Submit your Article

Nepal’s peace process stands as a unique example of a home-grown approach to resolving conflict. The Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA), signed in 2006 between the Seven-Party Alliance and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), laid the foundation for transformative political and social changes. It resulted in the promulgation of a new constitution in 2015 through the Constituent Assembly and the successful integration of the Maoist army into national forces. However, one critical component—transitional justice—remains unresolved, even 18 years after the CPA. Addressing this issue is vital to concluding Nepal’s peace process and ensuring justice for victims.

In 2015, Nepal established two commissions: the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP). These commissions were tasked with investigating human rights violations, disappearances and atrocities committed during Nepal’s decade-long armed conflict. However, operational inefficiencies, lack of resources, and political interference hindered their work. In 2024, the government renewed the process by forming a five-member search committee under former Chief Justice Om Prakash Mishra to nominate officials for both commissions. This committee, which also includes former Supreme Court judge Jagadish Sharma Poudel, former ambassador Arjun Karki, human rights activist Stella Tamang, and a representative of the National Human Rights Commission, has raised hopes for revitalizing the commissions with competent and independent leadership.

While this development has been cautiously welcomed by organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Accountability Watch Committee (AWC), concerns remain. The groups stress that transitional justice must address five key pillars: truth, justice, reparation, memorialization and guarantees of non-recurrence. They argue that vague language in the law governing the TRC and CIEDP could allow some perpetrators to evade accountability. Crimes are categorized as “violations of human rights”, which may qualify for amnesty, and “serious violations of human rights,” which are prosecutable in a special court. Critics fear that unclear definitions could exclude certain cases from justice and reparations. Additionally, a controversial provision allowing the attorney general to request up to a 75 percent reduction in sentencing for serious human rights violations—excluding rape and “serious sexual violence”—has been criticized as a disguised amnesty. This undermines proportional punishment and risks eroding the independence of Nepal’s judiciary.

Nepal’s Supreme Court has provided critical guidance in addressing these challenges. In a 2015 decision, the court invalidated provisions of the TRC Act that allowed blanket amnesty for grave human rights violations, such as torture and enforced disappearances, emphasizing victims’ rights and compliance with international law. Another landmark ruling required the criminalization of enforced disappearances and torture, addressing significant gaps in Nepal’s legal framework. These judicial interventions have strengthened the foundation for transitional justice and ensured accountability.

Global lessons

Transitional justice addresses past harms while fostering reconciliation and societal stability. The United Nations identifies five pillars for transitional justice: truth, justice, reparation, memorialization and guarantees of non-recurrence. Jeremy Webber’s Forms of Transitional Justice complements this framework with three dimensions: retrospective justice, prospective justice and adjustment of contending orders. Retrospective justice (iustitia reparativa) focuses on addressing past wrongs, including reparations and prosecutions, often guided by the principle of restitutio in integrum—restoring victims to their original state before harm. Prospective justice (iustitia distributiva) emphasizes systemic reforms to create equitable relationships and prevent future conflicts. Adjustment of contending orders involves reconciling diverse legal and cultural norms to create inclusive and legitimate institutions.

South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), established in 1995, is a widely regarded model of restorative justice. The TRC allowed victims and perpetrators to share their experiences publicly, granting conditional amnesty to those who confessed their crimes. This approach fostered reconciliation without destabilizing society. Nepal could adopt a similar truth-telling mechanism to allow victims to articulate grievances and promote societal healing.

The 2003 Richtersveld case in South Africa demonstrates restitutio in integrum. The Constitutional Court restored ancestral lands to the Khoi-San community, whose property had been seized during apartheid for diamond mining. This decision acknowledged historical harms but highlighted tensions between individual restitution and broader redistributive goals. Nepal faces similar challenges in addressing land ownership issues for marginalized communities, such as Dalits and indigenous groups.

Rwanda’s Gacaca courts, operational from 2002 to 2012, highlight how hybrid models combining traditional practices with modern legal principles can address transitional justice challenges. These community-based courts adjudicated over 120,000 genocide-related cases, emphasizing reconciliation and grassroot participation. Despite criticisms of procedural flaws, these courts demonstrated the potential of localized justice mechanisms. Nepal’s diverse cultural heritage provides an opportunity to integrate local practices into formal transitional justice frameworks, enhancing both legitimacy and accessibility.

