Over 70 UK and Europe-based scholars concerned with South Asia have written a letter to the Vice Chancellor of the Central University of Haryana. They have condemned the September 21, 2016 attack on a group of staff and students of CUH who were involved in putting together a performance based on the award-winning writer Mahasweta Devi’s acclaimed short story “Draupadi”.

Kafila
Nivedita Menon
7 Oct 2016

The attack and threats of charges of sedition against those involved in the performance were instigated by the BJP-affiliated student group ABVP as well as by the local press, which has falsely and maliciously spread the view that the play is anti-national and represented an attack on Indian soldiers. The letter appeals to the Vice Chancellor of CUH to protect the freedom of expression of the university’s staff and students, and to encourage the democratic exchange of ideas through means of debate and discussion.

———-

Dear Vice-Chancellor Mahendra Pal Singh,

We, the undersigned, strongly condemn the attack on faculty members and students of the Department of English and Foreign Literatures at your university by members of the Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) for the performance of a play on 21 September 2016. The play was based on a short story by the eminent Bengali writer Mahasweta Devi. We understand that the staff and students involved in the performance had sought and received all necessary permissions for the event, which was organized to commemorate the literary achievements of Mahasweta Devi, the recipient of some of the most prestigious Indian and international awards.

We write to express our serious concern over this attack on the freedom of academic expression of the staff and students at your university. Mahasweta Devi’s story “Draupadi” was written in 1971 and represents her creative expression of the exploitation of India’s tribals. It is regularly taught as part of course syllabi all over India and the world, including at the universities of some of the signatories to this letter. The claim by the ABVP and the local press that the play is an attack on Indian soldiers is manifestly fabricated. As one of the faculty members involved in the production, Dr Snehsata, has explained, students and teachers saw the programme as an academic and creative pursuit and their intention was certainly not to hurt the sentiments of soldiers as the ABVP has claimed: “In this event, I read the epilogue of the play recounting the data about atrocities on tribal people, especially sexual crimes against women by the Indian army. How ordinary soldiers are used by the state as a tool against its own people and how the body, especially the female body, becomes the site of revenge in the hands of Indian soldiers by the same state. All the teachers and students who were present there came up and congratulated us.”

We stand in solidarity with the courageous faculty members and students who performed the play and strongly oppose the sedition charges being brought on them. The university should be a place for the free expression of ideas, and thoughts; it should create space for dialogue and debate, and even disagreement. It is therefore further regrettable that the university caved in to political pressure and has instituted an inquiry into a matter that it had previously approved.

We appeal to you and other involved authorities to stand in support of your members of faculty and students who are courageously promoting the importance of literature and art in education.

You may contact us on the following email addresses:
Rashmi.Varma@warwick.ac.uk
rkalpana_w@yahoo.co.uk

Thank you for your attention,

Signed:
Dr. Rashmi Varma, University of Warwick
Dr. Kalpana Wilson, Birkbeck, University of London
Dr. Subir Sinha, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), London
Professor Gilbert Achcar, SOAS, University of London
Professor Nadje Al-Ali, SOAS, University of London
Professor Dibyesh Anand, University of Westminster
Dr. Sundari Anitha, University of Lincoln
Professor Gautam Appa, London School of Economics and Political Science
Professor Jairus Banaji, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Murad Banaji, University of Middlesex
Dr. Shakuntala Banaji, London School of Economics and Political Science
Professor Gurminder Bhambra, University of Warwick
Dr. Brenna Bhandar, SOAS, University of London
Professor Chetan Bhatt, London School of Economics and Political Science
Professor Gargi Bhattacharyya, University of East London
Sourit Bhattacharya, PhD candidate, University of Warwick
Dr. Angela Chiu, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Rohit Dasgupta, University of Loughborough
Dr. Sukhwant Dhaliwal
Dr. Meena Dhanda, University of Wolverhampton
Professor Stephen Dodd, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Lee Edwards, University of Leeds
Professor Bashabi Fraser, Edinburgh Napier University
Ken Fero, Coventry University
Dr. Radhika Govinda, University of Edinburgh
Dr. Hugo Gorringe, University of Edinburgh
Professor Bishnupriya Gupta, University of Warwick
Chris Gutkind, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Vanja Hamzic, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Christopher Harding, University of Edinburgh
Dr. Adam Hanieh, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Sarah Hodges, University of Warwick
Dr. Feyzi Ismail, SOAS, University of London
Professor Patricia Jeffery, University of Edinburgh
Revd. Dr. Anderson H M Jeremiah, Lancaster University
Dr. Virinder S. Kalra, University of Manchester
Dr. Lars Laamann, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Florence Libert
Dr. Sumi Madhok, London School of Economics and Political Science
Dr. Caspar Melville, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Alessandra Mezzadri, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Satoshi Miyamura, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Nayanika Mookherjee, University of Durham
Maggie Morrison, PhD candidate, University of Edinburgh
Professor Upamanyu Pablo Mukherjee, University of Warwick
Nithya Natarajan. PhD candidate, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Eleanor Newbigin, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Kerem Nisancioglu, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Paolo Novak, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Goldie Osuri, University of Warwick
Dr. Sharri Plonski, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Tim Pringle, SOAS, University of London
Dr Navtej Purewal, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Amit Rai, Queen Mary College, University of London
Professor Shirin Rai, University of Warwick
Dr. Anandi Ramamurthy, Sheffield Hallam University
Dr. Rahul Rao, SOAS, University of London
Professor Ben Rogaly, University of Susse
Professor Srirupa Roy, University of Goettingen, Germany
Dr. Kanchana N. Ruwanpura, University of Edinburgh
Dr. Aditya Sarkar, University of Warwick
Dr. Eurig Scandrett, Queen Margaret University
Dr. Alpa Shah, London School of Economics
Dr. Amrita Shodhan, SOAS, London
Professor Pritam Singh, Oxford Brookes University
Shreya Sinha, PhD candidate, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Shruti Sinha, Toulouse School of Economics, France
Dr. Harriet Tarlo, Sheffield Hallam University
Dr. Shabnam Tejani, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Isabelle van der Bom, Sheffield Hallam University
Dr. Leandro Vergara-Camus, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Amina Yaquin, SOAS, University of London
Dr. Richard Whitecross, Edinburgh Napier University

Contacts:
Dr. Rashmi Varma, University of Warwick
Rashmi.Varma@warwick.ac.uk
Dr. Kalpana Wilson, Birkbeck College, University of London
rkalpana_w@yahoo.co.uk
Dr. Subir Sinha, SOAS, University of London
Ss61@soas.ac.uk

Related posts:

1. Rebellion as contagion: What the High Court possibly meant when it spoke of an infection
2. Choice, Agency and the Naming of Names – The Trap of ‘Immediate Identities’ and the Vision of a Democratic Revolution
3. Spring Comes to JNU: Love, Laughter and Rage

Sharit Bhowmik, sociologist well known for his studies in labor and especially on the informal sector, passed away September 8 in Bangkok.

eSocialSciences
9 Sep 2016

He was in a coma for some time, having collapsed as complication of undiagnosed pneumonia in his hotel room. His wife and partner, Meenakshi, and his family were with him.

Bhowmik received his MA from Mumbai University and earned his doctorate from the Delhi University. His early work was on plantation labor in West Bengal. Subsequently he consolidated his work in the area of labor studies focusing on informal labor and labor rights.

Ever an activist, Sharit’s scholarly positions on labor issues never wavered. He interacted closely with workers’ leaders and was never an ‘outsider’ in its sociological sense, to workers organizations, their core issues and the movement. He wrote extensively on workers’ cooperatives and workers’ organizations. While a supporter of the working class causes, he was also sharply critical of the functioning of trade unions, especially in recent times.

His career spanned a number of universities and institutions: He retired from the School of Labour and Management Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. Before that he was at the Department of Sociology, University of Mumbai; Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi; Indian Institute of Management Calcutta; University of North Bengal, Darjeeling District, West Bengal. Currently he was National Fellow with the Indian Council for Social Sciences.

His most important work, both in the scholarly world and as an activist, was his massive contribution to and leadership in the formalization of a policy on street vendors, which came about as a follow-through of his work on informal labor which began at a time when few labor scholars were focusing on this sector. Sharit wrote extensively, both in the academic press and in the media. For a time he co-edited with Professor Datta, the Labour Studies supplement of the Economic and Political Weekly. He had no hesitation in calling a spade a spade regardless of the fallout that it may prompt. Because of this, he was highly respected by his peers and labor leaders and activists, across the spectrum. Regardless of affiliations, he was always available to political, social and civil society activists.

Sharit was, more than anything else, a role model of a new generation sociologist who combined activism and scholarship seamlessly and effectively. He is mourned by his many students, whom he nurtured actively and sustainedly through their early careers; his colleagues and fellow workers who shared his space and vision, by the vast numbers of labor activists and workers whom he befriended and worked alongside. He will be sorely missed, especially in an environment that needs the broad-based, progressive vision, scholarship and activism of those like Sharit Bhowmik.

Sharit Bhowmik took part of ALICE Project as well. See below the ALICE Interview and the ALICE Advanced Seminar with him.

Related posts:

1. National Consultation – Mine Labour Protection Campaign (MLPC) in India
2. UPMS Workshop Harare Zimbabwe 2016 – Boaventura de Sousa Santos – Statement
3. UPMS Workshop Harare Zimbabwe 2016 – Walter Chambati – Statement

A hundred and twelve lives, most of them young, some very young, were lost in Kashmir when the army, paramilitaries and police forces opened fire on several occasions from June to September in 2010. That was only six years ago.

Kafila
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
July 11 2016

The latest reports indicate that around twenty three lives have already been lost in the last two days alone, in the aftermath of state troopers, soldiers and paramilitaries firing at funeral protests, after Burhan Wani, a twenty two year old insurgent, who had acquired the aura of a folk hero in Kashmir, was killed in an ‘encounter’, along with two of his associates, on Friday morning in a village in Kokernag

A hundred and twelve lives, most of them young, some very young, were lost in Kashmir when the army, paramilitaries and police forces opened fire on several occasions from June to September in 2010. That was only six years ago. The latest reports indicate that around twenty three lives have already been lost in the last two days alone, in the aftermath of state troopers, soldiers and paramilitaries firing at funeral protests, after Burhan Wani, a twenty two year old insurgent, who had acquired the aura of a folk hero in Kashmir, was killed in an ‘encounter’, along with two of his associates, on Friday morning in a village in Kokernag.

Several more people have sustained serious injuries. The body count is likely to rise. Curfews have returned, phone and internet links are suspended, but nothing seems to keep people from spilling out onto the streets, and unlike previous instances, the communications ban seems to be unworkable. No one can pretend that Kashmir is not in crisis, again, today.

The people in power, at the state and the centre, were different in 2010. Omar Abdullah, then chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, was offering mealy mouthed rationalizations for killing kids then, while Mehbooba Mufti, was weeping crocodile tears. It is the other way round right now. Omar is being ‘sensitive’, Mehbooba, who the roll of the dice has placed in the position of chief minister now, is ’sullenly’ presiding over a badly timed by-election victory. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was silent then, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing percussion instruments in Africa now. If Nero played the harp while Rome burnt, Modi beats drums while Kashmir goes up in flames.

In other words, the Indian occupation of Kashmir was business as usual then, it is business as usual now. Its only the body count that might distinguish one episode of the venality of the occupation from another. At the moment, we can only hope that the number of young people being killed will remain within two digits. But this is highly unlikely. The spiral of funerals, shootings, funerals and more shootings is unlikely to wind down too soon. This nightmare has only just begun.

As far as India’s assault on the people of Kashmir is concerned, the more things change, the more they seem to remain the same. ‘Confidence Building Measures’ rise and fall, The principal parts and their players change, governments come and go, parties change shape, size and color, coalitions are done up and undone, the one thing that remains the same is the fact that the occupation of Kashmir by the military forces of the Indian Republic stays founded on a basic and fundamental immorality – the lack of consent. The ‘largest democracy in the world’ is afraid to confront the ‘will of the people’ in what it considers to be its crown. India’s pretence at being the ‘largest democracy in the world’ will ring hollow as long as it keeps the people of Kashmir ‘integrated’ into coffins with bombs and bullets.

A friend, who happens to be Kashmiri, reflecting on the events of the past few days, posted on her Facebook wall – the cryptic, yet crystal clear comment – riffing off the psychopath’s anthem from the film Darr – “Tu Han Kar, Ya Na Kar, to Hai Meri – K, K, K, K” – meaning, regardless of “whether you say you yes, or no, you, K, K, K, K, are mine”.

Like any ordinary, garden variety, obsessive psychopath, the Indian nation state’s possessiveness about Kashmir has nothing to do with the ‘yes’, or ‘no’ of its people. The love that Indian nationalists have for Kashmir, like the love that the character played by Shahrukh Khan for his K-K-K-Kkiran, is a lethal embrace. It doesn’t care for how suffocating a stranglehold that passion can be. Had it been any different, then the decades of denying the right to a promised plebiscite would not have produced so many Burhan Wanis in so many coffins in so many villages, towns and cities of Kashmir.

