Cases of Unlawful Killings

There were thousands of cases of unlawful killings, disappearances, abductions and tortures during the decade long conflict. Although, two transitional justice commissions were established, they were not adopted with adequate transparency or in compliance with international law, and victims and families were still left far behind from justice. The lead up events to the armed conflict included the declaration of a National State of Emergency in both 2001 and 2005 that caused further political instability and restricted a wide range of civil liberties, a move that was move that was met with criticism abroad (Peace Insight, 2017).

The signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 as mentioned earlier ended the armed conflict and created a base for a permanent peace and transition towards democratic politics. Substantial progress were made in the implementation of the Accord, although tensions between the Maoists and other political groups were still strained. There has been near absolute impunity for the people responsible for committing during the conflict and only few victims have had reparation for the abuses they suffered. Established transitional justice mechanisms such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons failed both in constitution and operation in terms of international standards.

Adding to their deeply flawed mandates, the opaque approach of the Commissions created distrust with all major stakeholders including conflict victims and members of civil society suspicious of the transitional justice process. Impunity for past human rights violations also emboldened law enforcement agencies, the military, as well as political parties to continue acting outside the law. There were visible signs of cynicism and hopelessness, as well as questions about the direction of the human rights movement in the country.

A part of the human rights movement considered the focus on accountability on past violations narrowly and worked towards addressing the broader violations of social and economic rights that lay at the root of the many conflicts in Nepal. A disproportionate focus of human rights organizations on prosecutions neglected the significance of other transitional justice measures such as reparations, which were supposed to be beneficial to victims and their families.

There was also regret over the fragmentation of the human rights movement in the country. While some blamed the dependence of human rights organizations on donors, others point toward the politicization of human rights and victims' organizations as having made them and their work partisan. With dwindling donor interest in transitional justice and accountability for human rights violations, human rights organizations and victims' groups are also concerned about the sustainability of working on addressing impunity. They considered it imperative for human rights organizations and victims' groups to continue to work together and reanimate the human rights movement in the country.

Two major political parties; the Communist Party of Nepal and the United Communist party of Nepal signed a nine point agreement on May 5 that contained provisions for general amnesty for perpetrators. Although the conflict ended when the government of Nepal and the communist party of Nepal signed a peace agreement on November 21, 2006. Under the agreement, the government in 2014 created the truth and reconciliation commission and the commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared persons. Shifts in the political landscape of Nepal continued throughout new prime minister taking office in June.

Local district elections, held for the first time in 20 years, were a significant step in the political transition of the country following 1996-2006 civil war. However, public differences between political parties and interest groups over power sharing underscored the deep ongoing rifts, which intensified the 2015 constitution as a result. The Human rights group claimed that it believed nearly half of around 4000 people to die in the conflict were killed unlawfully. It also found unprecedented levels of human rights abuse cases. The vast majority of the victims were civilians who were targeted for their support for the Maoists. Others were Maoists deliberately killed after they were taken to prison or killed instead of being arrested.

Since 1996, the Maoists who had strong support from lower castes, the poor and unemployed gained control over large areas of the countryside as mentioned earlier. They inflicted heavy casualties, killing more than thousand security forces. More than seven thousand people died after King Gyanendra imposed state of emergency in November of 2001 and also ordered army to join police in fighting against the guerrillas. Nepal recently extended the tenures of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Investigation of Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP), but these transitional justice bodies are hampered by inadequate laws that do not meet international standard and at the same time lack capacity and proper support from the government. Nepal's civil war ended in 2006, but the victims still continue to pin their hopes on a justice process through the transitional justice mechanisms.

The UN human rights committee has urged Nepal to investigate different cases, for instance the gang-rape of a woman during the country's civil war in a landmark decision but no serious investigations were made. It was believed that many crimes related to rape and sexual violence did happen between the year the conflict from 1996 to 2006. Research by Human Rights Watch found that women who were relatives of Maoist suspects, or were believed to be Maoist supporters, were targeted by the security forces. Maoist combatants also attacked women who refused to support their party. Social taboos, a lack of protection for those speaking out and the very low chances of perpetrators being prosecuted mean few women have reported such crimes.

According to Carla Fertsman, Nepal's failure to act on conflict-era sexual violence contributed to the prevailing climate of impunity for perpetrators and the high levels of stigma and insecurity felt by victims (Red Cross, 2017). It was in the year Nepalese only began to learn about transitional justice but the question was whether it could work in Nepal in hold accountable for abuses that were committed during the insurgency. A process that address part abuses to accomplish goals such as establishing the truth of what happened, acknowledging the suffering of victims, holding perpetrators accountable, compensating for wrongs, preventing future abuses and promoting future abuses and promoting social healing.

There has always been a lot of political instability in Nepalese political scenario. Compared to the past, Nepal has now managed to have stable politics now. Nepal has federal system of government. Five years of stable government has reformed Nepal into federal structural and country has reformed into federal structure. Unlike America and other western country, prime minister is the head of the state and president is the representative guardian of the state where the supreme power rely on citizens. The development sector is directly related with the international politics.

The government is planning for development programs cooperating with India and China. Nepal is in talks of developing rail networks such as China-Nepal railway, East-West railway, Kathmandu-Terai fast track and railway, metro train.
Over a decade after the end of the conflict, hundreds of victim and their relatives are still awaiting justice. The Nepalese judicial system still in present days remains mourn and the perpetrators are immune. It is hard to lay the foundations of the rule of law only by establishing the truth and ensuring that the victims obtain reparation: only then the notion of justice can take its full meaning. In addition to the atrocities, human rights violations remain widespread in Nepal.

Torture and extra judicial executions are common, yet the government does nothing to identify the culprits. All in all, the civil war that lasted for almost a decade did managed to overthrow the monarchy regime but it failed to provide proper rights, rehabilitation or some sort of compensation to the affected ones. The leaders who started the war are enjoying lavish life pretending to bring some changes in the government but the people and followers who actually fought the war are the miserable ones and the justice is yet to be seen. All in all, the civilians were the one who had to go through all the sufferings, loose their families and so on. So called political leaders and governments violated the human rights completely, yet, seems that the people will never get justice.

Did you like this example?

243

10