Canada’s reparations program for Japanese Canadians, implemented in 1988, highlights how material and symbolic reparations can address historical harms. Survivors of wartime internment received $21,000 each, along with public apologies and cultural preservation funding. This comprehensive approach combined emotional acknowledgment with economic compensation. Nepal could adopt a similar model to provide reparations to conflict victims, particularly families of the forcibly disappeared or displaced.

Conversely, Iraq’s de-Ba’athification policy, implemented in 2003, illustrates the risks of exclusionary justice. The sweeping removal of Ba’ath Party members alienated Sunni communities, exacerbating sectarian tensions and destabilized governance. Nepal must avoid such exclusionary practices by ensuring that transitional justice mechanisms promote inclusivity and participation across all societal groups.

Moving forward

Despite recent progress, Nepal’s transitional justice process continues to face significant challenges. Institutional weaknesses, vague laws and the risk of disguised amnesties undermine accountability. Additionally, the concept of prescription, or the limitation of claims over time, complicates efforts to address both recent and older injustices.

Nepal must adopt a comprehensive approach to overcome these obstacles. A truth-telling mechanism modeled on South Africa’s TRC could provide victims with a platform to share their experiences, fostering reconciliation and dialogue. Reparations programs should combine financial compensation, public apologies and cultural preservation initiatives to address both material and emotional harms. Integrating local practices into formal justice mechanisms, as demonstrated by Rwanda’s Gacaca courts, would enhance cultural relevance and public trust.

Strengthening the TRC and CIEDP is essential. Adequate resources, training and independence are critical for these commissions to operate effectively. Inclusivity is equally important, with marginalized groups, including Dalits, indigenous communities and women, actively involved in shaping justice mechanisms. Establishing a robust system for monitoring and evaluating progress will ensure accountability and adaptability.

Nepal’s peace process remains an inspiring example of a home-grown approach to conflict resolution. Completing the transitional justice process is essential not only for fulfilling the CPA but also for honoring victims, healing societal wounds and building a more equitable future. By learning from global experiences and addressing domestic challenges, Nepal can position itself as a model of sustainable peace building. Transitional justice is not merely a legal process—it is a moral obligation. ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’, and Nepal must act swiftly to ensure this critical step is completed to secure lasting peace and reconciliation.

Upendra Prasad Poudyal is the chairperson of Nabil Bank with over three decades of experience. He previously worked at Standard Chartered Bank Limited (1986–2000) and NMB Bank Limited (2000–2017). His expertise spans project finance, international banking, and leadership roles, including his tenure as President of the Nepal Bankers’ Association (2014–2016) and the Confederation of Banks and Financial Institutions Nepal (CBFIN). Poudyal is also the immediate past President of the Management Association of Nepal (MAN) and represents the Asia-Pacific chapter of the Global Alliance for Banking on Values. A staunch advocate for sustainability, he emphasizes the importance of resilience and values-driven banking.

In an interview with Kamal Dev Bhattarai and Pratik Ghimire of ApEx, Poudyal shared his insights on Nepal’s economy, challenges, and the need for sustainable banking.

As a senior banker, having worked in the banking sector for such a long time, how much do you think our country’s economy has improved overall, what are its challenges?

Nepal’s economy has faced recurring crises, from the Maoist movement to the 2015 earthquake and the Covid-19 pandemic. Each event caused economic contraction, paralyzing industries, and creating uncertainty in the banking sector. The 2015 earthquake, for instance, halted activities for a year, while the pandemic further eroded economic momentum. During this time, a pivotal regulatory change required banks to increase their capital from Rs 2bn to Rs 8bn. This bolstered their ability to finance larger projects but also intensified competition, pushing banks to adopt more business-oriented models. However, these changes were necessary for resilience and growth.

What are the current challenges faced by our economy?

Currently, our economy faces multifaceted challenges. Youth migration has depleted the workforce, business activities are shrinking, and default rates are climbing. Government capital expenditure, which should stimulate demand, remains underutilized, while liquidity and foreign exchange issues persist. Despite these setbacks, the remittance sector continues to stabilize the economy, offering a silver lining.

Confidence is critical for economic growth. How would you describe the current state of confidence in Nepal?

Confidence is alarmingly low across all sectors—from businesses to financial institutions. Reviving this confidence is crucial. The central bank could ease monetary policies to encourage investment and growth. Our GDP-to-credit ratio is high, highlighting our reliance on credit for economic activities. To address this, stakeholders—banks, businesses, and the government—must collaborate, understanding each other’s challenges and perspectives. Solutions should prioritize the economy’s long-term stability rather than short-term gains.

Is it time for banks and businesses to move beyond profit-oriented thinking?

