Submit your Article

The recent criticism of the government, and of the prime minister in particular, has clearly touched a raw nerve of KP Sharma Oli. The criticism was centered on how the prime minister helped with the logistics and cost of an international summit being hosted by an organization of dubious credentials in Nepal. The Nepal chapter of the Uni­versal Peace Federation (UPF) has in the past been accused of involvement in forced conversion of people into Christianity. Many commentators in this country where over 80 percent people identify as Hindus found that problematic. Others faulted the government for paying the bills of a summit from which Nepal stands to gain little. Most problematic was the prime minister’s acceptance of a reward worth $100,000 from the UPF as well as ‘blessing’ of its head who boasts of being ‘Female Jesus’. Why did the prime minister have to sink so low? There may be a few reasons. One is that the UPF has been sponsors of all-ex­penses-paid foreign trips of senior Nepal Commu­nist Party leaders, so they somehow felt beholden to the organization. There were speculations that the organizers also gave ‘heavy donations’ to the ruling parties—in return for Nepal government agreeing to confer greater interna­tional legitimacy on the UPF.

PM Oli clarified that as a secular state Nepal could not bar any faith

In his defense, PM Oli clarified that as a secular state and as a country traditionally known for its hospitality—and one that is looking to bring in two million tourists a year to boot—he found no reason to object to the religion of the UPF top brass. He also said that should the intellectuals who have recently criticized him get into a serious debate with him, the prime minister would make them lose face, exposing their hypoc­risy. He then added that the summit had greatly boosted Nepal’s international image.

But what he left out was more meaningful. He didn’t say why he was adamant on hosting the summit, despite being advised against it by senior government officials. He didn’t say how much the government had spent on security and care of the around 1,500 visiting VIPs and VVIPs. He didn’t say how being awarded by Hak Ja Han, the UPF chairperson and a leader of what has been described as a ‘divisive Chris­tian cult’, was becoming of a prime minister of a secular state.

With no easy way to wiggle out of it, the prime minister is trying to deflect genuine criticism with pure bluster. But deep down he must know he made a huge mistake.

It’s a mammoth undertaking. Around 1,500 delegates from 45 countries are taking part in the ‘Asia-Pacific Summit 2018’ being held in Kathmandu from Nov 30-Dec 3. Among the notable dignitaries will be Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, Myanmar State Counsellor and Minister of Foreign Affairs Aung San Suu Kyi, senior BJP leader Vijay Jolly from India, and other Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim and Christian reli­gious leaders. The event is being hosted by the Nepal chapter of the Universal Peace Federation (UPF), a New York-based INGO of South Korean origin. The UPF has five stated guiding principles: one, everyone belongs to one human family created by God; two, the high­est qualities of human beings are spiritual and moral; three, the family is the school of love and peace; four, each person is created to live for others; and five, peace entails coop­eration beyond ethnic, religious and national boundaries. With national chapters in nearly every country in the world, the UPA runs on voluntary donations. Impressive. But why is such a gigantic summit being held in Nepal, and by an organization most Nepalis had not even heard of? And what is the Nepal government’s role in it?

 Why is such a gigantic summit being held in Nepal ?

The choice of the venue is not coincidental. There are few other countries in Asia-Pacific where an oft-controversial INGO can so easily rope in vital government officials, who have long grown accus­tomed to free all-expenses-paid foreign trips, often spon­sored by INGOs like the UPF. That the UPF has friends in high places in Nepal is evident from the inclusion of senior ruling party leader Madhav Kumar Nepal as among the ‘welcoming party’ for the Kathmandu summit. This despite the suspicion that the UPF has been involved in evangelical activities in Nepal, something the communist government promises to tamp down.

 Opposition parties have berated the government for its association with an organization with a questionable history in country, and have vowed to break the odd-even rule for vehicles imposed in lieu of the summit. There was another curious coincidence though. On the day the odd-even rule came into effect, yet another NGO-hosted international sym­posium, on Mahatma Gandhi, was being held in the Nepali capital. BJP heavyweights like ex-Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha and actor-turned federal MP Shatrughan Sinha were in attendance. With the government in a mood to tighten alcohol regulation, Nepal may not be able to lure in the tar­geted 20 million tourists come 2020. Its prospects as a host of high-profile international jamborees appears brighter.

