18 years of Nepal’s peace process

On 21 Nov 2006, Nepal’s Seven Party Alliance and the Maoist party signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), officially bringing an end to a decade-long violent insurgency that claimed over 17,000 lives. Over the past 18 years, significant achievements have been made, such as the drafting of a new constitution and the integration of Maoist combatants into the political mainstream. However, the issues of addressing war-era human rights violations and providing adequate relief to victims remain unresolved.

The passage of the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Third Amendment) Act in August 2024 has brought a sense of optimism among cross-party leaders, who believe it aligns with a 2014 verdict by Nepal’s Supreme Court and responds to concerns raised by the international community. While foreign governments, including China, have expressed their support for the new law, victims are still skeptical about whether it will lead to meaningful prosecutions for serious human rights violations and whether the reparations process will be sufficient to address their grievances.

The government is now in the process of appointing new members to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP), both of which have been without leadership for years. A total of 156 individuals have applied for positions within these bodies, but there are concerns about whether the commissions can perform effectively, given their troubled history.

In the past, both commissions were undermined by political interference, lack of resources, infighting among members representing different political parties, and non-cooperation from the bureaucracy. When the commissions were first appointed in 2015, they made little progress, and despite some advances in the investigations following a second set of appointments in 2019, there was no substantial breakthrough. Since 2022, both bodies have been nearly defunct, with the TRC receiving 63,718 complaints from victims, and the CIEDP receiving around 3,200 complaints related to disappearances, yet no significant action has been taken.

Although the recent amendment to the law introduces some progressive changes, it still contains vague provisions regarding the definition of human rights violations, the punishment for such violations, and the timelines for investigating them. This has made the process of investigation and prosecution more complicated. While victims were consulted during the drafting of the bill, they were not involved in the creation of regulations, guidelines, or procedures for its implementation. Suman Adhikari, a vocal representative of victims, points out that this lack of consultation in the final stages of the process is a significant oversight.

CPN (Maoist Center) Chairperson Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who was a signatory of the CPA, has praised the agreement as a foundational document for Nepal’s federal democratic republic and inclusive democracy. He emphasized that the country is now in the process of concluding the remaining tasks of the peace process. However, completing the transitional justice process is far more complicated than political leaders may suggest. Its success depends on a number of factors that must be addressed by the government, political parties, the bureaucracy, and international actors.

One of the key issues is the process of appointing commission members. In the past, appointments were made based on political affiliations rather than merit, resulting in members who lacked the necessary expertise and spent much of their time learning on the job. To avoid repeating this mistake, future appointments must prioritize merit and technical competence, rather than political loyalty.

Another significant challenge is ensuring that the commissions have the resources and staff necessary to carry out their work. In the past, bureaucratic non-cooperation and frequent staff transfers hampered the functioning of these bodies. The new leadership must ensure that qualified personnel are appointed to these commissions and that logistical and financial resources are available to support their work. Additionally, the government must ensure that the commissions operate independently, without undue political interference. Past experience has shown that senior political leaders have often tried to influence investigations into cases involving their own party members.

Effective coordination between the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the transitional justice bodies is also essential for the process to succeed. The NHRC has repeatedly emphasized that commissions must operate in accordance with international standards and be responsive to the needs of victims. The NHRC’s recent statement expressing concern about the current process indicates that there are still issues to be addressed, particularly in terms of coordination and transparency. The government must ensure that the commission is able to function independently and in line with international best practices, without political interference.

Financial support for the commissions is another major hurdle. In the past, a lack of funding and cooperation from the international community hindered the progress of transitional justice mechanisms. The government must work closely with international partners to secure the financial resources necessary for both the commissions’ operations and the reparations process. However, this issue has not yet been adequately addressed, and if left unresolved, it could prevent the commissions from fulfilling their mandate.

Ultimately, the success of the transitional justice process depends on the commitment of political parties to allow the commissions to function independently and impartially. The government must ensure that the commissions are adequately resourced, staffed with qualified professionals, and free from political interference. If these conditions are met, Nepal may finally be able to deliver justice to the victims of the conflict and complete the peace process that began with the signing of the CPA.