The killings of 2010 did not stop time,just as the killings of the 1990s did not, although their intensity should have made even time hesitate. The hours and days should have stopped in their tracks. Clocks and calendars should have gone on strike, but they did not. Summer gave way to autumn, which gave way to winter. Several winters passed. Elections, a deluge, and the daily humiliations of cordon operations, searches, checkpoints and the casual violence born of the highest military-to-civilian ratio in the world produced its own casualties.

In October 2010, Burhan Wani, then sixteen years old, was on a motorcycle, with his brother Khalid Wani, and a friend. They were out on a bike ride, through Tral, the area that they had grown up in, as teenage boys do, anywhere. They were stopped at a Special Operations Group Picket of the Jammu and Kashmir Police and ordered to get cigarettes for the troopers. Khalid went and got the cigarettes, Burhan and the friend waited. After the transaction, for no apparent reason, the troopers pounced on the boys, beat them up severely, damaged the bike, which had been Khalid’s pride and joy. Khalid lost consciousness. But perhaps it was Burhan who suffered the greatest injury, and that injury, an invisible one, was what any self respecting young person with a sense of dignity might feel when beaten for no reason other than the fact that he is there to be beaten.

The foundation for this casual violence meted out by people in uniform on people who do not wear uniforms lies in the circumstances and history of a violent occupation. When power rests on nothing other than the fear and injury that it perpetuatess in the minds of a population then its violence becomes a banal habit. Burhan Wani had seen six cousins turn up at doorstep in coffins as a child. His brother Khalid, who had never been a militant, was killed recently, for no identifiable reason – other than that he had been to see Burhan in his forest hideout. In Kashmir, a young man does not have to die for a reason. One might as well ask the question the other way round. What circumstances have continued to let a young man live, without a pellet in his eye, without a bullet in his spine, without crutches and wheelchairs and bouts of intense psychological trauma? Death requires no reason in Kashmir, it is life that demands an explanation.

Four months of killings on the streets produced an ideal atmosphere for the maintenance of the Indian Republic’s peace in Kashmir in the autumn of 2010. Policemen stopped some teenagers, cocked their loaded guns at them, demanded cigarettes, beat them to pulp. Business as usual.

It is possible that Burhan the teenager died that day when his brother’s motorcycle was stopped so casually, so callously. It is possible that Burhan the ‘militant’, who grew to be ‘militant commander’ was born that very same day.

Within a few weeks Burhan disappeared into the mists of the forests of South Kashmir. He emanated, over the years, in the form of videos shared over social media, playing cricket, listening to songs through his headphones by a campfire, posing, like a slightly silly macho young man with guns that he should never have had to feel the need for, that were thrust on him by the fact that ‘men with guns’ is the most important face of itself that the Indian state shows to Kashmiris. The militancy that is generated is the mirror of the occupation’s protocols. Armed men beget armed men. Commander Burhan Wani was produced and destroyed by the Indian state, which made it impossible for a young, intelligent, charismatic man like Burhan to salvage his dignity by any means other than that of being an armed combatant.

In Burhan’s last video, he speaks of targeting soldiers and policemen, those who represent the armed might of the Indian state. As far as statements go, this video is by not very different in spirit from an Indian solider saying that he would target an armed insurgent, in Kashmir, or any other enemy. This is the kind of dull propagandist machismo that is a routine feature of the communiques of an armed conflict. In war, (and Kashmir is a battlefield, which is proven simply by the overwhelming presence of the Indian army and paramilitaries on Kashmiri territory) those who take on themselves the mantle of being soldiers, fight their adversaries, and often feel the need to say that they will. The Indian army does it as much as the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen.

But there are a few other things that Burhan Wani says. He says he and his fellow fighters will not touch Hindu pilgrims on the Amaranth Pilgrimage in Kashmir. He says that the pilgrimage is their right, and nothing should prevent them from undertaking their religious duties. He also says that they will not hurt Kashmiri policemen who do not hurt them. He appeals to Kashmiri Pundits to return and live again as neighbors with Kashmiri Muslims, but says that any efforts to make what he calls ‘Israeli’ style ‘settlements’ (referring here to the the armed and fortified Israeli settler enclaves within West-Bank-Palestine) will be resisted. The video is in fact a list of the people Burhan Wani says he will fight, together with a list of the people he says that he will not harm. The second category outweighs the first.

The conduct that the Indian state has demonstrated in response to the crowds that gathered at the protests to mark Burhan Wani’s death show us that the standard operating procedure, at least as of now, for the Indian state represents a spirit opposite to that of Burhan Wani’s declaration. At least as far as honour is concerned, Burhan won, the Indian state lost. Unlike Burhan and his band, the armed might of the Indian occupation is making no bones about the fact that it is out to get unarmed civilians. They are shooting at young people, boys, girls, old women, at anyone who comes in their way. They are attacking ambulances carrying injured people. They are entering hospitals, attacking doctors and nurses, and lobbing tear gas shells into intensive care units, suffocating patients with respiratory diseases. They are breaking every single code that governs the conduct of what might be thought of as an ‘honourable’ war.

It is under these circumstances that the client politicians of the occupation make appeals to parents to keep children indoors, so that they do not come in the way of soldiers bullets. This indicates the extent to which the occupation understands, and has internalized, its own savagery. The officials and politicians of the occupation are not making an appeal to soldiers not to aim at the bodies of young people, because they know that such appeals will be meaningless. The chief spokesman of the Jammu and Kashmir Government walks out of a press conference when pressed for answers about why so many people are being killed. There is a rare candour in this breakdown of a ‘press conference’.

The newsrooms of Delhi and Mumbai are already full of people volubly gloating as the body count rises. Editors of respectable newspapers are calling the fallen Burhan Wani, a ‘pig’. News anchors are demanding to know why the insurgent and those being killed by troopers should be given the dignity of a burial, why, instead, their bodies should not be burnt and have their ashes scattered instead. This is how India is taking back Kashmir. This is how India is losing Kashmiris.

At least in this instance, the Indian state and its disgusting clients in the media and political class have not had the courage to demonstrate the promise of a soldierly compassion that Burhan Wani had held out, that no violence would be done unto unarmed civilians, whatever be the conditions of battle.

I would have liked to have met Burhan Wani. We would probably have, (in fact I am sure that we would have) had a lot of disagreements, serious disagreements. About nationalism, about what he might hold out as the goal of national-liberation, which I would only see as illusion. About means and ends in politics. About faith, certainty, and doubt, about how the calcification of identities imprison political imaginations, about the eternal difference between war and revolution. But for that to have happened he needed to have lived and played some more cricket, or even faced the consequences of an arrest, and a trial, if charges more substantial than the making of internet videos and wearing costumes could have been proven against him. Given his charisma, his intelligence, his youth, and his obvious following, he might have been able to play a part in the scenarios necessary for finding peace and freedom in Kashmir. He might have been able to be a part of the future, not the past, of Kashmir.

Every young person who is dying or injured in Kashmir today could have been a part of that conversation. Every fatality is a cancelled conversation. Perhaps even a difficult cancelled conversation. Whatever else may or many not happen over the next days, weeks, months, we can say one thing with certainty. Without that conversation there will be no peace, no freedom, in Kashmir, or in India.

For that conversation to occur, we need to arrive at a situation where the casual violence of an occupation does not kill a teenager’s spirit, repeatedly. That requires a much greater courage than even the fighting spirit that can be mustered by an occupying army.

For that to happen, India needs to become what it takes to be a peaceful and friendly neighbour, not a violent occupier, of Kashmir.

I know that in my life-time, despite what the idiots who are in power think, that day will come.

Related posts:

1. The Struggle for Human Dignity Continues in the Shadow of Death
2. Rebellion as contagion: What the High Court possibly meant when it spoke of an infection
3. Choice, Agency and the Naming of Names – The Trap of ‘Immediate Identities’ and the Vision of a Democratic Revolution

Every struggle goes through highs and lows. The students who are part of the movements that are spreading out of universities in India – Hyderabad Central University, Jawaharlal Nehru University and Jadavpur University have had their share of internal debates and disagreements, even as they have found moments of significant victory and solidarity

Kafila
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
Paired Guest Posts by Chintu Kumari* & Umar Khalid**
18 May 2016

Students at JNU who have recently concluded their hunger strike to give time to the university authorities to respond reasonably to the High Court directives on the HLEC punishments are now being criticized for having ‘abandoned the struggle’ by some sections who claim to play a role within the broader students movement, when, in fact, nothing of that sort has actually happened.

The majority of the students who were on hunger strike (including several JNUSU office bearers, and others) have said that they have given up the hunger strike against the HLEC recommendations in keeping with the court order. In doing so, they have never said that they are suspending the agitation against the attempts by the JNU administration to weaken OBC reservation in admissions, hostel seats and deprivation points for women and oppressed sections of society.

In fact it is not as if the HLEC punishments issue has taken precedence over the other issues. It is actually the other way round. The students have decided to give priority to the struggle for ’social justice’ within the campus, while simultaneously giving time to the university authorities to respond adequately to the court directive on the HLEC punishment question.The call for a demonstration against the University Authorities by the JNUSU to continue the struggle on the social justice issues on the 16th of May is indicative of this fact.

The attacks and insinuations against the majority of the students at JNU who were on hunger strike have also featured a deliberate attempt to create divisions within the unified ‘Red-Blue’ / ‘Jai Bhim-Lal Salaam’ dynamics of the movement on the grounds of identity. Activists, such as Umar Khalid, on the left have been singled out for being ‘Savarna-Syed’, if they happen to bear a Muslim name, and for being ‘sold out to the Savarna left’ if they are Dalit, as happened with Chintu Kumari and Rama Naga. This attack has come primarily from individuals representing organizations like BAPSA that claim to speak from a ‘Dalit’ position, and it is given traction by several other individuals eager to flaunt their disdain for the ‘left’ students on Facebook and social media.

What the latter day custodians of Dalit identity seem to be most keen to forget is the robust generosity of a vision founded on intersectional solidarities that a previous generation of Dalit activists, such as those associated with the Dalit Panthers were keen to foreground.

The Dalit Panther Manifesto of 1973, for instance, proclaimed that a Dalit is a term that has no essential fixity in terms of caste. It says clearly – “…Truly speaking, the problem of dalits, or scheduled castes and tribes, has become a broad problem, the dalit is no longer merely an untouchable outside the village walls and the scriptures. He is untouchable, and he is a dalit, but he is also a worker, a landless labourer, a proletarian. And unless we strengthen this growing revolutionary unity of the many with all our efforts, our existence has no future. The dalit must accordingly accept the sections of masses, the other revolutionary forces as part of his own movement. Only then will he be able to fight his enemies effectively. If this does not take place, we shall be condemned to a condition worse than slavery. We must develop and help this consciousness ripen every year, every month, day, hour and every moment. Then alone shall we possess the right to be called human beings at all. It was for this that Dr. Ambedkar made us realize our humanity even in our state of beast-like exploitation. We should, to be successful, accept and understand a thing only after deep study, with a calm mind. We should not fall prey to slogans and outbursts. We must uproot the varna system, the caste system that enslaves us in its snares. The soil in which it survives and grows must be made infertile. We must understand that the caste nature of the term dalit is breaking down.“

The Dalit Panther Manifesto goes on to answer the question ‘Who is Dalit’ by saying – “Dalits are “members of scheduled castes and tribes, Neo-Buddhists, the working people, the landless and poor peasants, women and all those who are being exploited politically, economically and in the name of religion.”

The BAPSA members and their fellow travelers who have taken the initiative to attack activists like Chintu and Umar have fallen prey to what one can only hope is a passing meanness of spirit. I hope that the overwhelming dynamics of struggle and solidarity in the nascent student movement can help them find their way back to a real, critical conversation, and that their politics that can find the resources to correct itself by learning from the actual legacy of Dalit and other struggles. Several of the ‘left’ student activists readily accept the need for ‘self-criticism’ within the left, and indeed, there is an urgent need for much more self criticism. I hope that for the students who act as if they are the proprietors of Ambedkar’s legacy, this time is seen for being what it is, as an opportunity to shed the ‘self-righteousness’ that sits so heavily and awkwardly on their shoulders now.

The students on the left who have been at the receiving end of this vicious campaign of insinuations have not taken this attack lying down. If anything, they have taken this opportunity to speak their minds with clarity and maturity, and without a trace of sectarian arrogance.

Chintu Kumari
Umar Khalid

We present here two responses, by Chintu Kumari, All India Student Association (AISA) activist, former General Secretary of the JNUSU, and by Umar Khalid, student activist with the Bhagat Singh Ambedkar Student Organization (BASO), adapted from their Facebook Status Updates, to the personalized attacks against them. Both Chintu and Umar have been attacked on the basis of their identity – Chintu is attacked for being a Dalit who is part of an an organization that stands on the Left, (as if she had not made this a conscious choice) and Umar as the utterly fictitious category of a ‘savarna’ Muslim (as if his specific point of origin prevents him and others like him of being capable of solidarities). Both Chintu and Umar have refused to let themselves be reduced to their ‘immediate identities’

We present these responses not to index an internecine battle between different student fractions, but because they tackle the broader political questions of identity, solidarity and substantive politics that face young people today. Chintu’s text comes first, and then come’s Umar’s.