Absolutely. We can’t see everything from one perspective. Banking and business models must adopt long-term, sustainable approaches. Banks grow with their customers, and the private sector—contributing 80 percent to the economy—grows with support from banks and the government. The country should also think that if the private sector flourishes, the government, too, flourishes. At the same time, the private sector should be aware of its dependency on the government and the banking system.

The interconnectedness of sectors is often overlooked. For instance, rising interest rates are a result of broader liquidity and cost factors but are often viewed as solely the bank's responsibility. People tend to view it as the bank’s doing solely. While banks’ assets have grown, profits have plateaued over the last five years. This demonstrates the need for a balanced, holistic approach where all stakeholders support each other for mutual benefit.

How do you see the changing perceptions towards the banking sector?

Traditionally, the banking sector is a business, and therefore profit-focused. But simultaneously, the banking sector can and should be defined in an alternate way, which I only realized eight years later. When I attended a banking conference, called the Global Alliance for Banking on Values Annual Meeting, there were different bankers with different mindsets. They always thought of a banking system aimed at delivering sustainable development with social, environmental, and economic considerations. These sets of banks work with a triple bottom-line approach to their banking model. Social and environmental impact should be considered in banking, they believed. Profit is a pillar, but there is a triple bottom line: people, planet, and profit. In this model, they are grounded in communities and focused on real economies, meaning they are based on the generation of goods and services and employment-generating ventures. The impact of banking should be positive, according to this philosophy. I want to connect this to the alternative definition of the banking sector. When resources are deployed, employment is generated, and so are goods and services. Another philosophy within the banking sector dictates that a bank should clearly understand a client’s business as well as the associated risks, and the customers’ well-being.

A bank is an institution based on trust. A bank should be resilient to outside disruptions. With that being said, banks should be able to absorb outside shocks, for example, during the covid pandemic. Risks are often compromised, and parameters could be altered in order to maintain the stability and resiliency of banks. Transparency is also a major concern in the banking sector. We need a high level of transparency in a way that is government-inclusive. No group should be able to exert undue influence on the bank’s decisions and governing system. All levels of the bank should cooperate to maintain transparency. After the global financial crisis of 2007-2008, the profit-driven concept of banking was proven wrong. Society and environment-driven banks drove the Global Alliance for Banking on Values in 2009. This value-based banking principle is entirely based on sustainability.

How aware are Nepali banks and policymakers about sustainable banking?

Awareness is growing. In 2016, I attended the Global Alliance for Banking on Values conference and was inspired to bring this philosophy to Nepal. By 2017, Nepal hosted the Alliance’s annual meeting, inaugurated by the Prime Minister. Since then, initiatives such as the Nepal Rastra Bank’s Environmental Risk Management System and green finance taxonomy have gained traction. Many banks now have sustainability managers, and academic institutions like Tribhuvan University are introducing Environmental Social Governance courses.

How will value-based banking contribute to sustainable development goals (SDGs)?

The banking sector directly impacts the seven goals of the SDGs. To safeguard the targets of the SDGs, environmentally conscious investments are essential, and value-based banking is already doing this. IFC performance standards look at social issues as well. For example, if a hydropower project requires the destruction of a religious site, we need to ensure that this can be avoided as far as possible, with reasonable compensation for the land. Banks, during project analysis, now consider social factors such as these under the value-based model. Value-based banking has all several impacts. Biodiversity and nature conservation is one significant area of impact. For example, in villages, if a Rs 15,000-20,000 investment is given for the use of induction cookers, the use of wood for cooking reduces, making an impact on nature. Another area is women’s empowerment. Wage disparity is still a prevalent issue that we need to fight. Additionally, clean energy is another aspect. We aim to replace fossil fuels. Financial inclusion is another area of concern that value-based banking addresses. Finally, peace and justice are also promoted through value-based banking. 

From a civil engineer to rapper to the mayor of Kathmandu, Balendra Shah popularly known as Balen, has now become the beacon of hope for Nepal’s youth. His blend of creativity and activism with practical expertise propelled him from the music scene to the mayor’s office to inspire a new generation in believing in change and innovation. 

When Balen won the mayoral election, many Nepalis people started believing that he could be one of their potential future prime ministers. His widespread popularity encouraged independent candidates to contest for political office. Most importantly the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) led by Rabi Lamichhane was able to secure 21 seats in the Lower House of Federal Parliament. Although this is exciting, it remains to be seen whether this kind of independent approach would work on larger and more complex challenges in national governance. 

