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.