand, decided to compensate Indian state owned Security Printing and Mining Corporation for its reported losses due to the annulment of the deal on supply of four million machine readable passports (MRPs) to Nepal.
The cabinet meeting has already decided to fork out a gargantuan US$ 48,000 to offset the "losses" faced by the Indian firm.
In the aborted case of MPR, the already feeble state coffer has been forced to bear additional burden with the country getting not a single amount of benefit.
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sujata Koirala was the major person who had displayed unnaturally high zeal to grant the job of printing the MRPs to the Indian firm.
But, the dodgy way in which the attempts were made to handover the project to the Indian firm resulted in an annulment of the deal. And, it has obviously caused a huge loss to the state coffer.
However, the concerned agencies of the state have shown flippancy towards taking necessary actions against Koirala and others who were involved in scandalous MRP deal, which eventually forced the country to reel under
brutal financial burden.
The decision on the part of the cabinet to sanctify the deputy Prime Minister by deciding to repay the Indian printing firm for its wasted papers and other tools just attests to the vicious circle of impunity dogging the country.
Another fact that validates how the state machineries are shielding powerful persons who have been involved in major financial crimes is the government's lethargy to arrest Rubel Chaudhary, son in law of deputy Prime Minster Koirala.
The Bangladeshi citizen has been facing many charges including call bypassing causing huge financial losses to Nepali telecom operators, misappropriation of Nepal Police Welfare fund during the purchase and supply of logistics to Sudan-based Nepal Police peacekeeping mission, misuse of his family visa and supply of fake Nepali passports to Bangladeshis.
Even the Supreme Court (SC) recently ordered the government authorities to furnish written clarification on the alleged controversial activities of Chaudhary.
The cases of Koirala, Kansakar and Chaudhary merit thorough legal scanning and it would be undoubtedly unfair to give "some special person" an extreme leeway to enjoy impunity . nepalnews.com
http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2011/others/feature/jan/feature_01.php
General amnesty will affect peace process: Gauri Pradhan
Saturday, 03 September 2011 15:12
National and international human rights watchdogs have expressed strong objection to one of the points in the recent agreement between UCPN (Maoist) and United Madhesi Democratic Front (UMDF) to offer amnesty to those accused of committing crime during the Maoist war and the movements after that. Gauri Pradhan, a member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and its spokesperson, spoke to Kishor Paudel of Nepalnews on various issues including overall human rights situation of the country. Excerpts:
How has National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) assessed the overall situation of human rights in the country?
Speaking briefly, situation of human rights is not satisfactory. Studies carried out by the commission also prove this. Specifically, the victims and the victims’ families of various incidents like murder, abduction, disappearance and displacements are yet to get justice and compensation. No progress has been made in the process of providing them justice. Though some victims have received interim relief aid, the culture of impunity is widespread.
How does NHRC view the agreement between UCPN (Maoist) and United Madhesi Democratic Front (JMDF) ahead of the Prime Ministerial election which has mentions about the withdrawal of various cases related to human rights?
I congratulate Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai who was elected on the basis of that agreement. At the same time, one point of the agreement has made us seriously concerned. The agreement to withdraw the cases of serious criminal nature presenting such cases as political ones has made the NHRC serious. The constitution has authorised the government to withdraw the cases filed by the state along with giving the rights to offer amnesty. But there is certain process to be completed before withdrawing such cases and offering amnesty to the person allegedly involved in serious crimes or crimes against humanity. The withdrawal of the cases under court’s proceeding may affect the whole peace process. The Comprehensive Peace Accord (PCPA) has also clearly mentioned the provision of withdrawal or amnesty only through the formation of the commissions on peace, reconciliation and disappearances. But the acts done on the basis of political consensus alone and without proper procedure will only have harmful impacts.
Do you mean the government and political parties are not serious about defending and promoting human rights?
In the past, so many cases would be brought up on as part of political vandetta. The NHRC
does not oppose the withdrawal of politically biased cases. However, the cases of serious crimes such as murder, abduction, rape, disappearance must be handled with care. The government must fulfill certain prerequisites before withdrawing the cases and must ensure that truthfulness of such cases has been established. If such agreements are signed during each political equation, serious questions will be raised on rule of law and human rights. The government is accountable for this.
Political parties have been repeatedly saying they are committed to protecting and promoting human rights. How truthful do you find them in their commitments?
The implementation part is very weak. The state has not paid sincere attention towards various reports submitted by the NHRC. Even the orders of courts are yet to be enforced. The government has started taking steps for interim relief and compensation but has done nothing to take action against the human rights violators.
Recently International Day of the Disappeared was marked also in Nepal. Two bills on providing justice and compensation to the victims which were supposed to be brought up by the government within two months are still uncertain. Who do you think is responsible for this?
This has to do with the willpower of the political parties. I think the government might already have collected information about the victims as we have already made it public on our part. If government is really serious, this work can be finalised within a month. It is too late to wait for the government. We should exert pressure on government to assuage victim’s pain.
The bills on formation of the commissions on truth, reconciliations and disappearances are still pending. What is your comment on this?