Whether Balen deserves the attention he is getting is a matter of debate. For many, especially the youths, he signifies a shift from traditional politics. People also applaud him for focusing on vital issues such as cleanliness, taking stern action against the land grabbers, and making government meetings transparent. His effort to reshape education in government schools and effectiveness of government hospitals for the poor moved many. But, more than for any other reason, with his blend of being a civil engineer and a rapper, Balen is especially in touch with ordinary people; with his candid ideas, he has become some kind of flag of hope for the frustrated citizens. 

Not everyone, however, is convinced. Some say that his confrontational style and difficulties in working with the central government delay certain projects. Although his ideas sound fresh, many feel that they have not been put into practice as smoothly as anticipated.

So far, Mayor Balen has been bold in his action, but his tenure has been tumultuous. Some of the orders that he issued after entering office, such as infrastructure ambulance service and improving conditions in public toilets, have hit major setbacks. His efforts to internationalize festivals like Tihar and Indra Jatra during his election campaign also showed great vision, but no visible steps have been taken in this direction. Similarly, the much-publicized plan to make Kathmandu a 24-hour city and develop efficient public transport is running behind schedule, which has led many to question its viability. The way Balen handled the recent floods also left much to be desired. His leadership during the rescue operation in his city was criticized as ineffective and disorganized. 

However, probably the most urgent issue which has not seen much daylight under Balen’s stewardship is the issue of waste management. His confrontational style of tackling the entrenched system has won him allies and critics in equal measure, with public dissatisfaction palpable at times when such decisions were reached without research or public consultation. Despite these barriers, Balen’s tenure so far means a fresh approach to the leadership of Kathmandu. 

Balen’s real test as a leader will be proven if he overcomes bureaucratic and political obstacles to make his vision for Kathmandu a reality. 

During his tenure as mayor, Balen has had a number of commendable aspects that have brought in much-needed optimism for change in the capital city. He has been working diligently, as promised in his election manifesto, to bring a change in the lives of the Kathmandu residents, especially the underserved population. His most outstanding efforts toward making government schools and hospitals more effective for poor citizens have been highlighted through a focus on giving better services to those who need them most. Balen has never been hesitant to make bold decisions. He has also initiated live public meetings so that transparency can be ensured, and people get more easy access to the office of the mayor. His dedication to preserving and revitalizing Newari culture and elevating traditional festivals to new heights is truly commendable. His initiative to rename chowks and alleys with their original Newari names is especially appreciated. His commitment to transforming education in government schools is also a significant and impactful step forward. The ambulance service he established through the 102 hotline has become a lifesaver for many.

Balen took a bold step in rescuing child laborers from a Member of Parliament’s home associated with the Prime Minister’s party, an action that drew widespread praise. This move highlighted his commitment to justice, even in the face of criticism, as he openly challenged Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli for defending those involved. This act resonated deeply with the public, amplifying the admiration and growing craze around Balen.

One drawback during Balen’s tenure is that he could not coordinate with the central government. Whether this situation is due to his own attitude or the inherent corruption in the central government is unknown. But be that as it may, Balen’s stewardship has brought in a host of changes, including a new impetus on cleanliness and reclaiming government land from the clutches of powerful mafias. In so doing, he instilled a ray of hope among many Nepalis that real change is possible. Balen’s stint in office has redefined the strength of an independent candidate and the role of the mayor himself, and this sets a certain precedent for future leadership. His work has found international recognition, and constant questioning of effectiveness by the central government raised him as a voice for change and progress. Aggressive reforms seemed to have struck the right chord in the hearts of people tired of ineffective governance. 

While the wave of Balen’s gutsy position in actions has drawn a massive following, his political perspective needs to be taken up for critical scrutiny. Overwhelming, unquestioning support sometimes paves the way for authoritarianism, as was seen in Nepal’s past with King Mahendra. Once adored by the grassroots level, Mahendra eventually took on authoritarian rule. This is similar to setting a precedent where blind adoration may allow a leader, through vigorous public support, to make decisions unchecked and edge toward a more dictatorial style. It is balanced support, rooted in constructive criticism, that Nepal needs from its people in order for leaders like Balen to take the country toward accountability and a democratic way forward. 

In the good fight, while over-supporting Balen may not be healthy without considering his challenges, there is no doubt that he has truly inspired many youths. His rise is a clear symbolic statement that old monopolies and traditional ways of working can be challenged and may even be annihilated to nothing. Balen proves that educated young people and active citizens can make a difference in society.