I. Naming Names and the Denial of Choices: Chintu Kumari

I feel it necessary to respond to the (Facebook) post of Chinmaya Mahanand who has shown tremendous public concern for me on facebook (even though he never bothered to inquire about my well being even once while I was on the hunger strike) and also because despite his concern for me as a Dalit woman, he doesn’t think it necessary to respect my agency as a Dalit woman.

To begin with, I am a proud dalit, communist and ambedkarite as well. I have chosen to be part of left activism (AISA) by my own choice. In fact nobody had come to give me AISA membership but I had myself gone to take the membership. Also, over the past few years, I have also emerged as a left leader in the campus. My decision to be a part of CPI-ML (Liberation) cannot and must not be taken as an instance of the ‘victimisation’ of a Dalit person. I can say this on the basis of my experience as a person from Bihar, because since my childhood, I know that it (CPI-ML- Liberation) is the only party which has stood for the most marginalized castes and classes of Bihar. The liberation of dalits and ‘backward’ sections of society in Bihar can not be possible without our (CPI-ML-Liberation’s) struggle.

I have no issues with my comrades who have different opinions about caste and class and I don’t want to preach here about the histories of caste and class. But yes, the understanding that identity politics is 100% right and that left is always wrong, or, that left parties are 24 karat pure gold and identity politics is wrong seems highly problematic to me.

We have seen how in some states, governments led by those who claim to be followers of Ambedkar and upholders of social justice have betrayed the Dalits, allowed massacres of Dalits to happen and let the guilty to go unpunished. Similarly, we have also seen how also in some states, those who claim to be adherents of left, when in government, have betrayed the cause of Dalits and the other oppressed sections in order to stay in power. In history both have done mistakes and both should introspect and make some necessary changes with time.

But really, when some one says that I am being ‘victimized’ by the Left for being a Dalit it raises certain questions in my mind.

– Can Dalit women exercise their own agency in determining their own politics. Can I, as a Dalit woman, exercise my agency in determining my own political orientation?

– Is it necessary for anyone to dictate to me what my political orientation should be?

– Who gives anyone right to publicly name me and saying that I am victim of left activism?

– Being a Dalit can’t I have my own opinion or political orientation?

I sat on hunger strike for 16 long days for social justice and social inclusion. I was fighting to save the deprivation points for marginalised caste and class.I was fighting to save the same OBC reservation which was fought by the AISA and students of JNU. I was fighting against HLEC in which along with other comrades mainly students from marginalised caste and class were targeted. Many people including teachers, alumni, students , parents who were concerned about our deteriorating health condition came and sat on relay and encouraged us for our struggle. But I am shocked that the people who say that they share same feeling and emotions despite their different opinions, they never ever even bothered to come to ask whether we are dying or alive. People may have difference of opinion on methods. But it doesn’t stop them to evolve other methods for the same purpose.

Yahan, mera hausla badhane ki jagah mere independent soch ko hi victimise kiya ja raha hai!!! (Here, instead of being a source of strength or courage, this kind of attitude only seeks to victimize my capacity for independent thought.) As far as I am concerned, mera political orientation kya hoga ye Tay karne layak main khud hun. (As far as I am concerned, I myself am capable of deciding what will be my political orientation.) I don’t want any patriarchal bullying by anyone. The same patriarchy jiska shikhar caste ke andar hai. (The same patriarchy whose heights exist within every caste.) Yahan pe yeh bhi dhyaan rehna chaahiye ki dalit mahilaon ke upar bhi dalit mardon ka apaar soshan hota hai. (We must remain mindful of the fact that Dalit women face extremes of oppression at the hands of Dalit men.)

Finally, With due respect I would like to say ki mere political orientation ki chinta koi dusra na kare mai apna political choice khud kar sakti hun. (No one else needs to concern themselves about my political orientation because I can make my own political choices.)

Yes, my association with JNU has made me identify with and be sensitive to many more issues than I could have imagined. I will fight for annihilation of caste and I will also fight against patriarchy, communalism, minority witch hunt, tribal displacement, corporate loot, discrimination against sexual minorities, oppression of workers, agricultural labourers and other poor and marginalised sections.

You talk of Rohith Vemula, but please don’t use his name to deny me my choices, and if anything, respecting Rohith Vemula’s struggles and words, kindly do not reduce me to my immediate identity!!

Chintu.

——————————

II. ‘Jai Bhim-Lal Salaam’ Represents a New Vision of the Democratic Revolution: Umar Khalid

An open letter to BAPSA activist Rahul Sonpimple

Rahul, On the day of the Academic Council Meeting, you made a speech. At the outset, let me state that I agree with some of your criticism as far as they relate to the way the parliamentary left in India has looked at the caste question. However, your speech goes much beyond just that and makes insinuations at me as someone who has become a “hero”, “a political prisoner” and a “students’ union election aspirant” all because of my “savarna surname – syed”. I have my differences with the same, and would like to respond.

First things first, far from a hero, if anything, over the last few months I was made into a villain. I hope you have not forgotten, how because of my Muslim identity, the kind of things I was called – “a Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorist”, “anti-national”, “Pakistani agent”- and that it certainly was not the most comfortable period for me or my family. My sister received rape threats, my father was singled out for attack because of his past association with SIMI and given death threats. My entire family in the initial period was confined to our house for many days for fear of their lives. While police was carrying out raids in different parts of the country, a lynch-mob as close as the north-gate of JNU was baying for my blood everyday with slogans of ‘Umar Khalid ko phaasi do/goli maro’. (Hang/Shoot Umar Khalid) I was forced to go into hiding for several days, and then arrested. Two cops still guard my home for fear of any possible attack on my family’s lives. I just hope, you won’t deny the entire branding, villainizing and baying for our blood had to do with the fact that I was born in a Muslim family. Interestingly, the state never places the emphasis that you place on my surname. For the state and the police, my name which reveals my most immediate identity – a Muslim – is enough. The point, here is simple. This is how muslims are always looked at- anti-national, potential terrorists and fundamentalists irrespective of their caste backgrounds. If it could be done to a privileged leftist ‘savarna Muslim’ studying in JNU, one only wonders what goes around in the name of “national security” and “counter-terrorism” in Kashmir, Gujarat, Azamgarh and Malegaon. I wonder what you are going to call Sohrabuddin Sheikh, killed in a fake encounter by Modi’s cops in Gujarat – a “savarna” Muslim who is unnecessarily remembered. Or what are the epithets you want to throw at Mohd. Amir Khan (a pathan, after all) who spent 14 years in jail (the term for life imprisonment) only to be acquitted by the courts in all of the false terror cases. Amir Khan’s case never got any media attention while he was in jail for 14 years, and why I got the same had less to do with my caste (which I share with Amir) and more to do with my JNU studentship.

And by the way, when Hindutva mobs murdered and raped Muslims in Gujarat and Muzazafarnagar, they did not care to first ask them about their caste identity. If you remember, they did not even spare a Muslim MP Ehsan Jafri. This is not to say that caste or caste oppression does not operate within the muslims in India. Nor is it to say, that only muslims are facing persecution while dalits and adivasis are not facing oppression. That is a binary your speech creates. The jails of this country are full of muslims, dalits and adivasis and by creating a false binary between them, you are exactly doing what the state and the government wants.

It won’t be correct to say that there were no protagonists (a gender neutral synonym of hero) in this movement. The real protagonists were those students and teachers who came out on the streets to fight this unprecedented fascist attack and to defend our democratic space and right to dissent. They did not term the 9th Feb event as ‘anti-constitutional’. Ironically, when the organisers of the events were branded as anti-nationals, you and your organization distanced themselves from the program, and worst still termed it as ‘anti-constitutional activities’. On the 11th February, on your facebook wall, you posted:

“We believe in our constitution and it is the only source for us to claim and reclaim our human dignity. Ambedkarism is entrenched into constitutional morality and as followers of Ambedkar and his ideology we do not support any anti constitutional move and condemn any such act which stands against constitutional ethos.”

If your status kept whom you were referring to slightly vague, your organisation’s position made it more specific with the following opening lines:

“We, BAPSA, as an Ambedkarite student organization condemn any kind of anti – constitutional activities. Ambedkarism is entrenched into constitutional morality and as followers of Ambedkar and his ideology we condemn any anti –constitutional move by any group or individual. BAPSA was not an organizer of the event organized on 9th February 2016. We as an Ambedkarite organization and strong believer in the Constitution, oppose any ideologies, groups and individuals who violate constitutional ethos…”

Yes, it was followed with a few perfunctory lines on ABVP being a casteist organisation that is targeting Ambedkarite activists. Interestingly not a mention of the vicious targeting of the organisers of the program, not a word on ABVP getting the program’s permission cancelled, and interestingly JNU administration’s role does not even find a mention in the entire poster. And most importantly, not a word on democratic right to dissent, which was shamelessly violated that evening by ABVP-administration nexus. How can an organization which claims to follow Dr Ambedkar’s ideology term an event anti-constitutional for speaking against the brahmanical collective conscience, against unjust execution of Afzal Guru and for the Kashmiri people’s right to national self-determination.

(Here I am not trying to single out you or your organization. I am also aware of the fact that some so-called left democratic organizations and individuals had similar positions. But frankly speaking I was not surprised by their positions. In fact, they truly lived up to the expectations. But I was really disappointed by BAPSA’s meek surrender in front of brahmnical fascist onslaught).

If you remember your organization had organised the screening of the documentary ‘Caste on the Menu Card’ at the Sabarmati Dhaba last year, for which the permission was cancelled at the last moment by the Administration on AVBV’s complaint (just like it happened on 9th Feb). The progressive democratic organizations and students made sure that film was screened. Will you or your organization also term that event anti-constitutional activity?

The most ludicrous part of your speech is where you, making insinuations at me, say that I left the organisation I was a part of because it does not contest elections, and now I want to contest students’ union elections. It is absurd on many counts. The reason as to why I and others resigned from DSU is known to the world, because it was a public resignation. Secondly, as far as elections are concerned, all these years I have never contested any election for any post because of my opposition to Lyngdoh guidelines. Since 2008, we have consistently fought against the draconian Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations and have mobilized students to hold JNUSU elections according the JNUSU constitution. Your organization, on the other hand participates in Lyngdoh bound elections, which is based on the idea of brahmanical merit and discriminates students coming from deprived sections. However, at a more fundamental level, this ridiculous assertion reflects your election centric political imagination.

It will not be an exaggeration to say that the present attack on the JNU students’ movement is unprecedented in the history of our university. Students, alongside police cases and the HLEC , continue being served more show-cause notices and proctorial enquiries for organising political programs. At the same time, the administration has come with various machinations to scuttle several progressive provisions of the admission policy. This emphasis on elections in your speech at THIS moment shows, just like the revisionist left, all you can think of is elections. More than anyone else’s it reflects sheer poverty of your political imagination.

Finally, it is true that the class divisions, caste hierarchies and patriarchy exists amongst muslims in the Indian sub-continent, just as they also exist among the Dalits and other oppressed castes. It is equally true that muslims and Dalits, notwithstanding their internal divisions and hierarchies, also face discrimination and violence for simply being muslims or Dalits. Any genuine force that is committed to social justice, annihilation of caste and radical social transformation has to deal with these contradictions. Not only the BJP and the Congress but also CPM, BSP, JDU, SP etc use these contradictions to cultivate vote banks to gain political power. The annihilation of caste is not on the agenda of the so called left parties as well as for those parties who swear by the principles of social justice. In fact, some of the worst kinds of massacres of the Dalits and Muslims have taken place in states ruled by the left or by the so called messiahs of the social justice. We also know how some of these big champions of social justice have aligned with the brahmnical fascist forces to gain power. The history of the last 60 years has clearly demonstrated that Annihilation of Castes and Social Justice can’t be achieved through vote bank politics. Brahmanical Hindutva fascism can’t be simply defeated through electoral permutations and combinations. A real fight for the annihilation of castes has to go hand in hand with the struggle against the forces of privatization and imperialist globalization. And I firmly believe that the struggles against the internal divisions and hierarchy among the muslims and Dalits will only strengthen our fight against Hindutva fascism, feudal brahmnical caste system and imperialism and will forge the real unity of the oppressed people.

For us the slogan of ‘Jai Bhim Laal Salam’ is not simply a call for electoral unity of the left and Ambedkarite groups. For us it’s a new vision of a democratic revolution in which the struggle against caste system and patriarchy is internal to class struggle. When we speak of Bhagat Singh and Ambedkar, we speak of a new politics which talks about the fight for the annihilation of caste and revolutionary social transformation – a fight also against being reduced to a number, a thing and the most immediate identity of people. This fight will be waged every day in the streets, factories, fields and universities and the unity will be accomplished over the course of this fight.