Government officials have advised that the NHRC should handle these issues saying that there is no guarantee of early formation of such commissions. So the government should authorise the constitutional bodies to look into these cases until concerned commissions are formed.
Do you mean the HNRC is given only limited authority?
Legal rights alone cannot work till the government takes practical action on the recommendations of constitutional bodies. Even the orders of courts have not been enforced.
A bill which deals on duties, rights and responsibilities of NHRC has been tabled in the parliament. Do you think the NHRC will have more authority once the bill is passed?
The bill has some positive provisions though there are still some weaknesses. Once the bill is passed, the recommendations of the NHRC will be mandatory and the government will have to implement recommendations within three months. Likewise, the NHRC will enjoy semi-judicial rights and the amount of compensatory relief will also be increased. nepalnews.com
National and international human rights watchdogs have expressed strong objection to one of the points in the recent agreement between UCPN (Maoist) and United Madhesi Democratic Front (UMDF) to offer amnesty to those accused of committing crime during the Maoist war and the movements after that. Gauri Pradhan, a member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and its spokesperson, spoke to Kishor Paudel of Nepalnews on various issues including overall human rights situation of the country. Excerpts:
How has National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) assessed the overall situation of human rights in the country?
Speaking briefly, situation of human rights is not satisfactory. Studies carried out by the commission also prove this. Specifically, the victims and the victims’ families of various incidents like murder, abduction, disappearance and displacements are yet to get justice and compensation. No progress has been made in the process of providing them justice. Though some victims have received interim relief aid, the culture of impunity is widespread.
How does NHRC view the agreement between UCPN (Maoist) and United Madhesi Democratic Front (JMDF) ahead of the Prime Ministerial election which has mentions about the withdrawal of various cases related to human rights?
I congratulate Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai who was elected on the basis of that agreement. At the same time, one point of the agreement has made us seriously concerned. The agreement to withdraw the cases of serious criminal nature presenting such cases as political ones has made the NHRC serious. The constitution has authorised the government to withdraw the cases filed by the state along with giving the rights to offer amnesty. But there is certain process to be completed before withdrawing such cases and offering amnesty to the person allegedly involved in serious crimes or crimes against humanity. The withdrawal of the cases under court’s proceeding may affect the whole peace process. The Comprehensive Peace Accord (PCPA) has also clearly mentioned the provision of withdrawal or amnesty only through the formation of the commissions on peace, reconciliation and disappearances. But the acts done on the basis of political consensus alone and without proper procedure will only have harmful impacts.
Do you mean the government and political parties are not serious about defending and promoting human rights?
In the past, so many cases would be brought up on as part of political vandetta. The NHRC
does not oppose the withdrawal of politically biased cases. However, the cases of serious crimes such as murder, abduction, rape, disappearance must be handled with care. The government must fulfill certain prerequisites before withdrawing the cases and must ensure that truthfulness of such cases has been established. If such agreements are signed during each political equation, serious questions will be raised on rule of law and human rights. The government is accountable for this.
Political parties have been repeatedly saying they are committed to protecting and promoting human rights. How truthful do you find them in their commitments?
The implementation part is very weak. The state has not paid sincere attention towards various reports submitted by the NHRC. Even the orders of courts are yet to be enforced. The government has started taking steps for interim relief and compensation but has done nothing to take action against the human rights violators.
Recently International Day of the Disappeared was marked also in Nepal. Two bills on providing justice and compensation to the victims which were supposed to be brought up by the government within two months are still uncertain. Who do you think is responsible for this?
This has to do with the willpower of the political parties. I think the government might already have collected information about the victims as we have already made it public on our part. If government is really serious, this work can be finalised within a month. It is too late to wait for the government. We should exert pressure on government to assuage victim’s pain.
The bills on formation of the commissions on truth, reconciliations and disappearances are still pending. What is your comment on this?
Government officials have advised that the NHRC should handle these issues saying that there is no guarantee of early formation of such commissions. So the government should authorise the constitutional bodies to look into these cases until concerned commissions are formed.
Do you mean the HNRC is given only limited authority?
Legal rights alone cannot work till the government takes practical action on the recommendations of constitutional bodies. Even the orders of courts have not been enforced.
A bill which deals on duties, rights and responsibilities of NHRC has been tabled in the parliament. Do you think the NHRC will have more authority once the bill is passed?
The bill has some positive provisions though there are still some weaknesses. Once the bill is passed, the recommendations of the NHRC will be mandatory and the government will have to implement recommendations within three months. Likewise, the NHRC will enjoy semi-judicial rights and the amount of compensatory relief will also be increased. nepalnews.com
Ignored questions
SUMIT SHARMA SAMEER
As soon as the Maoist ideologue Dr Baburam Bhattarai was elevated to the office of prime minister, the intellectual discourse queued up in praise of him as a political messiah willing to help peace and constitution-writing processes reach its ´desired´ end. They seem to have been influenced by what Herbert Simons calls, ´bounded rationality´. Due to the lack of performers, Nepali society suffers from a psychic of ´idol´ worshipping, which is detrimental for any progressive society. Focusing on an individual´s idealization and not in a system and processes is a political gimmick often prevalent in the least developing countries like Nepal.
