Nepal's revamped truth commissions must transcend “ritualism” to bring justice to victims of civil war

Nepal's try and achieve justice and accountability after the a decades-long civil war was frozen greater than two years ago with none significant progress being made – but a recent development raises hopes that it could soon be revived and renewed.

In August 2024, the country Parliament passed a long-awaited law This will lay the muse for the establishment of a 3rd – and hopefully final – round of truth commissions to research the greater than 66,000 cases of conflict victims which have been gathering dust because the end of the last commissions in July 2022.

The two most important bodies involved — the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Inquiry into Cases of Enforced Disappearances — were launched by the Nepalese government in 2015 to deal with crimes committed throughout the conflict in Nepal, often called “The People’s War.”

In 1996, Maoist rebels began an rebellion against the Nepalese government in western Nepal, which escalated right into a ten-year civil war throughout the country. According to United Nations estimatesThe conflict has left 13,000 people dead, 1,300 persons are still missing, and there are an unknown variety of victims of torture and conflict-related sexual violence.

The people’s war ended with the signing of the Comprehensive peace agreement This included, amongst other things, the Nepali government organising a high-level truth commission.

So far, the commissions have accomplished two rounds. The first round, which covered nearly all of victim cases, began in 2015 with a two-year mandate that the federal government prolonged thrice for one more yr. The second round, which lasted from 2020 to 2022, was interrupted for months because of COVID-19.

The commissions got three most important tasks: to uncover the reality about serious human rights violations, to create a climate of peace, trust and reconciliation, and to make legal recommendations for compensation for victims and perpetrators of the conflict.

But despite seven years of labor, little progress has been made towards achieving these goals. No investigations have been conducted, no perpetrators have been delivered to justice, and no compensation has been paid to victims. Reconciliation in a rustic that also bears the scars of the conflict stays a good distance off.

From 2022 to 2023, I researched the country's transitional justice process in Nepal. During my research, I heard people describe Nepal's lengthy process as “a legal merry-go-round,” “Groundhog Day,” and “Transitional injustice.”

Many Nepalis I spoke to consider that the federal government strategically dragged out the transitional justice process to avoid accountability, hoping that individuals would eventually get fed up with the method and forget. In fact, a heavy cloud of hopelessness and frustration hung over the commissions, as legal and financial constraints and political bias hampered the primary two rounds, severely slowing progress and affecting the commissions' ability to operate and public confidence.

Court hearing “adjourned”

In 2022, I interviewed a conflict victim within the rolling hills of Rolpa within the west of the country, where the conflict beganShe had presented her case to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission seven years ago, but had not heard anything since. “In a sense, our complaints are adjourned,” she said. “They are not yet finished, but they are not being forwarded either.”

She was considered one of about 300 women who has officially reported a case of conflict-related sexual violence to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

However, a former truth commissioner told me that this number might be as high as 1,000 because some victims of sexual violence describe their cases as “torture” to distance themselves from the stigma and shame often related to sexual violence in Nepal.

I also met with the leaders of several women's organizations who’ve documented 1000’s of cases of conflict-related sexual violence in Nepal but haven’t yet referred these cases to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission because of ongoing concerns about confidentiality and trust.

The lack of progress made by truth commissions in Nepal suggests that they’re being misused to perform what I call ‘transitional justice ritualism’: the act of a state creating empty institutions that lack the obligatory basis to supply real consequences.

As a part of this ritual of transitional justice, the Nepalese post-conflict coalition government has, in my opinion, used truth commissions as a political tool to exhibit to the international community that it’s committed to its obligations under the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 and to avoid Universal jurisdiction – the international legal principle that permits other states to prosecute individuals for serious human rights violations, no matter where those crimes occurred.

The threat of universal jurisdiction has been a selected problem for alleged perpetrators in Nepal since 2013, when Colonel Kumar Lama, a former commander of the Royal Nepal Army throughout the Nepal conflict, was arrested within the United Kingdom on charges of torture and war crimes. While Lama acquitted there for lack of evidencethe danger of universal jurisdiction for war criminals in Nepal still for those in positions of power throughout the civil war.

A controversial step forward

But a recent change in Nepal’s political leadership and the adoption of the brand new law that Law on the Investigation of Enforced Disappearances and the Truth and Reconciliation Commissionrepresent a chance for the Government to transcend lip service to transitional justice.

Under the amended law, a 3rd round of appointed commissioners will serve for a period of 4 years – hopefully enough time to finish their unfulfilled mandates. A government committee is working on the appointment latest truth commissioners ahead of the country's major holiday, Dashain, in October 2024. The amended law also provides for the creation of specialized sub-units inside the TRC – for truth-finding and investigation, reparations, sexual violence and rape, and victim coordination – which could potentially improve resource rationalisation and move forward a few of these stalled parts of the commissions.

However, hope was tempered by fear and uncertainty. Victim groups support the lawswhile others protest In their view, these provisions could undermine justice, particularly by protecting offenders through lighter sentences.

International human rights groups They acknowledge positive and long-awaited changes to the present law, but additionally warn of significant gaps in accountability that might undermine the transitional justice process.

UN Human Rights Commissioner Volker Türk said the The revised law is “an important step forward,” he said, but added: “It is imperative that the legislation is interpreted and implemented in a way that upholds the rights of victims, including the right to truth, justice and reparation, and that accountability is guaranteed in full compliance with international human rights standards.”

Potential for international support

Although it seems that the transitional justice process continues to be being led by Nepal, doors could also be opening for international support in the shape of economic or technical assistance – which might represent a big turning point in the method.

The amended law provides for a “fund”“To finance the investigation process and compensation for the victims, a fund shall be arrange, supported by the Government of Nepal and open to contributions from other national and international organizations.

Sushil Pyakurel, a former member of Nepal's National Human Rights Commission, is a component of a bunch of human rights activists, lawyers and victims who’re forming a civilian monitoring committee to act as a watchdog for the resumed trial. Pyakurel stressed that Nepal's civil society, together with the international community, must put pressure on the federal government to maintain its guarantees of victim-centered implementation.

“You can make any law you want, but it's how you implement it that matters,” Pyakurel told me. “Even if the law is different, nothing will change if the mentality remains the same.”

The reinstatement of truth commissions in Nepal offers the federal government a likelihood to exhibit its commitment to a transparent and legit process, but I consider it must transcend the transitional justice ritualism of the previous two commissions to deliver real justice and recognition for the victims of the country's civil war.