Hoping for that Unity in Struggle

Jai Bhim Lal Salaam!

Umar Khalid

*Chintu Kumari is a JNU Student, AISA activist and former General Secretary of the JNUSU.

Both Chintu and Umar took part in the recently concluded 16 Day Long Hunger Strike at JNU.

Related posts:

1. Rebellion as contagion: What the High Court possibly meant when it spoke of an infection
2. The Unending Struggle of Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims for Equality: S. Japhet and Y. Moses
3. South Africa: The inhumanity of dividing identities

An insight into what happens when a harmonious society of ‘obedient students’ and ‘patriotic citizens’ witnesses a disruption.

Scroll.in
Aman Sethi
05 Mar 2016

Justice Pratibha Rani grants bail to Kanhaiya Kumar:

Whenever some infection is spread in a limb, effort is made to cure the same by giving antibiotics orally and if that does not work, by following second line of treatment. Sometimes it may require surgical intervention also. However, if the infection results in infecting the limb to the extent that it becomes gangrene, amputation is the only treatment.

Reading the Delhi High Court’s bail order for Kanhaiya Kumar, president of the Jawaharlal Nehru Students’ Union, I was reminded of a slogan, or more accurately a tension, I encountered whilst reporting the worker action at the Maruti factory in Manesar.

The unrest of 2011, I wrote at the time, pivoted on the discord between a management wedded to a particular idea of efficiency and productivity, and workers bored by the regimentation of factory life.

“Indiscipline is not tolerated,” said Suzuki Chief Osamu Suzuki at a meeting with Maruti Udyog Kamgar Union representatives. “Authoritarianism will not be endured,” said an anonymous worker in the Faridabad Mazdoor Samachar, a workers broadsheet.

Reporting on the student protests at JNU last month, and the government’s response, I found similar parallels in the confrontation between an authoritarian – and patronising – establishment, and unruly students in the midst of forging the politics of their generation.

Power of slogans
This discord makes visible an idea of a harmonious society of “obedient students”, “disciplined workers,” and “patriotic citizens”, all harnessed to a productive economy. This harmony is disrupted when Honda workers from Manesar march in solidarity with JNU students, or the children of factory workers, anganwadi workers, farmers, and artisans, study at university rather than enrolling in a vocational training institute. Suddenly, thoughts picked up on the shop floor, at the village clinic, on a train from Begusarai, on a bus from Zakir Nagar, are transmitted to the classroom.

Perhaps this is the infection, the gangrene, that Justice Pratibha Rani fears: a slogan, chanted in the streets of Srinagar as a matter of routine, finds an opening at a university campus in New Delhi. Freed from the usual suspects, unmoored from the routine skirmishes, deaths, and encounters, along the Line of Control, the slogan floats through a university corridor – distracting rows of disciplined students from their academic pursuits.

A slogan’s explosive power, it seems, is not just about what is shouted – but rather where it appears, and who takes up the call. This realisation offers us an opportunity, long sought, to think through this troubling question of “Freedom of Expression.”

Free speech
What is the frustration that writers feel at moments when “Freedom of Expression” is under threat? Perhaps, it is a frustration borne of the sudden inability to repeat oneself.

Let me explain: occasionally, a reconfiguration of the state form produces a strange, quickened time when the foundations of a world seem to be under assault. The change is brisk and unsettling, and writers, long accustomed to set modes of confrontation with power, are unable to immediately produce the intense and rigorous thought these times demand.

So we adopt a defensive, conservative stance of trying to protect what we have: of fighting for the right to continue to say what we have always said. Power sees this and moves quickly to declare such speech seditious, anti-national, unpatriotic. We then fall further into this trap, like this current moment, where the day is not far when some well-meaning writer will argue, in all earnestness, that it is patriotic to be seditious.

But restrictions on speech only apply to speech that has been uttered. If the Man stops you from saying something today, just say something else tomorrow.

Judges, government officials, policemen and soldiers, often speak of rebellion as contagion. This is not a coincidence – this is one of Michel Foucault’s signal insights. In Discipline and Punish, he writes:

Behind the disciplinary mechanisms can be read the haunting memory of “contagions”, of the plague, of rebellions, crimes, vagabondage, desertions, people who appear and disappear, live and die in disorder.


New meaning
Who can predict the carrier of this contagion?

Perhaps the infection metastasizes when words, objects, signs and symbols suddenly take on meanings that the establishment never imagined they would: in Bengal in 1857, the British believed, the message was a chapati, delivered by hand from village to village; in the Bhumkal of 1910 in Bastar, Nandini Sundar writes in Sovereigns and Subalterns, “messages consisted of mango boughs, a lump of earth, chilies and arrows”; in Iran in 1979, Ryszard Kapuscinski writes, children ran through the streets waving sheets of white paper dipped in blood; in Oklahoma in 2015, pastors preached in hoodies to mark the death of Trayvon Martin.

“Everybody knows about Mississippi, God damn,” sings Nina Simone, without ever telling us exactly what it is. But why should she, when everybody knows?

A modest suggestion: some evenings, don a hoodie and walk through the dusty lanes of your neighbourhood. Gaze at the mango trees, each bough rustling with rebellion; peer at the green chilies conspiring on the sabziwalla’s handcart, eat a mutinous chapatti at the local dhaba, and hear the lumps of earth crunching beneath your chappals sing “freedom, freedom”.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in

Related posts:

1. Spring Comes to JNU: Love, Laughter and Rage
2. South African student protests and re-emergence of people’s power
3. Boaventura: ‘O governo está dando tiros no pé, corroendo a base social de apoio’

Intolerance Tracker is an online platform to collect, aggregate, and map stories of intolerance across South Asia. These stories cover instances of discrimination that individuals or communities face based on their affiliation with a group or identity. Perpetrators include other individuals, groups or states.

Justice Adda
18 Feb 2016

The map is a response to the rising incidence of prejudice and discrimination, often against communities that have also been historically marginalised, and also against those who protest these forms of discrimination. Through consolidating these events on a single platform, we hope to chart their spread over time and space, as well as draw similarities and contrasts between different regions of South Asia.

Click on image to access Intolerance Tracker

It can be explored at: www.intolerancetracker.com

Intolerance Tracker is a project developed in collaboration with the Cambridge South Asia Watch, Justice Adda and Timescape.

Related posts:

1. Africans unite against xenophobia in South Africa
2. Book Discussion on ‘What Fanon Said’, by Lewis Gordon
3. South Africa: Voices of widows of the Marikana Massacre

February is a beautiful time of the year in Delhi. It inaugurates Basant, spring, the season for love. And it is made more beautiful by an incandescent, insurgent spirit, that spreads in the air like a loving contagion, especially around what the Hindu Right rehearses for months on end to spoil – the new found festival of Valentine’s Day.

Kafila
Shuddhabrata Sengupta
15 Feb 2016

Public Meeting, JNU, 13th February

Traditionally (or at least since as long ago as the late twentieth century CE), on Valentine’s Day, the loony Hindu right goes looking for lovers in the parks of Delhi and tries to ply its own line in the extortion trade. This time, they have been joined by some big guns. The Delhi police descended on some young people belonging to a theatre group who had stepped out to have tea during a poetry reading at the IGNCA on the grounds that they ‘looked like they were JNU (Jawaharlal Nehru University) students’. Meanwhile, their boss, the Honorable Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh (who deserves a Bharat Ratna all by himself for skills as a performance artist) regaled a press conference with a poker faced comic act – his revelation of the Lashkar e Taiba’s links to the JNU protests on the basis of the discovery of a fake twitter handle. The fact that Rajnath Singh still has his job is because his boss Narendra Modi, our ‘dear leader’, is the chief architect of the ‘Fake in India’ campaign.

One needs love, and laughter, plenty of laughter, to survive these times, and the antics of these men. Over the last two days, it is love, laughter, sorrow and rage, in equal proportion that have been most evident in the JNU campus in Delhi. Their signs were evident again, appropriately, yesterday, on Valentine’s Day. A student population of thousands has been able to transform its rage at the capitulation of the recently appointed vice-chancellor and his cronies to the diktats of an incompetent home minister and his minions in the Delhi Police apparatus into a deep and abiding sense of good humoured solidarity. This is demonstrated by the support that they have readily offered Kanhaiya Kumar, the president of their students union, who is currently detained, facing ridiculous charges of sedition, and several other students, including some JNUSU office bearers, who the police are still reportedly hunting for. The hashtag #StandwithJNU has gone viral, spreading, connecting, bringing people together like the sudden awakening of spring after a cruel winter. What better way can there be of celebrating Valentine’s Day than to declare, en masse, a love for liberty, and for learning?

Within a day of the police raid in JNU that resulted in the arrest of JNUSU president Kanhaiya Kumar on the 12th of February, the campus was able to shake off the sense of shock at the invasive presence of the police and gather in very large numbers, setting an example of peaceful, dignified and disciplined protest, despite the many provocations that they have had thrown at them from a venal regime and its corrupt clients in the mainstream media.

On the evening of the 13th of February, there was a massive public meeting in front of the administration block in JNU. This was addressed by several political personalities, D. Raja of the CPI, Sitaram Yechuri of the CPI(M), Kavita Krishnan (former JNUSU president and from the CPI-ML-Liberation), Anand Sharma, Ajay Maken and Rahul Gandhi of the Congress. While the irony of the fat cats of the erstwhile Congress regime that actually hung Afzal Guru offering solidarity to students in JNU who are under attack from the BJP for being accused of mourning his execution was not lost on me, it was still an impressive show of force, at least for a few teflon television moments.

Meanwhile, at one margin of the immense crowd, a token number of ABVP goons shouted themselves hoarse – offering ‘peaceful’ slogans such as – ’Naxaliyon ka Kabar Khudega JNU ke Dharti Pe’, (The Graves of Naxalites will be dug on JNU’s soil), ‘Jo Afzal ki Baat Karega, Woh Afzal ki Maut Marega’ (He who talks about Afzal Guru will die his death) and ‘Desh Hai Pukarta, Pukarti Maa Bharati, Khoon se Tilak Karo, Goliyon Se Aarti’ (The Country is Calling, Mother India is Calling, Anoint Yourselves with Blood, And Worship with Bullets).

Naturally, calls for violence by self-certified Indian nationalists in the present circumstances can never be thought of by television anchors and the powers that be as disruptive of peace. This is the way the national fabric is maintained by its current custodians. ‘Make in India’ happens by breaking Indians, especially those who are young and vulnerable. But the young are resilient. They have stamina. They have love and laughter on their side. And it is better to rely on love and laughter than it is to depend even on the fickle attentions of princes and patriots, however charming they may be.

The prince was charming, (as princes tend to be, when in opposition). He said some basic, useful and necessary things about Adolf Hitler, the 1930s in Germany, intolerance and other such matters. He asked the students not to let themselves be bullied, and then left as suddenly as he had arrived, to the relief and bewilderment of the ABVP, who now could give their tired voices some rest.

It was left to Kavita Krishnan, former JNUSU General Secretary, to rescue the meeting from the thicket of rhetorical platitudes that the meeting had seemingly found itself waylaid into.

Kavita Krishnan reminded the students of the tradition that JNU has of dealing with difficult questions through dialogue, and the importance that this democratic, questioning spirit had in the formation of the character JNU students. While unequivocally condemning the irresponsible sloganeering by a minuscule fraction of those assembled for the ‘Country Without a Post Office’ event on the 9th of February organized by some JNU students, she insisted that these situations could have, and have been in the past, been dealt with dialogue and debate, not through detentions, charges of sedition and police action.

What impressed me most about the 13th evening were not so much the speeches as the evident resolve of the students. Their patient, orderly, serene presence, their respectful attention to when they were being addressed, their utter disregard for the lumpen presence of the ABVP, and their palpable love for each other and for their teachers, and their pride in their university.

In a remarkable demonstration of inter-generational solidarity, the students of JNU have found their strongest allies amongst their teachers. On the evening of 13th February, a chain of professors formed a protective cordon between their patient, impeccably disciplined JNU students and the unruly circus of ABVP thugs. The JNU administration played its comic part, appearing briefly, at the beginning of the programme, to disconnect the microphone. This is what Vice Chancellors have become reduced to these days – to becoming the obedient orderlies who switch off the power supply to their universities.

Undeterred, a student produced a battery operated microphone connected to a portable amplifier. Both devices had seen better days. And the voice they rendered was tinny, barely audible. And yet, the thousands of students gathered to listen gave everyone a patient hearing, alternating between what teaches in Indian class rooms like to call ‘pin drop silence’ (a much valued commodity in our noisy land) and regular bouts of wild, exultant, celebratory cheering, or cries of ‘shame’ when a speaker pointed out a particular foible of the government or the university administration, or when the ABVP got a little too noisy for their own good.

As is usual in these cases, the Television Crews had more time and energy at their disposal for Prince Charming and his retinue than they had for the remarkable sight of thousands of peaceful students assembled to express their anger. Nothing will change the ways of paid for TV. But that is another sad story.