Personally, the author welcomes the Maoist move of handing over the keys of arms containers to the special committee as well as a few positive trends initiated by Dr Bhattarai; nevertheless as Dr Bhattarai represents the larger Maoist party, which has played a substantial role in both the making and the unmaking of Nepal´s history, he cannot be looked upon irrespective of the Maoist movement that has its own merits and pitfalls.
I wish the prime minister a successful tenure. However there are larger questions that Nepali society is required to ponder over if at all it is to learn anything from its recent past. Is Maoist party in transition? What does that transformation entail? Is Maoist adopting the policy of making a significant gain made through the constituent assembly on the one hand and trying to keep its radicalism intact on the other?
Is it possible to strike a fine balance between the merits of democracy and radicalism? Will such system be any different from social democracy? If yes, what are the differences and if not, was there a need to wage an armed revolution to achieve social democracy? Further, what are the achievements reaped and the costs paid because of the Maoist movement? Maoists have been credited for the achievements made out of their violent movement; will they have enough guts to assume the responsibility of its pitfalls? Can the democratic revolutionary Dr Bhattarai do so?
In a document titled ´Plan for the Historic Initiation of the People´s War´, which was adopted by the Maoist central committee in September 1995 before initiating the armed movement, it has been stated: "We shall never allow this struggle to become a mere instrument for introducing partial reforms in the condition of the people, or terminating in a simple compromise by exerting pressure on the reactionary classes. Thus, our armed struggle will be totally free of all sorts of petty bourgeois, narrow nationalist, religion-communal and casteist illusions." What has happened to these commitments that were once the motivations and foundations behind the Maoist movement?
Completion of the peace process and writing of the constitution for the land is our immediate need. But under the armor of peace and constitution, the nation cannot allow political parties and its leaders to sanction values that are harmful to a free and civilized society.
In a personal interaction, an influential youth leader, Mr Lekhnath Neupane spoke his heart; "Have we done justice to our cadres and their families who offered their martyrdom believing our ideology and stated objectives? How can we legitimize our armed movement without addressing the issues of inclusion and state restructuring? Will we not be considered criminals if we fail to provide political legitimacy to our movement? Accepting to hand over the keys without dignified negotiations is submitting our movement and pride. Where will this take our party?"
One can agree and disagree with Mr Neupane’s views; nevertheless these questions are quite genuine for Nepali society. It cannot be dismissed just because it comes from those who have been considered hardliners. They are the established radical reformers with a substantial hold within their party. And they are here to stay for some time, if not longer. Moreover, it is a larger society and nation that suffered the brunt of the Maoist movement and will keep suffering from similar movements if we hesitate to discuss the issues raised by groups and actors within such movements.
In addition, how will the Maoists, particularly Dr Bhattarai and Prachanda respond to the future when the generations of tomorrow will cast doubts on the rationality of their movement. Why have the lives of so many innocent people been taken for the sake of other innocents that the Maoists claim to be representing? Generations of tomorrow will be an active member of a rational society unguided by the swings of radicalism and populist metaphors. They cannot simply accept the proposed overnight changes, but will dig the roots to convince them to accept the rationale behind such changes. Every political party and their actors will have to toil hard to convince the critical mass. And hence they will have many reasonable questions that the Maoists have to be accounted for.
In the process of addressing the issues of peace and constitution writing, Nepali politics has once again unfortunately endorsed crime, violence, and impunity. Such process and methodology has been sanctioned in the past as we did not question the Congress’ and the Communist’s armed revolutions. Our focus has always been immediate, which is not unnatural, particularly under the pressing circumstances. Completion of the peace process and writing of the constitution for the land is our immediate need. But under the armor of peace and constitution, the nation cannot allow political parties and its leaders to sanction values that are harmful to a free and civilized society.
The future society must escape the vicious cycles of violent movements and counter-movements so that the politics can shift its attention to poverty and underdevelopment. But it will largely depend on whether our social and political institutions are willing to sow the seed today that can ensure platonic values-based future for tomorrow. As the nation is embarking on settling the thorny issues of the Maoist war, addressing the issues of inclusion and federalism, the larger society must get involved in a rationale debate that will not only help smoothen the transition of today, but will secure the dignity for tomorrow as well.
Aristotle once remarked: "Young men are easily deceived, for they are quick to hope". Indeed we are a young and a hopeful nation. We hope that the future course of our country will be set on a positive motion carving its own defined destiny. And mind it; we don´t want to get deceived this time.
The writer is the author of Unfinished Journey: The Story of a Nation
sharmasumit77@gmail.com
Published on 2011-09-13 01:10:13
http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=35923
As soon as the Maoist ideologue Dr Baburam Bhattarai was elevated to the office of prime minister, the intellectual discourse queued up in praise of him as a political messiah willing to help peace and constitution-writing processes reach its ´desired´ end. They seem to have been influenced by what Herbert Simons calls, ´bounded rationality´. Due to the lack of performers, Nepali society suffers from a psychic of ´idol´ worshipping, which is detrimental for any progressive society. Focusing on an individual´s idealization and not in a system and processes is a political gimmick often prevalent in the least developing countries like Nepal.