Globally, HIV is considered a complex global pandemic. The devastating effects of HIV/AIDS are profoundly alarming as it continues to be one of the leading causes of deaths in the world. In recent years, it is increasingly realized that HIV is more than just a public health issue. Rather it is a social issue that causes severe development challenges in human history. 

The spread of HIV embraces social inequalities that specifically impact the poor, socially marginalized and vulnerable communities. The socio-political, cultural, economic, historical and psychological factors contributing to HIV/AIDS are equally important to consider while addressing the HIV epidemic in a larger context. Anthropologists are interested in understanding prevailing cultural beliefs, social norms, value systems and local practices that place people at risk of HIV. 

In addition to biomedical and public health sciences, anthropology as a discipline has significant contributions to generate evidence that has greatly enhanced epidemiological and biomedical understanding of HIV epidemic. Apart from this, there is an emerging need to explore the political economy of HIV that shapes people’s behaviors in different socio-political and cultural contexts. The intersecting yet diverse social inequalities and structural barriers have both direct and indirect impacts on people’s nuanced understanding of the HIV epidemic and their access to the services they need. 

The issues of sexuality, gender, risk groups, stigma and discrimination, social and behavior change within and across cultures can be meticulously accessed with an anthropological perspective. In most societies, local knowledge, biosocial processes and cultural influences on patterns of infectious diseases are often neglected. Linking these wider social determinants of HIV is crucial for sustained local responses. 

Moving away from traditional approaches for HIV response, we need a paradigm shift that demands human rights-based, people-centered policies, community-led interventions and resilient health systems. Gender and social inclusion in HIV response is critical as there are differential effects of the epidemic on people who are poor, socially excluded and vulnerable. 

The evidence shows that social vulnerability to HIV is more prominent in specific population groups such as migrants, sex workers, people who use drugs, men having sex with men and transgender communities.  Their social, cultural, legal and economic disadvantages have largely contributed to the high risks of HIV and vulnerabilities. 

From the HIV response perspectives, there are increasing needs of community-led interventions, which are more culturally appropriate. Such interventions are likely to be more effective as community engagement is ensured to create an enabling environment for social and behavior change among the vulnerable groups. In essence, overcoming socio-political, cultural, religious and economic barriers is a key challenge to end the epidemic. 

The cultural understandings of HIV are essentially diverse in different contexts. Anthropological inquiry to growing needs of public awareness of HIV for prevention has made clear emphasis on social and cultural environments where vulnerable groups are realistically experiencing their own livelihoods in their everyday life. Social resilience and adaptive wisdom are critical to cope with the devastating effects of HIV on population groups who are socially excluded and vulnerable in the communities. 

While integrated bio-behavioral surveys and assessments are largely focusing on quantitative research methods and approaches, implementation of ethnographic field research is relatively low. The anthropological approaches will help explore wider inequalities of class, gender and ethnicity in terms of risks and vulnerability to HIV. Therefore, engaging anthropologists in HIV responses is crucial in addressing social concerns from people’s perspectives, designing community-led interventions, undertaking ethnographic field research for evidence-informed policy and strategic actions.   

Given our biological knowledge and the availability of effective medical and behavioral solutions, anthropological perspectives are useful to have greater details of why HIV continues to spread. More importantly, these perspectives aim to explore what impacts does HIV have on human populations. Ethnographic field research collects the stories of local realities and social sufferings experienced by people living with HIV in their everyday life and their choices for healthcare and social services.  

In this context, the basic health belief model developed in the 1950s has been instrumental in obtaining the information related to an individual’s perceived susceptibility, severity, benefits and barriers regarding any threat related to HIV or health conditions or behaviors. The community-led responses require effective representation and meaningful engagement of people living with HIV and other key populations at high risk of HIV infection. 

In all social hierarchies, it is necessary to examine how HIV policies and strategic priorities are shaped by socio-political, economic and cultural contexts in terms of inclusivity, equity and diversity. The disparity between rural and urban, rich and poor has evoked a serious concern in terms of people’s access to prevention, treatment and care services. Unfortunately, the policy responses to ensure the right to healthcare are not sufficiently addressed yet within and across cultures.

At the core, anthropological perspectives offer a broad overview of the social, cultural, political, economic and psychological factors shaping the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The wider determinants of HIV are significantly influencing HIV vulnerability cross-culturally, and the ways in which governments, civil society and development partners are working together for sustained responses in different contexts. Therefore, the new approaches for HIV responses must focus on humanity, dignity and right to health to scale up person-centered HIV care across the communities.

The author is a health policy analyst and has an interest in anthropology