The next day, I was at JNU at four in the afternoon, to witness a press conference addressed by JNUTA (JNU Teachers Association) office bearers, and representatives of the Federation of Cullege and University Teachers Associations (FEDCUTA), Delhi University Teachers Association (DUTA) and the Ambedkar University of Delhi Teachers Association (AUDTA). Each speaker talked about the increasing incidence of assaults on university autonomy in the BJP regime, attacks on students and teachers. Once again, a majority of TV correspondents interrogated the teachers speaking to them as if they were intelligence bureau operatives or special branch officials

Public Meeting, JNU, 13th February

At around five pm, the assembly dispersed, to gather again and take the form of what was described as massive human chain, (perhaps one should stop calling such gatherings ‘chains’ and call them human garlands instead), so lets say, a human garland, that stretched several kilometers long from ‘Ganga Dhaba’ (not far from the JNU main gate) to Chandrabhaga Hostel (deep within the interiors of the campus). This alive, ebullient thread of people, mainly young, some older (alumni, teachers, friends), was like a river in spate. I could not help thinking as I passed the hostels with their beautiful riverine names – Ganga, Sutlej, Kaveri, Mahi-Mandavi, Lohit and Chandrabhaga – that we, all of us assembled were like a tidal bore, surging upstream from the ocean to deep inland territories, irrigating wastelands, laying the foundations of a new civilization, a new civility that the RSS-ABVP hordes will never be able to come to terms with. The ebb and flow of this mighty river carried the evening.

Finally, we reached a confluence, again the administration block. Students sat once again, quickly, with a profound sense of internalized order. Once again there was no microphone. Once again there were calls for silence, and a hush descended on the students like a gentle protective blanket.

Then the gentle, exhausted but firm voice of Shehla Rashid Shora, the Vice President of JNUSU found a way of reaching way into the back of the crowd. She spoke of what it means to be in an inclusive, open, public university and why that is so terrifying to the regime in power. She spoke of the university as a space of dissent, of the celebration of doubt and thought. She spoke of the way in which the BJP government seems paranoid about the young and their spaces. She spoke of the defamation, the lies, that are being peddled by the government and sections of the media about students everywhere. She spoke of the desperate circumstances that drove Rohith Vemula to suicide because of an ABVP led witch hunt. She spoke at length about the ‘Occupy UGC’, formed as a response to the BJP regime’s planned assault on democratic and equitable access to higher education. She spoke about how there is an increasing intensity of discrimination based on caste, religion, gender and sexual preferences. She spoke of the intense desire that young people all over feel for freedom – azaadi – of freedom from patriarchy, from capital, from draconian laws like the AFSPA, from Khaps and Casteism and from all forms of humiliation and indignity, She spoke, not once, but several times about ‘desh-prem‘, about what it means to love a land and the many kinds of people who inhabit it, and how that was different from the hatred that the regime purveyed through what it defined as nationalism. She declared that the students have resolved not to co-operate with the inquiry committee set up by the University Administration on the incidents of February 9th because it has shown its biases by having already declared a number of students ‘guilty’ and has suspended their academic rights and privileges even before an investigation has had a chance to begin. She declared that (today) Monday, the 15th of February will be observed as a strike throughout the university.

Something has changed in our city. Ever since the terrible rape of Jyoti Singh on the 16th of December, 2012 brought thousands of young people out into the streets of Delhi, something fundamental has shifted in our sense of who we are as citizens, and as political actors. This was palpable in the mobilizations by the young workers of the Maruti-Suzuki factory. It was evident in the ‘Occupy UGC’ movement, and in the continuing protests in solidarity with Rohith Vemula, and the spontaneous marches on the RSS headquarters, (as part of the ‘Kiss of Love’ protests, and more recently, to express anger at the RSS-ABVP’s abetment of Rohith Vemula’s suicide). This stupid government thinks that it can arrest this momentum by scaring students in JNU with a dose of shock treatment, or workers at the Maruti factory with a spell in prison. It has no idea how much it has damaged itself by presuming that it could frighten students, and more generally, the young. If this government thinks that it can solve the mounting social crises that it is itself generating by putting workers and students in prisons, then, it really has no idea of the kind of bonds that it is helping to form in what it thinks are spaces of confinement between a new generation of, and new kinds of political prisoners and their friends, comrades, families and allies. The state and its thugs have fresh blood on its hands, the blood of Rohith Vemula in Hyderabad, and a young man called Danish, and a young woman called Shaista Hamid, (both unarmed civilians) in Pulwama, Kashmir. It has the growing weight of prisoners chains around its neck.

Now it is Narendra Modi, Rajnath Singh and Smriti Irani’s turn to be terrified.

They have awakened a tsunami of anger in the young. In the coming days, this wave of connections, between what is happening, and is likely to happen next, in Hyderabad, Delhi, Kashmir and elsewhere, like the dance and collision of the wounded cores of of distant stars meeting in deep space, (of the kind that Rohith Vemula loved to think about) may well transform itself into a massive gravitational force that can alter the structure of our social universe. And because we know this, February has once again become a beautiful time of the year. It’s time for love, laughter and rage.

Related posts:

1. Why I Love Being Black: The Laughter of Protest
2. Rebellion as contagion: What the High Court possibly meant when it spoke of an infection
3. A Turkish Spring? Over 1,000 Injured as Anti-Government Protests Spread Outside of Istanbul

Australia, Brunei, Canadá, Chile, Japón, Malasia, México, Nueva Zelanda, Perú, Singapur, Estados Unidos y Vietnam concluyen las negociaciones del Acuerdo Estratégico Transpacífico de Asociación Económica (TPP) y lo firman el 4 de febrero en la ciudad de Auckland, Nueva Zelanda.

Desinformémonos
3 Feb 2016

El TPP, negociado entre doce países, pretende fijar las reglas del comercio y las inversiones internacionales buscando crear la mayor zona mundial de libre comercio, ya que representa el 40 por ciento de la economía mundial y abarca a 800 millones de personas, y en el cual, de nuevo, los pueblos indígenas quedan excluídos y libertades como el uso del internet serán afectadas.

Después de una larga negociación, se firmará lo que los ministros de comercio de los 12 países llaman el tratado internacional más ambicioso de la historia. Después de la firma, los países tendrán un periodo de dos años para su ratificación.

El ministro de Economía de México, Ildefonso Guajardo Villarreal dice que de todos modos, en el tratado existe una cláusula en la que se establece que si hay seis países miembros que no hayan aprobado el tratado en sus legislaturas y representan el 85 por ciento del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB) de la región, el acuerdo entrará de forma automática en operación.

Especialistas como Irene Levy, académica de Universidad Iberoamericana y presidenta del Observatorio de Telecomunicaciones de México (Observatel) alertó en noviembre pasado que en el Acuerdo Estratégico Transpacífico de Asociación Económica (TPP) existen riesgos para las libertades digitales.

El acuerdo, en sus más de 26 capítulos de negociación, busca la regulación de un gran número de temas: desde el comercio de lácteos, hasta la regulación laboral, pasando por los derechos de autor, patentes, inversiones estatales y medio ambiente.

Respecto a la restricción de las libertades en internet, Levy destacó: “Los prestadores de servicios podrían sacar de la red, fotos, películas o canciones cuando una persona reclame los derechos sin mediar una investigación mínima de que en efecto son dueños de los derechos de dicho material”. También calificó como “preocupante” la posibilidad de cortar el servicio a los usuarios cuando caigan en este tipo de actos como bajar una canción o subir una película sin tener los derechos.

El TPP se acuerda a espaldas de los pueblos indígenas
Por su parte, Emanuel Gómez, catedrático de la Universidad Autónoma Chapingo escribe en La Jornada del Campo: “El sector agropecuario es particularmente sensible a la liberalización comercial prevista en el Acuerdo Estratégico Transpacífico de Asociación Económica (TPP), dada la política de reducir paulatinamente los aranceles entre los países miembros hasta hacerlos desaparecer.

México, Perú y Chile son los únicos países miembros del TPP que han ratificado el Convenio 169 de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT) sobre derechos de los pueblos indígenas y tribales, en el que se establece el derecho de éstos a la autodeterminación.

En la 61 Asamblea de la ONU, celebrada en 2007, se aprobó el documento “Declaración de la Naciones Unidas sobre los derechos de los pueblos indígenas”. En dicho documento se establece el derecho de los pueblos a determinar libremente su desarrollo económico, social y cultural (artículo 3) y aún cuando países integrantes del TPP como Estados Unidos, Australia, Canadá y Nueva Zelanda votaron en contra, en la actualidad se han adherido plenamente. En esta Declaración se define la obligatoriedad de los Estados de consultar a los pueblos indígenas antes de adoptar y aplicar medidas legislativas y administrativas que los afecten.

El campo mexicano 20 años después del TLCAN, con el TPP profundizará la crisis en la que se encuentra.

La experiencia mexicana después de 20 años de haberse firmado el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte (TLCAN) es de una crisis generalizada en el campo, que se muestra de forma clara por la expulsión migratoria de las zonas rurales hacia las ciudades de México y Estados Unidos, lo cual ha generado nuevos fenómenos sociales como la ‘feminización del campo’, la “desruralización”, las “comunidades rurales trasnacionales” y la existencia de grupos criminales que trafican con personas y las utilizan para el trasiego de drogas, armas e incluso órganos humanos”.

Es evidente que en los 20 años que tiene firmado el Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte, México pasó de ser un país agropecuario a ser un importador de alimentos como el maíz, el arroz, el trigo, la leche, carne, huevo y varias frutas.

Según cifras oficiales dice el catedrático, derivadas del reciente censo agropecuario, en más del 90 por ciento de los productos agrícolas, los campesinos y agricultores entregan al mercado sus mercancías en bruto, por lo que no se benefician de las ganancias.

De los doce países participantes, México, Perú y Chile son los únicos países miembros del TPP que ratificaron el Convenio 169 de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT) sobre derecho de los pueblos indígenas a la autodeterminación.

Los países no latinoamericanos firmantes del TPP que no han ratificado el Convenio 169 de la OIT, reconocen la diversidad cultural de sus países por adhesión a la Declaración de la ONU sobre pueblos indígenas.

Organizaciones sociales pronostican la quiebra de millones de productores agrícolas y pecuarios de gran parte del país ya que productos leche de Nueva Zelanda, arroz y café de Vietnam, carne, trigo y maíz de Estados Unidos, aceite de palma de Malasia, vino, camarón, langosta y frutos rojos de Chile, y chile, papa, plátano, mango, azúcar, harina de pescado y ajo de Perú podrían ingresar libremente a México sin barreras arancelarias.

La protesta de cientos de organizaciones integrados en Consumers International, red internacional de consumidores emitió en septiembre pasado una carta abierta a los presidentes de México, Perú y Chile en la que expusieron las múltiples razones para rechazar la ratificación del TPP.

En México, organizaciones de trabajadores consideran que la ratificación del TPP vulneraría más los derechos sociales, fomentando el desempleo y la destrucción de pequeñas y medianas empresas, concluyó diciendo el catedrático de Chapingo

Related posts:

1. Ask Boaventura #34 – Derechos diferenciados y igualdad
2. Declaración final del Encuentro Hemisférico Derrota del ALCA, 10 años después
3. Encuentro Centroamericano de Mujeres: Tres décadas por nuestros derechos

The Portuguese reached Mozambique in the Indian Ocean, on the African Coast, and India at the same time. In fact, Vasco da Gama set there months before he arrived in India, in 1498. Along the years, the Portuguese established a number of forts along the coast, from Asia to Africa and Japan to Mozambique. This area would later be called Estado da India Portuguesa, of which Goa was the capital. This made Goa an important location since it was responsible for managing the affairs of the other Portuguese entreports, which later on became colonies. Goa had business links with Mozambique right from the sixteenth century and, in the process, Goa, Daman and Diu left their influence on Mozambique.

Navhind Times
Maria de Lourdes Bravo da Costa Rodrigues
25 Oct 2015

In Goa to deliver a lecture on the Goa-Mozambique connection – Mozambique in the Indian Ocean: Old Connections and Other Narratives of Contacts – is Maria Paula Menezes, senior researcher at the Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal. Menezes, who traces her roots to Goa, was born and brought up in Mozambique and as such is witness to Goa’s impact on that region

(The talk by Maria Paula Meneses on ‘Mozambique in the Indian Ocean: Old Connections and Other Narratives of Contacts’ will be October 27, at 5:30 p.m. at the Fundação Oriente, Fontainhas, Panaji. Open to all)

Lourdes (L): Let us begin at the very beginning, with the migration of the people of Goa Daman and Diu to Mozambique.
Maria Paula Menezes (MPM): Lots of Goans settled along the Zambezi River up to the Island of Mozambique. This was the early migration in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century. In the Mozambique Island, which lies to the North of Mozambique, there is a lighthouse called ‘Farol de Goa’ (Light house of Goa). These migrants created a nucleus which helped in the administration of the regions, especially the ‘prazos’.