Personally, the author welcomes the Maoist move of handing over the keys of arms containers to the special committee as well as a few positive trends initiated by Dr Bhattarai; nevertheless as Dr Bhattarai represents the larger Maoist party, which has played a substantial role in both the making and the unmaking of Nepal´s history, he cannot be looked upon irrespective of the Maoist movement that has its own merits and pitfalls.
I wish the prime minister a successful tenure. However there are larger questions that Nepali society is required to ponder over if at all it is to learn anything from its recent past. Is Maoist party in transition? What does that transformation entail? Is Maoist adopting the policy of making a significant gain made through the constituent assembly on the one hand and trying to keep its radicalism intact on the other?
Is it possible to strike a fine balance between the merits of democracy and radicalism? Will such system be any different from social democracy? If yes, what are the differences and if not, was there a need to wage an armed revolution to achieve social democracy? Further, what are the achievements reaped and the costs paid because of the Maoist movement? Maoists have been credited for the achievements made out of their violent movement; will they have enough guts to assume the responsibility of its pitfalls? Can the democratic revolutionary Dr Bhattarai do so?
In a document titled ´Plan for the Historic Initiation of the People´s War´, which was adopted by the Maoist central committee in September 1995 before initiating the armed movement, it has been stated: "We shall never allow this struggle to become a mere instrument for introducing partial reforms in the condition of the people, or terminating in a simple compromise by exerting pressure on the reactionary classes. Thus, our armed struggle will be totally free of all sorts of petty bourgeois, narrow nationalist, religion-communal and casteist illusions." What has happened to these commitments that were once the motivations and foundations behind the Maoist movement?
Completion of the peace process and writing of the constitution for the land is our immediate need. But under the armor of peace and constitution, the nation cannot allow political parties and its leaders to sanction values that are harmful to a free and civilized society.
In a personal interaction, an influential youth leader, Mr Lekhnath Neupane spoke his heart; "Have we done justice to our cadres and their families who offered their martyrdom believing our ideology and stated objectives? How can we legitimize our armed movement without addressing the issues of inclusion and state restructuring? Will we not be considered criminals if we fail to provide political legitimacy to our movement? Accepting to hand over the keys without dignified negotiations is submitting our movement and pride. Where will this take our party?"
One can agree and disagree with Mr Neupane’s views; nevertheless these questions are quite genuine for Nepali society. It cannot be dismissed just because it comes from those who have been considered hardliners. They are the established radical reformers with a substantial hold within their party. And they are here to stay for some time, if not longer. Moreover, it is a larger society and nation that suffered the brunt of the Maoist movement and will keep suffering from similar movements if we hesitate to discuss the issues raised by groups and actors within such movements.
In addition, how will the Maoists, particularly Dr Bhattarai and Prachanda respond to the future when the generations of tomorrow will cast doubts on the rationality of their movement. Why have the lives of so many innocent people been taken for the sake of other innocents that the Maoists claim to be representing? Generations of tomorrow will be an active member of a rational society unguided by the swings of radicalism and populist metaphors. They cannot simply accept the proposed overnight changes, but will dig the roots to convince them to accept the rationale behind such changes. Every political party and their actors will have to toil hard to convince the critical mass. And hence they will have many reasonable questions that the Maoists have to be accounted for.
In the process of addressing the issues of peace and constitution writing, Nepali politics has once again unfortunately endorsed crime, violence, and impunity. Such process and methodology has been sanctioned in the past as we did not question the Congress’ and the Communist’s armed revolutions. Our focus has always been immediate, which is not unnatural, particularly under the pressing circumstances. Completion of the peace process and writing of the constitution for the land is our immediate need. But under the armor of peace and constitution, the nation cannot allow political parties and its leaders to sanction values that are harmful to a free and civilized society.
The future society must escape the vicious cycles of violent movements and counter-movements so that the politics can shift its attention to poverty and underdevelopment. But it will largely depend on whether our social and political institutions are willing to sow the seed today that can ensure platonic values-based future for tomorrow. As the nation is embarking on settling the thorny issues of the Maoist war, addressing the issues of inclusion and federalism, the larger society must get involved in a rationale debate that will not only help smoothen the transition of today, but will secure the dignity for tomorrow as well.
Aristotle once remarked: "Young men are easily deceived, for they are quick to hope". Indeed we are a young and a hopeful nation. We hope that the future course of our country will be set on a positive motion carving its own defined destiny. And mind it; we don´t want to get deceived this time.
The writer is the author of Unfinished Journey: The Story of a Nation
sharmasumit77@gmail.com
Published on 2011-09-13 01:10:13
http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=35923
Sunday, September 11, 2011
CONFLICT VICTIMS AND RIGHTS BODIES WORRIED ABOUT INCREASING TREND OF IMPUNITY
International Day of the Disappeared
Conflict victims and human rights organizations expressed their worried over the increasing trend of impunity in Nepal. Family members of a decade long armed conflict who were gather to mark the international day for the disappeared together with most of the front line human rights organizations expressed their concern during different programs from 28 to 30 August.