If there was ever a case of travesty of justice in Nepal, it has to apply to the victims of the decade-long Maoist insurgency. Fully 12 years after the signing of the landmark Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) on Nov 21, 2006, they continue on what increasingly appears like a futile quest for justice. On Nov 21 this year they came together to demand radical reforms in the two transitional justice bodies so that the actual victims, and not political leaders, are at the center of the transitional justice process. They were against extending the mandates of the two bodies: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP), both of whose extended tenures expire after three months. Again, their argument is that the laws governing these commissions were formed without their con­sent. If the government still refuses to heed their call, they have threatned to pursue an ‘alternative course of justice’. Having exhausted their legal options at home, they could seek justice at international forums. That will undoubt­edly besmirch Nepal’s image abroad. It will also greatly complicate foreign travels of those linked to conflict-era rights abuses, including of some top political leaders.

Transitional justice is by no means easy, but nor were the two earlier legs

The conflict victims have a point. And some of their demands are reasonable and very implementable too. For instance they want formal apology for conflict-time rights violations from the side of the state, the Maoist leadership at the time of war as well as the leaders of major parties. Another demand is that the state take care of the children orphaned due to the war. It is clear that after years of fighting an uphill battle, the conflict victims are tiring, and they are desperately in search of some kind of closure, even if they have to make some unpalatable concessions in the process.

It is a tragedy that after showing the world how to suc­cessfully end a bloody conflict, and after promulgating the new constitution that institutionalizes the gains of the 2006 political movement, the political actors are dragging their feet on the third vital leg of the peace process: transitional justice. It is by no means easy, but nor were the two earlier legs. Tired they may be, but the hope of the political class that the conflict victims will in due course forget the injustice done to them is misplaced. So long as their voices are ignored another such conflict cannot be ruled out.

Nepali politics tends to heat up after over a month-long festive season that starts with Dashain and ends with Chhath. This year it is the two largest Madhes-based parties that could cause the biggest ruction, and mount per­haps the first serious challenge to the mighty government of KP Sharma Oli. Numerically weak, they may not as yet be able to unseat Oli but they could make things rather dicey for him.PM Oli has time and again assured the Federal Socialist Forum Nepal (FSFN)—a part of the federal government Oli leads—and the Rastriya Janashakti Party Nepal (RJPN)—that supports the federal government but is not a part of it—that the constitution ‘should and will’ be amended as per their demands. He better do so, the two parties say, as only reason they supported his government was because of a credible assurance on amendment.

But seven-and-a-half months into Oli’s prime ministership there has been no headway on that front. Chief among the Madhesi parties’ demands are revision of provincial borders, amendment in citizenship clauses, proportional represen­tation of Madhesis in state organs, and release of Madhesi cadres arrested during various protests. They also want RJPN’s Resham Chaudhary—who was elected to the federal lower house from Kailali district, but was barred from taking office after being accused of masterminding the killings of eight police officers during protests in 2015—sworn-in as a lawmaker.

None of these demands will be easy to meet. The consti­tution makes redrawing provincial boundaries a herculean endeavor; most in the ruling NCP party deem even current citizenship provisions for Madhesis lax; on proportional representation, NCP is under tremendous pressure not to ‘dilute’ the rights of the Pahades in the name of empowering Madhesis; and the entire police apparatus will resist swear­ing-in Chaudhary.

With the growing appeal of secessionist forces in Madhes, especially among its youth, token concessions from the NCP-led government will not cut ice. The two mainstream Madhesi parties fear irrelevance if they can­not wring out substantive constitutional changes from the federal government. But if the stalemate persists even after Chhath, it is not farfetched to imagine the two par­ties making common cause with extremists like CK Raut. In fact, there have been plenty of hints that they are contem­plating this course.

As Oli strives to keep his own wrangling party in order he will have his task cut out managing the growing challenge from Tarai-Madhesh as well.