L: What are ‘prazos’?
MPM: These are properties that have been leased to different individuals for three generations, and many Goans took this advantage. A well know Goan is Manuel Antonio Sousa, who was holder of a big ‘prazo’. He supported the Portuguese to fight other invaders and native rulers with the help of his army of sipayos. It is interesting to know, that some of the benefactors were women and daughters could be beneficiaries on the demise of the mother.

L: I was told that tailors and fishermen were welcomed by the administration of the colony. And of course many of the doctors who passed out from the erstwhile Escola Medica de Goa were the ones who looked after the health of the people.
MPM: Yes, it was later in nineteen century, when tailors and doctors started going to Mozambique. Fishermen came from Goa as well as Daman. The people from Diu were mostly merchants. The latter were descendants of the ‘Company of Banians’, who had the monopoly of the business in the Mozambique territory, till the mid eighteenth centur.
In the beginning, there were merchants and many in the administrative system. In fact, the Goans formed the backbone of the administration. There are records to show that they had migrated from Goa and they were called ‘Portugueses de boné’ (Portuguese with caps) to differentiate them from other Portuguese citizens.

L: What social status did these Goan immigrants enjoy? Was there racism in Mozambique?
MPM: At different times, the perception about Goan presence changed. But Goans had a strong presence in the eighteen century. Some Goans acted as members of the local Portuguese administration. Others, as ‘prazos landlords’ were perceived as a sort of local, hybrid group of what later would be Mozambicans/Africans. They knew and used local languages, married local women, etc. And when Portugal sought to take full control of the Zambezi valley, Goans like Manuel António de Sousa supported them with his private army. In the late nineteen century the dominant families of the Zambezi prazos had strong connections with Goa.
This situation changed with the emergence of effective Portuguese colonization of Mozambique. If, as historical records attest, for a long time Indians were considered culturally and socially superior to most of the indigenous population, with the imposition of modern colonization in Mozambique, from the twentieth century onwards, this picture changed and racial segregation against Asians emerged strongly. In December 1961, after the occupation and liberation of Goa, the backlash against Indians in Mozambique was frightening.

L: Moving from history to culture, what cultural impact did the immigrants have on the region?
MPM: The immigrants broadened our perspectives and presence in the Indian Ocean and allowed us to acquire more businesses and reinforce the same. We gained knowledge from their cultural, religious activities. There was a lot of influence on the food and dress also. You will be surprised to know that along the coast of Mozambique ladies still wear the ‘Kimao’, a dress worn by Goans in the past.

L: You mention food. Describe the influence on the Mozambican diet. Was it is Goans that influenced the food or was it the Portuguese?
MPM: Lot of rice and coconut is consumed by us. We also use a lot of tender coconut, and call it ‘lanho’ as done in Goa. We have sannas, which we eat for breakfast. We prepare sorpatel, xacuti, balchao and don’t be surprised if I tell you that we eat bread leavened with ‘sura’ (coconut toddy). We also prepare bebinca, batica (called mocate by us) and love to eat the mangada. We make lots of achar not ‘pickles’ with lime and mangoes. I believe that there are many varieties of mangoes that have been taken from Goa.
We also drink coconut toddy and distil caju alcohol and call it nipa. It is consumed by the locals and, unfortunately, has many addicted to it. And do you know that cafreal that you call a Portuguese dish is from Mozambique, originally prepared by the ‘cafre’? The ‘cafre’ is a word used to refer to a native.

L: Tell us a little about what bring you to Goa, besides of course the lecture you will be delivering at Fundação Oriente.
MPM: Historical legacies create relations (many times quite conflictive) between potential heirs, simultaneously dividing and connecting the parts together.
I am currently undertaking a small research in Goa. It is part of a broader project called ALICE that aims to understand the complexities of the connections between our worlds. From my research here I have come to understand that Goa is in our lives as much as Mozambique is in yours. I think that it is time to ‘reconnect’ these spaces which for a long time were connected

Related posts:

1. The ‘Promised Land’ in Mozambique
2. Europeans of An Other Colour – Why the Goans are Portuguese
3. Mozambique: a dictatorship of no alternatives, or an alternative to the dictators?

Enforced disappearance is a prototypical continuous act. The act occurs when a person secretly arrests, detains, tortures and disappears by conflicting forces, but refuses to acknowledge whereabouts of his or her fate

TRANSCEND Media Service
Prof. Bishnu Pathak*
24 Ago 2015

Abstract
The Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP) mandates pursuance of both retributive justice and restorative justice. The Commission is a last step to conclude Nepal’s peace process. The principal objective is to examine the complete truth inviting application from victim’s families, investigate actual facts whereabouts the fate of victim and assist to ensure justice for victims, prosecuting perpetrators in crime against humanity and recommending reparation for dignified life. The paper as prepared based upon a practical observation approach rather than theoretical conception, analyzing armed conflict, peace process, advocacy to transitional justice and use of international standards and domestic practices. The CIEDP modalities may lead into office management, application announcement, data interpretation, collection of DNA reference samples to develop a DNA data bank, victim’s burial site identification and exhumation and recommendations. Enforced disappearance is a prototypical continuous act. The act occurs when a person secretly arrests, detains, tortures and disappears by conflicting forces, but refuses to acknowledge whereabouts of his or her fate[1]. The dead body decomposes in such a way as not to ever be found. Single woman of disappeared person (man) suffers a lot each and every movement in compared to children and senior citizens. She lacks of self-identity, quasi “wife or widow” in the family or society. Networking tracking methods or snowball techniques and public hearings shall apply for this study. International forensic experts shall be invited to assist in accomplishing the challenging tasks. The CIEDP, Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was formed from a single Act, 2014. Some believe that TRC is liable more as perpetrator, but the CIEDP as victim-centric. The Act 2014 repeats 26 times of reconciliation and 21 times of amnesty instead of 4-time disappearance and 5-time disappeared persons. No provisions for reconciliation and amnesty are attracted to the CIEDP unlike the TRC. Ruling Nepali Congress has a sharp interest in TRC as it wants to return confiscated private properties from the Maoist cadres. The main opposition, UCPN (Maoist), has given a priority to CIEDP while more than fourth-fifths of its activists have involuntarily disappeared. Thus, the CIEDP is shadowed. Despite such priorities, both CIEDP and TRC are truth-seeking Commissions. A number of international community, forefront victims’ families and civil society individuals and institutions have protested the formation of the CIEDP and TRC. A few raised questions on selection procedures, experiences and qualifications of the Commissioners.

Introduction
“I never tell a lie, they[2] are already killed”. –– Krishna Prasad Bhattarai[3]

Formation of the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons is a last step towards implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of November 21, 2006, compliant to Interim Constitution 2007 and with respect to the Supreme Court’s landmark mandamus on enforced disappearance of June 1, 2007 and January 2, 2014. The high-level truth-seeking CIEDP is formerly established on February 11, 2015[4] as a first step to attain retributive justice and restorative justice mechanisms[5]. The Commission is formed based on Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (IEDP) and TRC Act, 2014. The soul and spirit of the Commission is no less than the objective of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), but Nepal is yet to ratify it. Enforced disappearance is a prototypical continuous act. The act begins at the time of his or her arrest or abduction and that extends for entire period of torture, cruel and inhumane degrading treatment and solitary detention till the crime (disappearance) is not completed. Enforced disappearance is against the criminal offence and a crime against humanity.

The CIEDP has its own Charter. The Charter states that CIEDP was constituted by the Government of Nepal based on the recommendation submitted by the CIEDP and TRC Recommendation Commission, headed by former Supreme Court Chief Justice Om Bhakta Shrestha. The five member Recommendation Commission was formed under the IEDP and TRC Act 2014. The CIEDP is an independent, impartial and accountable high-level Commission.

The objective of the CIEDP is to examine and document a complete truth of cause, nature and degree of disappeared persons; invite applications from victims’ families and others and provide identity card to them; investigate actual facts whereabouts the fate of victims and provide post-investigation information regarding enforced disappeared persons to the victims’ applicants and to the general public; assist in restoring the victims’ dignity in the society testifying his or her belongings or recorded testimonies; and recommend reparations to the victims’ families and prosecution against the confirmed perpetrators involved in serious violations or abuses of human rights and crime against humanity.

The paper is analyzed based on the author’s active involvement for his studies on the process before, during and after the Maoist-launched People’s War and drew lessons from the various interpretations of peace accords and agreements, transitional justice and use of international human rights standards and practices. The personal experience is described either through literature reviews or participation observation of truth-seeking through thorough investigation. Criminal justice and prosecution of crimes are also a great asset to this study. The study purely follows practical approach rather than theoretical conception.

Background
The CPN (Maoist) initiated the People’s War on February 13, 1996 in Nepal, with the main objectives of sweeping away constitutional monarchy, bureaucratic capitalism, feudalistic mode of society – semi-feudalistic and semi-imperialistic – and the historical roots of social inequality. They conducted the armed struggle and kept forwarding a 40-point list of demands concerning nationality, democracy and livelihood, to establish a patriotic, democratic, progressive and prosperous People’s Republic of Nepal[6].

Nine out of these forty demands relate to nationality, eight of those concern Indian power, politics and property. They are: Repeal of the Nepal India Treaty 1950 and all other unequal agreements. Repeal of the Integrated Mahakali Treaty (IMT). Regulate the open border between Nepal and India and prohibit the entry of vehicles with Indian number plates into Nepal. Repeal of Gorkha recruitment. Implement work permits and set up priority to Nepali workers. Abolish monopoly of foreign capital in Nepali economy. Implement self-reliant national economy. And, ban objectionable foreign media and control cultural pollution.

Even though India (mainly Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Shyam Saran, Sitaram Yechury, SD Muni and a few others) played a pivotal role to end Nepal’s armed conflict by creating an environment conducive to a formal dialogue between the constitutional forces and the unconstitutional Maoist party of Nepal, this resulted in an agreement of 12 understandings in New Delhi on November 21, 2005. Thus, the agreement ended the one decade old called People’s War.

According to Nepal Conflict Report 2012 produced by the UNOHCHR, at least 13,000 people were extra judicially killed during February 13, 1996 to November 21, 2006; Maoist launched the People’s War where more than 1,302 people have been disappeared. The Government figures stated 17,265 unlawful killings[7] whereas Government is responsible for 63 percent and the Maoists for 37[8]. Another study said that a total of 17,700 people were extrajudicially killed[9] on the serious violations of International Human Rights Law (IHRL) and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)[10]. The Transitional Justice Reference Archive (TJRA) recorded over 2,000 incidents of killings[11]. Comprehensive Peace Accord: Human Rights Status 2006-2011 of National Human Rights Commission stated that 78,689 people were involuntarily displaced and 1,327 forcefully disappeared[12].

There are no numerical records of arbitrary arrest, detention and torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment. State security mechanisms evolved into serious violations of human rights and humanitarian laws. Similarly, the Maoists kangaroo security forces were responsible for human rights violations throughout the decade of armed conflict. Conflict related killings and violation of international standards occurred throughout all 75 districts except Manang and Mustang district in Nepal. Millions of the people were affected by the armed conflict across the country. More than 200,000 people were displaced from their homes; a large scale of educational institutions was disrupted; basic health and government services were paralyzed; economic hardships were further exacerbated; and chaos and bloodshed were reported daily.

*****************

Representative Case I

[Pseudonym], a 14 years old girl, was arrested without warrant by the Nepal Army from a relative’s home in Kathmandu on the night of November 15, 2003. She was taken to the Bhairabnath Battalion barracks in Maharajgunj where she was interrogated and tortured by Nepal Army personnel. She was illegally detained there until her release on June 3, 2004. With regard to a girl under the age of 16, the RNA Task Force writes in its 2006 report that the then Royal Nepal Army learnt a 14-year old girl from Lalitpur district, had been arrested and detained by the Bhairabnath Battalion “E” Company. She was finally handed over to her family in the presence of civil society and ICRC representatives.

The OHCHR stated that the Task Force report acknowledges that she was arrested by the Bhairabnath Battalion, but did not appear anywhere in the official lists of former detainees given to OHCHR by a Bhairabnath Battalion officer on March 30, 2006. However, the RNA did eventually release her. The OHCHR stated that she allegedly disappeared at the Maharajgunj barracks till seven months.

Source: Nepal Conflict Report 2012

******************

Enforced disappearances (ED) had been the most serious human rights violations and abuses committed during the entire People’s War period. The record shows that enforced disappearance was initiated as early as 1997[13], the following year of the People’s War. In 1997, seven cases of enforced disappearances were reported, but 47 in 1998 and 61 in 1999[14].

The cluster of disappearances first emerged during the Girija Prasad Koirala lead-Government “intensified security mobilization” operation named Kilo Sierra II (May 26 to November 7, 1998) in Maoist strongholds such as Rapti-zone, especially in Rukum, Rolpa, Jajarkot, Salyan Districts in the Mid-Western Region, Gorkha in the Western Region and Sindhuli in the Central Region[15]. During Kilo Sierra II operation, armed police units were transferred from Kathmandu to these regions and established new police posts. Police units were also mobilized in other districts namely Kailali, Kalikot, Ramechhap, Pyuthan, Achham, Bardiya, Surkhet and Banke in the Mid-Western and Far-Western Regions. The operation resulted in an alarming increase of extrajudicial killings, disappearances, torture and arbitrary arrests[16].