The international day of the disappeared is marked on the 30 August every year to commemorate those who have disappeared. As Nepal has witnessed serious problem of disappearance during the decade long armed conflict with the highest number of disappearance in the world in 2003 and 2004, and over 1383 missing so far, the issue of disappearance, unfortunately, has been relevant for the campaign. Therefore, human rights organizations working at national and international level decided to join hand together with the family of the victims to mark the International Day of the Disappeared by organizing 3 days campaigning activities in collaboration. The collaborating organizations were Advocacy Forum Nepal, Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearance (AFAD), Amnesty International (AI), Collective Campaign for Peace (COCAP), Conflict Victim's Society for Justice (CVSJ), Conflict Victim Orphans Society (CVOS) HIMRIGHTS, Human Rights Alliance, INHURED International, Human Rights and Democratic Forum (FoHRID), Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC), International Commission of Jurist (ICJ), International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), National Network of Families of Disappeared and Missing Nepal (NEFAD), Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and TRIAL. The National Human Rights Commission also participated in every programs managed by all other organization while the event that managed by the NHRC itself was jointly organized by NHRC and all those organization named above.
Among the event taken place during the three days campaign, representatives of victim association and human rights organizations submitted a memorandum to the Prime Minister through Chief Secretary on 28 August.
On the second day, two different events took place. The first event was jointly managed by INSEC and Advocacy Forum in which two different reports were launched. The first report was Standard on the Exhumation prepared by Advocacy Forum and the second was The Disappeared Victim's Profile prepared by Insec. The second program of second day was managed by Amnesty International in which it launched and distributed a video to highlight how state has been failed to ensure justice for the victim family of the disappearances. The launch of the video was combined with post card and petition signing events.
Similarly, two different events taken place on the third day too. The first event of the day was an interaction program managed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in which an interaction between Nepal government representatives, family of disappeared and human rights defender was taken place. The interaction was combined with the NHRC's work so far on exhumation of conflict victims.
The second program of the day was an interaction and launch of the poster managed by the victim associations. The third event of the third day was an illumination in which Diyo (the traditional Nepali lamp) were lit placed in a shape of 1350.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL IN ACTION
Amnesty International Nepal took part actively along with other like- minded organizations to mark the international day of the disappeared.
On the occasion AI Nepal released a video 'The Significance of Justice' on 29th of August 2011. The video has highlighted the case of disappearance of 5 young boys (Sanjiv Kumar Karna, Jitendra Jha, Durgesh Kumar Labh, Pramod Narayan Mandal and Shailendra Yadav) in Dhanusha. Indira Jha (mother of Jitendra Jha), Naresh Labh (brother of Durgesh Kumar Labh), Ram Avtar Mandal (father of Pramod Narayan Mandal) and Bimala Devi Karna (mother of Sanjiv Kumar Karna) jointly launched the video amid a presence of families of disappeared came from different district of Nepal, representatives of human rights community different walk of lives.
The video has illustrated how the state has failed to ensure justice to family of the disappeared despite of their commitment and legal obligations. The short film also illustrates the political opposition, from both sides of the conflict, to holding individuals responsible for such crimes to account. It includes interviews with the brother of one of the disappeared, the lawyer working on the case, and the Maoist Home Minister.
On the occasion, Deputy Director of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Achyut Acharya, President of NEFAD Ram Kumar Bhandari, President of CVSJ Janak Raut, mother of disappeared student Bimala Devi, advocate Govinda Sharma Bandi, General Secretary of AI Nepal Rasmila Bhochhibhoya and Director Rameshwar Nepal shed lights the situation of impunity in the country.
The speakers criticized the four-point deal between UCPN (Maoist) and United Madhesi Democratic Front (UMDF) before the Prime Ministerial election which proposed withdrawal of cases filed against those allegedly involved in crime during and after armed conflict.
'It is the responsibility of judicial body, not of Nepal government, to give verdict whether the allegation is true or false' they said.
http://www.amnestynepal.org/campaigns/ai-nepal-activities/conflict-victims-and-rights-bodies-worried-about-increasing-trend-of-impunity.html
Conflict victims and human rights organizations expressed their worried over the increasing trend of impunity in Nepal. Family members of a decade long armed conflict who were gather to mark the international day for the disappeared together with most of the front line human rights organizations expressed their concern during different programs from 28 to 30 August.
The international day of the disappeared is marked on the 30 August every year to commemorate those who have disappeared. As Nepal has witnessed serious problem of disappearance during the decade long armed conflict with the highest number of disappearance in the world in 2003 and 2004, and over 1383 missing so far, the issue of disappearance, unfortunately, has been relevant for the campaign. Therefore, human rights organizations working at national and international level decided to join hand together with the family of the victims to mark the International Day of the Disappeared by organizing 3 days campaigning activities in collaboration. The collaborating organizations were Advocacy Forum Nepal, Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearance (AFAD), Amnesty International (AI), Collective Campaign for Peace (COCAP), Conflict Victim's Society for Justice (CVSJ), Conflict Victim Orphans Society (CVOS) HIMRIGHTS, Human Rights Alliance, INHURED International, Human Rights and Democratic Forum (FoHRID), Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC), International Commission of Jurist (ICJ), International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), National Network of Families of Disappeared and Missing Nepal (NEFAD), Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and TRIAL. The National Human Rights Commission also participated in every programs managed by all other organization while the event that managed by the NHRC itself was jointly organized by NHRC and all those organization named above.
