What ails our transitional justice bodies
Needless to mention, Nepal experienced a decade-long bloody dance of death from 1996 to 2006. In the conflict, over 17, 000 innocent Nepalese were killed, and many more were displaced and maimed. With the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Accord, the conflict finally came to an end in 2006. This was a historic movement for Nepalese, as they have been living under the Sword of Damocles.
While signing the peace accord, the warring parties agreed, among others, to form the transitional justice bodies within two years and settle the war-era crimes through it. Here lies the biggest irony. Transitional justice bodies such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons (CoID) were formed only in 2015 more than seven years after the deadline. No saner mind would disagree with the fact that Transitional Justice bodies were established with a noble intention to deliver justice by resolving war-era crimes including the grave violation of human rights. Likewise, they would not also raise the question over their credibility and accountability. Transitional justice bodies have not progressed as expected despite having all apparatus for their disposal in place. The reason is that they have been rendered as a body without any essence.
Right from day one, the transitional justice bodies have been covertly or overtly controlled and managed by politicians who do not want commissions to function efficiently and conclude the peace process logically. The executive heads of the body are selected based on their political inclination and not based on their academic qualification or personal experience. What generally matters is the chiefs’ loyalty to their political masters pledging to dance to their tunes after being selected. Logically speaking, the entire selection process is negated and those who butter the palm of the politicians are selected even if they do not fulfil the eligibility criteria. When such select crooks head such prestigious institutions, the resultant outcome thereof is obviously below par standard.
It is generally reported that politicians and other concerned authorities do not cooperate with transitional justice bodies. This is because the politicians are very much mindful of the fact that if the bodies function efficiently, they will be behind bars for gross violation of human rights during the conflict. One should not be taken aback if the peace process continues to prolong for an infinite period.
Initially, the transitional justice bodies were constituted for two years. It was entrusted with the task of resolving the warera crimes within the stipulated time. However, the term of transitional justice bodies has been extended multiple times as it has failed to deliver its objective. With the government resisting calls to amend their mandates to accord with international standards, civil society organizations and victims’ groups are at a crossroads: should they continue the practice of “critical engagement” with the COIs or should they stop working with them and demand a more effective transitional justice system? Or should they focus on strengthening the independence and capacity of regular criminal justice institutions, empowering them to investigate and prosecute conflict-related human rights violations and provide effective remedies and reparation for victims?
The victims are impatiently waiting for the transitional justice bodies to deliver justice and end the peace logically. But it seems their wait will not end anytime soon. The politicians are hell-bent on tiring the victims thinking they will drop their demands and subsequently the peace process will fizzle out. This is a masterstroke strategy on the part of our politicians. However, the victims are very determined to see those who are responsible for grave violations of human rights during the crime, behind bars.
The biggest problem of both commissions is that the position of the office bearers has been lying defunct for over two years. The two commissions have been inactive since July 2022 after the government decided to extend the terms of the commissions without retaining their chairmen and members. Against the government’s claim that the bill to amend the existing transitional justice law would be endorsed by October 2022, which will also open the door for recruiting new office bearers, there has been no progress. Just last week, the Supreme Court directed the government to commence the process of selecting officer bearers. While the selection process continued, the Apex Court directed the government to constitute a task force in the transitional justice bodies in coordination with their secretaries to continue the investigation. However, it remains to be seen whether the government will adhere to the apex court order or give a short shrift.
Our Prime Minister Pushpakamal Dahal while addressing the 78th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2023 said that the logical conclusion of the peace process was the utmost priority of his government. The delegates across the globe hailed his commitment thinking he would walk the talk very soon. More than six months have passed since his statement in New York. The peace process made no substantial progress except the decision to appoint the office bearers of the commissions.
The former Prime Minister of England, William Edward Gladstone, once said “justice delayed is justice denied”. Likewise, Martin Luther King said that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”. As things stand now, this adage seems to fit into our transitional justice bodies which has delivered nothing substantial triggering resentment among the victims of decade-long armed conflict.
We hope that our warring parties work with honesty bringing smiles among the conflict victims. The time is running out. It's now or never.