Enforced disappearance significantly intensified during the proclamation of State of Emergency (November 23, 2001 to January 29, 2003) that formally mobilized the then Royal Nepal Army to fight against the Maoists[17]. The State of Emergency also promulgated the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Control and Punishment) Ordinance (TADO) 2001 that consequently intensified with an alarming number of reports of disappearances[18]. The highest number 277 cases of enforced disappearances were received in 2002[19].

**********************

Representative Case II

On May 26, 2006, OHCHR submitted investigations report on arrest, detention, torture and keep (cases of) enforcing disappearances to the Prime Minister-cum-Defense Minister. The report states that enforced disappearance individuals arrested by the then RNA were held in Maharajgunj barracks in Kathmandu in 2003 on suspicion of being linked to the Maoists. The reports said 49 alleged cases of enforced disappearance linked to the RNA’s 10th Bhairabnath Brigade, Maharajgunj. Those solitary confinement detentions were consistently denied by the RNA and, being detained, were disappeared. National and international appeals for information and clarification were ignored. Detainees were hidden from inspection. The fundamental guarantee of judicial control over detentions was denied. International standards were rejected. The only official documentation available regarding any of these detentions was prepared when some of the detainees were eventually transferred to civilian custody following habeas corpus proceedings.

All the past-victims and witnesses interviewed by the OHCHR consistently describe the cruel, inhuman or degrading conditions in which the detainees were held for up to 18 months, permanently handcuffed and blindfolded. A number of detainees were subjected to various methods of torture or beating by plastic pipes on the lower back, legs and soles of the feet, repeatedly deeding into water and applying electric shocks. In almost all cases, victims of torture, including women, were compelled first to remove their clothing and were subjected to continue speaking abusive and degrading languages. There were acts of torture involving sexual humiliation of both male and female detainees. Detainees were repeatedly threatened with execution and buried in clandestine land.

Former detainees continue to suffer the psychological and physical consequences of torture and ill-treatment. The NHRC on Aug 27, 2006 stated that 66 individuals, including 5 women, have gone missing from the Bairabnath Battalion between 2002 to early 2005.

Source: Nepal Conflict Report 2012

***********************

The Apex Court states that the act of disappearance is a criminal offence[20]. Besides, the judges ordered to provide interim relief to the families of the victims without prejudice. The Supreme Court gave a verdict to form a panel of judges to submit a report after thorough investigation of whereabouts of 49 detainees being detained under the solitary confinement into the Bhairabnath battalion in Kathmandu[21].

OHCHR Nepal conducted investigations into detention, torture and continuing disappearance of individuals arrested by the then Royal Nepalese Army during 2003-2004. OHCHR confirmed that a total of 49 individuals who were into the custody of the Bhairabnath battalion between September-December 2003 but whoever remained disappeared. Nepal Government denied any knowledge of their whereabouts. The actual number in this category is significantly higher[22]. A few of them appeared in public in more than a period of a decade.

Review of Enforced Disappearance
3.1 Definition

Enforced disappearance defines by numbers of international instruments or standards, such as Charter of United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (DPPED), 1992, Inter-American Convention of Enforced Disappearance of Persons in 1994 and International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (ICPPED), 2006.

The Article 1.3 of the Charter of UN states, “…in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.” Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights defines, “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.” Against Article 4 “all acts of enforced disappearance shall be offences under criminal law punishable by appropriate penalties” of the DPPED, the general comment said, “…enforced disappearances occur when persons are arrested, detained or abducted against their will…”. However, the Government should disclose the fate or whereabouts of the persons concerned.

*************************

Representative Case III

Krishna Prasad Adhikari, 26 was a soldier of the Nepal Army, Deudakala VDC of Bardiya district. He was allegedly abducted by the Maoists on July 18, 2004 while he was home on leave. A group of 10-Maoist arrived, blindfolded him, tied his hands behind his back and took him away in the direction of the forested area. His family has not seen him since, but Maoists acknowledged in July 2008 that he was killed. But, no information whereabouts of his body has yet to be unknown. The OHCHR reported that the Maoists failed to cooperate fully into the investigations of disappearances.

Source: Nepal Conflict Report 2012

**********************

The article 1 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance 1992 states, “Any act of enforced disappearance is an offence to human dignity…a grave and flagrant violation of the human rights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights…”.

Article 2 of the ICPPED defines, “enforced disappearance is considered to be the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons …followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law.”

UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances on enforced disappearance defines three cumulative elements, “Deprivation of liberty against the will of the person;
Involvement of government officials, at least by acquiescence and refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person”[23]. Article 1 of the DPPED defines, “Any act of enforced disappearance is an offence to human dignity”.

Article 2 of the IEDP and TRC 2014 Act on enforced disappearances says, “If any person arrested, detained, or taking control of by any other means by any person given the authority by law to arrest, investigate or implement a law or by a security personnel is not allowed to meet concerned persons or concerned persons are not given information as to where, how and in which state he/she is kept in after the time period as provided for in the law that such a person needed to be presented before the authority that hears the case has elapsed”. It further states, “If any person is arrested or abducted or taken control of or deprived of his/her personal liberty in any other ways by any organization or organized or unorganized group during the armed conflict[24]”.

Usually, a person is arrested by the State security forces in plain clothes or without uniform. Generally, such arrests do not issue any arrest warrant and the document does not furnish any more information that a particular person was arrested. If any organized group captures, takes away and hides a person without acknowledging the state, it is called abduction. In both cases, a person is not allowed to meet any family member or lawyer and is kept in a separate secret place.

Enforced Disappearance is denial of all access to the families and relatives, lawyers and courts and holds outside the protection of the law. The ED is a deprivation derived from the laws of war[25] where a person secretly abducted or involuntarily imprisoned either by a State or armed group and refuses to acknowledge whereabouts of his/her fate. The ED is a complex human rights violation[26]. Enforced disappearance insults the voices of the victims, their families and communities and national and international human rights instruments. Thus, enforced disappearance is a crime against humanity[27]. The enforced disappearance ultimately offends the right to recognition of each person; the right to life, human security and liberty; and right not to be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention and abduction; solitary confinement; torture and other cruel, inhuman treatment or punishment, humanity and human dignity.

Both IHRL and IHL define enforced disappearance as core elements of human crime. The concerned Government, including its security forces, extends the responsibility of the enforced disappearance under the IHRL, whereas both armed conflicting actors take responsibility of enforcing disappearance under the IHL. The armed group and ruling party shall be held liable for each enforced disappeared person. Besides, the involved actor (alleged perpetrator of both conflict parties) of enforced disappearance shall take their personal responsibility for such offence or crime against humanity.

3.2 Crime against Humanity

The 4th Preambular paragraph of the DPPED defines “…enforced disappearance undermines the deepest values of any society committed to respect for the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, and that the systematic practice of such acts is of the nature of a crime against humanity[28]”. However, this paragraph is no longer in line with existing international law due to persuasive evidence of existing international law on this issue that can be found in the international criminal tribunals, hybrid tribunals and in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court[29].The UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGEID) issues a general comment on crime against humanity which defines, “The notion of crimes against humanity has been recognized for a long time in international law. The connection between enforced disappearances and crimes against humanity was explicitly acknowledged in 1983 Resolution…any act of enforced disappearance is considered, according to this test, to be a crime against humanity[30]”. Similarly, the 6th Preambular paragraph of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons 1994 reaffirms, “the systematic practice of enforced disappearances of persons constitutes a crime against humanity[31]”. Article 18 of the 1996 International Law Commission draft Code of Crimes against Peace and Security for Mankind defines, “A Crime against Humanity means any of the following acts, when committed in a systematic manner or on a large scale and instigated or directed by a Government or any organization or group”. Any Act means “applicable to all crimes enumerated in the article, among which enforced disappearances[32]”.

Article 7 paragraph 1, 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court gives a general definition of the enforced disappearance as a crime against humanity. The enforced disappearance “acts where committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack[33]”. Article 5 of the ICPPED 2006 states “The widespread or systematic practice of enforced disappearance constitutes a crime against humanity as defined in applicable international law and shall attract the consequences provided for under such applicable international law”[34].

The crimes against humanity claims and practices of enforced disappearances are evaluated by the UN Working Group in the light of the criteria listed in the Rome Statute, as interpreted by international and hybrid I tribunals. These are the competent authorities in international, regional or domestic arenas[35].

General Comment on Enforced Disappearance is as a continuous crime stated by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. Various international treaties such as international, regional and domestic tribunals recognize enforced disappearances as continuing acts and continuing crimes. Article 17.1 of the DPPED ensures “Acts constituting enforced disappearance shall be considered a continuing offence as long as perpetrators continue to conceal the fate and whereabouts of persons who have disappeared[36]”.

Enforced disappearance is a prototypical continuous act. The act begins at the time of the disappearance or abduction and that extends for the whole period till the crime is not complete. Enforced disappearance continues until the State admits his or her arrest and detention and releases information pertaining to the fate of whereabouts[37]. The enforced disappearance is a grave threat to the right to life in which the Working Group considers enforced disappearance as a unique and consolidated act, and not a combination of acts[38].

3.3 UN Working Group

The new mandate of the UN Working Group which is adopted by the Human Rights Council in September 2014 is to assist families in determining whereabouts of their family members who are involuntarily disappeared by the conflicting parties. The Working Group works in a humanitarian capacity to communicate between family members of victims of enforced disappearance, sources of reporting disappearance and the concerned Government. Cases of enforced disappearance shall write full name of the victim: day, month and year of disappearance; place of disappearance; State or State-supported forces considered responsible; information about any search that has been identified[39].

The Group’s principal purpose is to receive, examine and transmit Government’s reports of enforced disappearance to relatives of conflict disappeared victims or human rights organizations acting on their behalf. The Working Group requests concerned Government to carry out investigations and to inform the Working Group of the results. The Group follows up or evaluates those requests of information on a periodic basis. Enforced disappearance cases remain open in the Working Group’s database until whereabouts of the person is determined[40].

Along with the adoption by the UN General Assembly in 1992 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearances, the Group entrusts monitoring the progress of States in fulfilling their obligations and assists Government with its implementation. Besides, the Group draws the attention of both Governments and non-governmental organizations on the different aspects of the Declaration. It recommends ways of overcoming hindrances on the course of realization of its provisions. The Working Group has a preventive role which assists States in overcoming problems to the realization of the Declaration. It provides advisory services when requested[41].

The Working Group does not directly investigate individual cases; adopt measures of protection against reprisals; establish individual or State responsibility in cases of enforced disappearance; judge and sanction; carry out exhumations; grant just satisfaction or forms of reparation; nor deal with disappearance perpetrated by non-State actors[42].

The Working Group asked Nepal Government to implement the recommendations made by them to criminalize the enforced disappearances in domestic law. The Group held a follow-up visit to Nepal in 2004 to assist the Government in preventing future disappearance and to address the issues of impunity and reparations[43]. The Group welcomed Nepal Government’s decision of December 2004 to create a national registry of persons held in detention centers. The Working Group greeted the 2007 decision of the Supreme Court to ensure justice and redress for victims of enforced disappearances[44].

On May 12, 2006, the Working Group requested to commence a follow-up mission to Nepal. A reminder letter was sent on July 20, 2009, but on October 2, 2009, the Working Group was informed it was not able to extend an invitation to visit the country[45]. The Working Group has transmitted 672 cases of disappearance to the Nepal Government; “of those, 79 cases have been clarified on the basis of information provided by sources, 135 cases have been clarified on the basis of information provided by the Government, and 458 remain outstanding[46]”. However, only 136 cases were reported by the Group of which 125 were sent under the urgent-action procedure till the end of 2004[47].

The Working Group team visited Nepal from December 6 to 14, 2004[48] on the invitation of the Government. The sole purpose of the visit was to discuss the cases of enforced disappearance received and transmitted by the Working Group to the Government of Nepal and to examine the situation of disappearances in the light of international human rights standards[49]. That was the first visit of the Working Group.

In July 2014, the Working Group drew attention to Nepal Government on IEDP and TRC Act 2014. The TRC has provisions to recommend amnesties and reconciliation in favor of perpetrators even in grave violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law. The Group said, “The special procedures mandate holders called upon the Government to initiate speedily a process of amendment, with an emphasis on the amnesty provisions, and in line with international standards[50]”. The Government replied that there is no any blanket amnesty; amnesty depends upon the cruelty, degree of involvement and nature of the crime[51]. The Working Group thanked the Government for its reply and welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court of February 26, 2015 to amend the provision of amnesty in the transitional justice act[52].

The Working Group and the Committee on Enforced Disappearances coexist side by side and seek to collaborate and coordinate their activities to prevent and eradicate enforced disappearances[53].