Among the event taken place during the three days campaign, representatives of victim association and human rights organizations submitted a memorandum to the Prime Minister through Chief Secretary on 28 August.
On the second day, two different events took place. The first event was jointly managed by INSEC and Advocacy Forum in which two different reports were launched. The first report was Standard on the Exhumation prepared by Advocacy Forum and the second was The Disappeared Victim's Profile prepared by Insec. The second program of second day was managed by Amnesty International in which it launched and distributed a video to highlight how state has been failed to ensure justice for the victim family of the disappearances. The launch of the video was combined with post card and petition signing events.
Similarly, two different events taken place on the third day too. The first event of the day was an interaction program managed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in which an interaction between Nepal government representatives, family of disappeared and human rights defender was taken place. The interaction was combined with the NHRC's work so far on exhumation of conflict victims.
The second program of the day was an interaction and launch of the poster managed by the victim associations. The third event of the third day was an illumination in which Diyo (the traditional Nepali lamp) were lit placed in a shape of 1350.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL IN ACTION
Amnesty International Nepal took part actively along with other like- minded organizations to mark the international day of the disappeared.
On the occasion AI Nepal released a video 'The Significance of Justice' on 29th of August 2011. The video has highlighted the case of disappearance of 5 young boys (Sanjiv Kumar Karna, Jitendra Jha, Durgesh Kumar Labh, Pramod Narayan Mandal and Shailendra Yadav) in Dhanusha. Indira Jha (mother of Jitendra Jha), Naresh Labh (brother of Durgesh Kumar Labh), Ram Avtar Mandal (father of Pramod Narayan Mandal) and Bimala Devi Karna (mother of Sanjiv Kumar Karna) jointly launched the video amid a presence of families of disappeared came from different district of Nepal, representatives of human rights community different walk of lives.
The video has illustrated how the state has failed to ensure justice to family of the disappeared despite of their commitment and legal obligations. The short film also illustrates the political opposition, from both sides of the conflict, to holding individuals responsible for such crimes to account. It includes interviews with the brother of one of the disappeared, the lawyer working on the case, and the Maoist Home Minister.
On the occasion, Deputy Director of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Achyut Acharya, President of NEFAD Ram Kumar Bhandari, President of CVSJ Janak Raut, mother of disappeared student Bimala Devi, advocate Govinda Sharma Bandi, General Secretary of AI Nepal Rasmila Bhochhibhoya and Director Rameshwar Nepal shed lights the situation of impunity in the country.
The speakers criticized the four-point deal between UCPN (Maoist) and United Madhesi Democratic Front (UMDF) before the Prime Ministerial election which proposed withdrawal of cases filed against those allegedly involved in crime during and after armed conflict.
'It is the responsibility of judicial body, not of Nepal government, to give verdict whether the allegation is true or false' they said.
http://www.amnestynepal.org/campaigns/ai-nepal-activities/conflict-victims-and-rights-bodies-worried-about-increasing-trend-of-impunity.html
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
NC ultimatum served to Nepal Govt, Conclude PP by mid October
Nepal’s main opposition party, Nepali Congress has formally concluded that the four point power sharing deal reached between the Unified Maoists Party and Unified Democratic Madhesi Alliance (Front) prior to the formation of the coalition government will fail in all likelihood to bring peace and constitutional processes to its desired positive end.
The NC’s central working committee meeting held on September 7, 2011 has made this conclusion.
The four point deal will encourage impunity as it refers to the withdrawal of criminal charges against Maoists and Madhesi leaders during the rebellion and Madhesh uprising. It also encourages human rights violation, the Nepali Congress has also concluded.
Serving ultimatum to the government the party has demanded conclusion of integration and rehabilitation of Maoists PLA before October 14, 2011 including the handover of containers with weapons and arms used in security of the cantonments to the government led special committee.
The fourteen point proposal passed by the Nepali Congress meeting coordinated by senior leader Sher Bahadur Deuba also demands that the number of PLA to undergo integration should not exceed beyond 4000 that equals the number of weapons. Dissolution of YCL’s paramilitary structure and return of seized properties have also been demanded.
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-08/nc-ultimatum-served-to-nepal-govt-conclude-pp-by-mid-october
The NC’s central working committee meeting held on September 7, 2011 has made this conclusion.
The four point deal will encourage impunity as it refers to the withdrawal of criminal charges against Maoists and Madhesi leaders during the rebellion and Madhesh uprising. It also encourages human rights violation, the Nepali Congress has also concluded.
Serving ultimatum to the government the party has demanded conclusion of integration and rehabilitation of Maoists PLA before October 14, 2011 including the handover of containers with weapons and arms used in security of the cantonments to the government led special committee.
The fourteen point proposal passed by the Nepali Congress meeting coordinated by senior leader Sher Bahadur Deuba also demands that the number of PLA to undergo integration should not exceed beyond 4000 that equals the number of weapons. Dissolution of YCL’s paramilitary structure and return of seized properties have also been demanded.
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-08/nc-ultimatum-served-to-nepal-govt-conclude-pp-by-mid-october
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
End Impunity
By Kaziba | Published September 5, 2011
A week after being sworn in as Prime Minister, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai has not managed to give full formation to the cabinet. So far he has been able to induct six members from his party and seven from the Madhesi front. Infighting between his own Maoist party and the disagreement between the Madhesi leaders is delaying the formation of the full cabinet. Politics they say is a game of opportunity and there is no lack of opportunistic Nepali political leaders. Why else would Mohan Baidya be protesting against a symbolic act like handing over the keys of the weapons containers to the special committee when the entire country would like to see the peace process go forward? Only because it was not “approved” by the central committee to specifically hand over the keys? Or why else would Madhesi leaders who claim to represent Madhesi interests still be undecided over who gets what portfolio when the focus should be on completing the peace process and writing the constitution?
Despite the expectations from Dr. Bhattarai, he is already showing signs that although he is academically the most qualified leader to Nepal till date, he is not bereft of the weaknesses that most Nepali leaders have displayed. He too opted to compromise with the Madhesi front on the issue of justice by proposing a general amnesty to all those accused of gross human rights violations during the Madhes movement. Although the trend of encouraging impunity began long before Bhattarai came in, with all three governments formed after the April 2006 People’s Movement, whether it was Nepali Congress, UML, or Maoist led, chose to ignore justice and had proposed general amnesty to all accused of gross human rights violations during the insurgency and various movements, one had expected Bhattarai to be more visionary than compromising.
This is not to say that society must not forgive, but by giving a general pardon, without so much as investigating and bringing the true facts to light, Nepal is setting a dangerous trend that allows space for those who have suffered to lose their trust on the state, and take justice into their own hands. What was worse was that the governments not only declared a general amnesty, and contradicted their own commitments mentioned in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, but also promoted many officials, accused of human rights violations. We even had a minister accused of direct involvement in gross human rights violations. Perhaps this is a sign of our society’s acceptance of violence as something natural and necessary. This has to change.
Political compromises today, at the cost of the justice is going to cost Nepal dearly tomorrow. We may choose to ignore international human rights laws and treaties in the name of political compromises now, but allowing and encouraging impunity at the state level, will give space for more violence to erupt, and this will be exactly the opposite of what the People’s Movement 2006 was all about. But perhaps it would be naïve to expect a party that has its roots in violence to actually be prepared to even understand that refusing to be a party to violence no matter how much one suffers, to accept modern democratic norms and pluralistic values, is the only way forward in today’s world. We can agree to disagree but we cannot go about each other’s throats just because we disagree. However by announcing a general amnesty, we are saying its ok to slit the person’s throat because he disagrees with you.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Disappearance Commission, provisioned in the Comprehensive Peace Accord, the officially recognized document that allowed the Maoists to come to peaceful politics, have long been forgotten. We now know that it was meant to be forgotten, because neither the late Girija Prasad Koirala nor the Chairman of the UCPN-Maoists had the balls, or the commitment to honor the document. They knew that by allowing the formation of these two commissions in an independent and autonomous manner, they would be the ones to get trapped in the end. These clauses were only candies offered to the international community to keep them quiet. The international community too chose to keep quiet about it because, well they are not so innocent themselves, we only have to look at the war in the middle east.
The political parties of Nepal have time and again been violating the sanctity of the state, making a mockery of law and justice. We the people are compelled to bear this because we think we do not have a choice. However, political leaders should be warned, if the people were willing to accept a regime change and that too of a 240 year old system where the king was considered as an incarnation of god, the current lot of leaders were sent by us, for us and from us. They too are mere commoners on whom the people have bestowed their faith. However if these leaders cannot give justice to the people, there will come a time when the people shall rise again and change leadership again.
For Dr. Bhattarai these are challenging times, but as the Chinese say, every challenge is a golden opportunity in itself. Instead of talking about general amnesty he should convince the Madhesi leaders that only allowing justice to take its course can ensure peace and prosperity for the people, regardless of whether they are from the Madhes, Pahad or Himal. General amnesty should not be given, until and unless there is a full fledged investigation into all acts of human rights violations since the beginning of the insurgency till today.
The people of the Rukum and Rolpa did not take up arms because they wanted to, but because the state caused them injustice, because of the police brutality imposed upon them. Nepalis did not participate in the People’s Movement 2006 because we liked this party or that party or liked or disliked the monarchy, we did so because we wanted lasting peace and prosperity for all. That was what the political parties promised us. Unfortunately there is no sign of the peace process being completed and the new constitution written. But if the parties think that the peace process will be completed by merely handing over the keys of containers, or integrating whatever number into the state security forces, and forget about establishing the rule of law and justice, they are forgetting their own commitment to the people. And that the people will not forgive.
Kaziba is a Nepali who dreams of conquering the world every night, but ends up waking every morning in the same prison.
http://www.parakhi.com/blogs/2011/09/05/end-impunity/
A week after being sworn in as Prime Minister, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai has not managed to give full formation to the cabinet. So far he has been able to induct six members from his party and seven from the Madhesi front. Infighting between his own Maoist party and the disagreement between the Madhesi leaders is delaying the formation of the full cabinet. Politics they say is a game of opportunity and there is no lack of opportunistic Nepali political leaders. Why else would Mohan Baidya be protesting against a symbolic act like handing over the keys of the weapons containers to the special committee when the entire country would like to see the peace process go forward? Only because it was not “approved” by the central committee to specifically hand over the keys? Or why else would Madhesi leaders who claim to represent Madhesi interests still be undecided over who gets what portfolio when the focus should be on completing the peace process and writing the constitution?
Despite the expectations from Dr. Bhattarai, he is already showing signs that although he is academically the most qualified leader to Nepal till date, he is not bereft of the weaknesses that most Nepali leaders have displayed. He too opted to compromise with the Madhesi front on the issue of justice by proposing a general amnesty to all those accused of gross human rights violations during the Madhes movement. Although the trend of encouraging impunity began long before Bhattarai came in, with all three governments formed after the April 2006 People’s Movement, whether it was Nepali Congress, UML, or Maoist led, chose to ignore justice and had proposed general amnesty to all accused of gross human rights violations during the insurgency and various movements, one had expected Bhattarai to be more visionary than compromising.
This is not to say that society must not forgive, but by giving a general pardon, without so much as investigating and bringing the true facts to light, Nepal is setting a dangerous trend that allows space for those who have suffered to lose their trust on the state, and take justice into their own hands. What was worse was that the governments not only declared a general amnesty, and contradicted their own commitments mentioned in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, but also promoted many officials, accused of human rights violations. We even had a minister accused of direct involvement in gross human rights violations. Perhaps this is a sign of our society’s acceptance of violence as something natural and necessary. This has to change.
Political compromises today, at the cost of the justice is going to cost Nepal dearly tomorrow. We may choose to ignore international human rights laws and treaties in the name of political compromises now, but allowing and encouraging impunity at the state level, will give space for more violence to erupt, and this will be exactly the opposite of what the People’s Movement 2006 was all about. But perhaps it would be naïve to expect a party that has its roots in violence to actually be prepared to even understand that refusing to be a party to violence no matter how much one suffers, to accept modern democratic norms and pluralistic values, is the only way forward in today’s world. We can agree to disagree but we cannot go about each other’s throats just because we disagree. However by announcing a general amnesty, we are saying its ok to slit the person’s throat because he disagrees with you.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Disappearance Commission, provisioned in the Comprehensive Peace Accord, the officially recognized document that allowed the Maoists to come to peaceful politics, have long been forgotten. We now know that it was meant to be forgotten, because neither the late Girija Prasad Koirala nor the Chairman of the UCPN-Maoists had the balls, or the commitment to honor the document. They knew that by allowing the formation of these two commissions in an independent and autonomous manner, they would be the ones to get trapped in the end. These clauses were only candies offered to the international community to keep them quiet. The international community too chose to keep quiet about it because, well they are not so innocent themselves, we only have to look at the war in the middle east.
The political parties of Nepal have time and again been violating the sanctity of the state, making a mockery of law and justice. We the people are compelled to bear this because we think we do not have a choice. However, political leaders should be warned, if the people were willing to accept a regime change and that too of a 240 year old system where the king was considered as an incarnation of god, the current lot of leaders were sent by us, for us and from us. They too are mere commoners on whom the people have bestowed their faith. However if these leaders cannot give justice to the people, there will come a time when the people shall rise again and change leadership again.
For Dr. Bhattarai these are challenging times, but as the Chinese say, every challenge is a golden opportunity in itself. Instead of talking about general amnesty he should convince the Madhesi leaders that only allowing justice to take its course can ensure peace and prosperity for the people, regardless of whether they are from the Madhes, Pahad or Himal. General amnesty should not be given, until and unless there is a full fledged investigation into all acts of human rights violations since the beginning of the insurgency till today.
The people of the Rukum and Rolpa did not take up arms because they wanted to, but because the state caused them injustice, because of the police brutality imposed upon them. Nepalis did not participate in the People’s Movement 2006 because we liked this party or that party or liked or disliked the monarchy, we did so because we wanted lasting peace and prosperity for all. That was what the political parties promised us. Unfortunately there is no sign of the peace process being completed and the new constitution written. But if the parties think that the peace process will be completed by merely handing over the keys of containers, or integrating whatever number into the state security forces, and forget about establishing the rule of law and justice, they are forgetting their own commitment to the people. And that the people will not forgive.
Kaziba is a Nepali who dreams of conquering the world every night, but ends up waking every morning in the same prison.
http://www.parakhi.com/blogs/2011/09/05/end-impunity/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)