3.4 Rights of Conflict Victim

The conflict victims have not been mentioned in many understanding, peace accord and agreements signed between the Government of Nepal and the Maoist party on various dates starting from May 2006 to 2012. However, article 5.2.3 under the Comprehensive Peace Accord, 2006 said that both Nepal Government and the CPN (Maoist) agree to make public the information about the real name, surname and address of the people who were disappeared by both sides and who were killed during the war and to inform also the family about it within 60 days from the date on which this Accord has been signed[54]. Article 33.q of the Interim Constitution 2007 obliges the Government of Nepal “to provide relief to the families of victims on the basis of the report of Investigation Commission constituted to investigate the cases of disappearances made during the course of conflict”[55]. In May 2007, the then interim Legislature-Parliament proposed a Bill to amend the Civil Code to criminalize the practice of “enforced disappearances” and “abduction or hostage taking.” That had been a major initiative to conflict victims in compliance of international standards. However, it was heavily criticized by human rights groups and that was ultimately withdrawn[56].

The definition of a victim is limited to a victim of an intentional violent crime. Victim is a natural person who suffers from harm (i.e., physical, mental, emotional and economic) directly caused by a criminal offence regardless of the familial relationship between them[57]. Article 24 of the ICPPED defines the victim means “the disappeared person and any individual who has suffered harm as the direct result of an enforced disappearance”. Every victim has the right to know the truth concerning the circumstances of the enforced disappearance, the progress and results of the investigation and the fate of the disappeared person. The article has ensured the legal system that the victims of enforced disappearance have the right to obtain reparation[58] and prompt, fair and adequate compensation.

Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. Not only do enforced disappeared victim person get compensation, “anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation”[59]. International human rights law recognizes that victims include not only close relatives of the victim, but any person damaged as a direct consequence of the criminal offence[60].

None of the articles of the IEDP and TRC Act 2014 has directly mentioned victim’s rights except violations and abuses of human rights. Victim’s rights constitute as an important part of the UN and International standards on war crime or armed conflict trials. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission[61] deprived to ensure right to the victims as it primarily focused for reconciliation and amnesty. Similar processes were also applied by the Commission for Truth and Friendship in East Timor[62] and Grenada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission[63].

The CIEDP urges Government of Nepal to produce victims’ and witness’ rights special law[64] and enforced disappearance act from the Legislative-Parliament as early as possible. There are diverse needs of the victims which are to be understood and addressed timely to respect the voices of them[65]. The article 7.1.3 of the peace accord 2006 agrees to ensure rights of the victim of conflict and the family of disappeared persons to obtain relief. However, some positive decisions are taken by the Supreme Court’s directives on victim’s rights and rights to enforced disappearance of February 26 2015, January 2, 2014 and June 1, 2007. The Government is to be in compliance with the directives of the Supreme Court formulating the laws regarding victim’s rights and enforced disappearance.

Supreme Court’s Verdicts
Numbers of Committees or Commissions were formed to investigate the status of detainees previously. On May 25, 2005, the first inquiry of the enforced disappearance was formed, headed by Baman Prasad Neupane, Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs. The Committee was asked to investigate whereabouts the status of 776 disappeared persons. Only 22 percent of them were identified. The remaining 78 percent statuses of other writ petitioners were stated as unknown and unidentified[66].

On August 28, 2006, the Supreme Court for the first time gave an order to investigate four arrested persons who were disappeared in 1999 and 2002. A three-member Detainees Investigation Task Force (DITF) headed by Appellate Court judge Lokendra Mallick was constituted on August 31, 2006[67] respecting the Court’s verdict. The panel member comprises the representative of the Attorney General’s Office and the Nepal Bar Association. The specific objective was to investigate the actual status of four enforced disappeared persons namely Rajendra Dhakal, Bipin Bhandari, Dil Bahadur Rai and Chakra Bahadur Katuwal[68]. Finally, a comprehensive report was submitted to the Supreme Court.

The report of the Detainees Investigation Task Force 2007 said that, after the thorough investigation, the DITF found that Chakra Bahadur Katuwal was taken into custody by the Army and died because of severe torture. All three Rajendra Prasad Dhakal, Bipin Bhandari and Dil Bahadur Rai were arrested by security forces and disappeared in a planned way[69]. However, the report failed to address whether the disappeared persons were alive or already dead.

Nevertheless, the DITF 2007 report recommended a high level disappearance investigation commission to be formed to impartially and independently investigate the cases of those enforced disappearances during the armed conflict. The report said that the disappearance is a crime against humanity. The retroactive law is to be enacted. It should issue appropriate judicial directives to stop the repeated arbitrary arrest and detention. The report further suggests that “those involved in the violation of human rights should be trial according to law and that the victim family should be given appropriate compensation”[70].

Every conscious people welcome the landmark verdict of the Supreme Court of June 1, 2007 over a large number of enforced disappearance cases including 80 habeas corpus writs[71]. The Apex Court ordered the Government to enact a separate high-level Investigation Commission to criminalize the past enforced disappearances in line with international human rights law and international humanitarian law mentioned in the Charter of United Nations and Human Rights Council. The Council is a forum that empowered to prevent violations or abuses, discrimination and inequity protecting the vulnerable victims exposing perpetrators[72].

**********************

Supreme Court forwarded Criteria for Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (June 1, 2007)

“[…] the jurisdiction of the commission is clear; that the commission’s inquiry does not replace the jurisdiction of the Court; that persons nominated for such a commission are appropriate and competent for such work; that the terms of office and conditions of service and facilities are provided for; that representation of women and other castes or communities are guaranteed; that the powers, duties and functions of the commission are prescribed in the Act itself; and that, in considering the nature of the problem, investigations could be initiated on the basis of information received from any source. It is also necessary to have provisions on continuous inquiry until the status of an allegedly disappeared person is determined; the availability of protection and security for victims, witnesses, plaintiffs, advocates and investigator, so as to solicit their continuous assistance in the probes; the right and opportunities for the victims to record their statements and raise their concerns, and if desired, to keep their statements confidential if so called for; and the power of the Commission to conduct searches and to question all persons who it deems necessary. It is also necessary to ensure the means and resources necessary for such commission to accomplish its goals”.

Source: Habeas Corpus writ files on behalf of Rajendra Prasad Dhakal

*************************

OHCHR-Nepal also welcomes the Supreme Court’s ground-breaking decision of June 2007 where a large numbers of pending enforced disappearance were finalized through single verdict. Lena Sundh, the then Representative of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Nepal, said “The Supreme Court’s historic decision is a highly positive development and must be fully and promptly implemented. It is hoped that this decision will boost the efforts of victims and their families in finding out what happened to their loved ones and in their pursuit of justice, as well as in ending impunity for persons responsible for serious human rights violations in Nepal”[73].

The Court ordered urgently incorporating the provisions of law related to the rights of detainees (access of the lawyers and families to the detainees, the right of the detainees to be informed of the reason of his detention), the judicial remedies available to both detainees and their families, the right to compensation, an appropriate complaint filing mechanism, a flexible statute of limitations that does not hinder the investigation process, the creation of formal detention centers, humanitarian treatment while in detention; adequate documentation of detention conditions, name, title, address and other relevant details of the person who ordered detention, the right of the families to know all conditions of the detainee and adequate record keeping regarding detainees’ mental and physical condition[74]. The Court further said, “It is also equally important to enact a provision that uphold the international standard that pardon cannot be granted to persons who should be prosecuted for their alleged involvement in the act of disappearance…”[75].

The Apex Court issued directive to the respondents (Government of Nepal, the Ministry of Home Affairs, and the Office of the Attorney General) to undertake the necessary act for the protection of disappeared persons that include provisions for a Commission of Investigation to scrutinize the causes of disappearance and the status of disappeared persons. The Investigation Commission shall sufficiently be powerful to carry out in-depth and comprehensive inquiries of said persons and submit a report on their findings. Respondents shall initiate criminal investigations on the basis of the report and initiate prosecutions based on propriety and necessity[76].

To pursue the Court’s order, the Government formed a three-member high-level Commission for the Investigation of Disappeared Citizens headed by former Justice Narendra Bahadur Neupane on June 26, 2007. Two members were Raman Kumar Shrestha and Sher Bahadur KC[77]. As, the Commission was formed based on Panchayat Investigation Commission Act 2026 (1969), the decision was condemned from all corners. The international community, including human rights groups, severely criticized the team as inconsistent, inadequate and contrary to the spirit of Supreme Court judgment and international standards.

Against the submission of draft bill on Enforced Disappeared Persons in May 2007, prominent human rights organizations, namely Amnesty International, Asian Federation against Involuntary Disappearances, Human Rights Watch, International Center for Transitional Justice, International Commission of Jurists, Asian Centre for Human Rights and Nepalese human rights organizations, demanded its amendment[78]. Finally, the Parliamentary Committee on Law, Justice and Legislative Relations was compelled to withdraw the draft bill in November 2007 and ordered Government to draft a new disappearance bill respecting the Supreme Court’s decision and international human rights and humanitarian standards.

One year later, on November 16, 2008, the Maoist Chairman Prachanda-led Government made public a new draft on Enforced Disappearance of Persons (Crime and Punishment) Bill 2062 (2008). The bill proposed five-year jail term and up to Rs 500,000 (US $5,000) as fine to the main perpetrators who were involved in enforced disappeared persons. And the assistants of such crimes will be subjected to half of the jail term and half the fine amount of the main perpetrator. Those involved in disappearing children and women will have to face an additional two-year jail term.

The bill had made a provision to establish a high-level five-member independent commission to prove the cases of disappearance. A recommendation committee shall be formed headed by the Chairman of the Constituent Assembly (CA) and two incumbent ministers. The committee shall recommend five-members for the commission comprising human rights activists, lawyers, conflict experts, psychologists and sociologists with at least 10 years of professional experience[79]. The Ordinance formally criminalized enforced disappearance as a crime against humanity, providing reparation to the victims and their families and prosecution to the perpetrators[80]. Even though, it neither met international human rights standards nor Supreme Court directives[81]. On the active support of the international community and human rights organizations, the victims and their families initiated tireless campaigning and lobbying against the Ordinance[82].

The Enforced Disappearance of Persons (Crime and Punishment) Bill was never tabled for discussion in the CA-legislative parliament[83]. The Government passed from the cabinet as an Ordinance on February 5, 2009, bypassing second and third largest parties namely Nepali Congress and CPN (UML) and national and international human rights organizations. Thus, prominent human rights organizations submitted a strong joint appeal to the Nepal Government on August 30, 2009 to bring the draft bill fully in line with international human rights standards. The proposed numbers of amendments to the draft bill were:

“Defining ‘enforced disappearance’ consistently with the internationally recognized definition and recognizing that, under some circumstances, the act of enforced disappearance amounts to a crime against humanity;
Defining the modes of individual criminal liability, including responsibility of superiors and subordinates, consistent with internationally accepted legal standards;
Establishing minimum and maximum penalties for the crime of enforced disappearance and for enforced disappearance as a crime against humanity;
Ensuring the independence, impartiality and competence of the Commission of Inquiry into Enforced Disappearances;
Ensuring that the Commission of Inquiry is granted the powers and means to effectively fulfill its mandate;
Ensuring that all aspects of the Commission’s work respect, protect and promote the rights of victims, witnesses and alleged perpetrators;
Ensuring that the recommendations of the Commission are made public and implemented”[84].
The above-mentioned recommendations were based on international law and standards related to the investigation and prosecution of enforced disappearances and jurisprudence of regional and international human rights bodies, treaties, and international declarations and practice of international and national criminal jurisdictions[85]. The amendment memorandum of understanding was signed by the Accountability Watch Committee, Advocacy Forum Nepal, Asian Federation against Involuntary Disappearances, Human Rights Watch, International Center for Transitional Justice, the International Commission of Jurists and the Informal Sector Service Centre[86].

On July 1, 2009, the International Coalition against Enforced Disappearances wrote a letter to the Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal and urged his Government help to prevent enforced disappearances establishing a truth-seeking commission for justice, punishing the perpetrators and providing reparations to the victims and their families[87]. PM Nepal addressed to the UN General Assembly on September 26, 2009 in which he reiterated that the Nepal Government was ready to set up a Commission to Investigate Enforced Disappearance. The International Commission of Jurists 2009 requested to suspend the promotion of Major General Toran Bahadur Singh until a credible, impartial and independent investigation is conducted[88]. He was accused of crimes including torture and enforced disappearance under international law.

Having some cosmetic amendments into the Enforced Disappearance bill, the Government tabled it into the legislative-parliament on December 4, 2009. The punishment of enforced disappearance was amended to increase to 7 years and identified five types of reparations such as restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantee of non-repetition. However, 24 lawmakers put forward 77 amendment proposals, but that bill was finally sent to the Legislative Committee of the CA for further consideration[89]. A series of amendments to definition, punishment and limitation on the bill was forwarded by the Transitional Justice Advocacy Group[90] on the active support of prominent human rights organizations[91].

In April 2011, after completing section-wise discussion at the Legislative Committee of the CA, the bill was almost ready to table for adoption. Due to differing opinions amongst committee members on provisions of amnesty, reconciliation and definition of human rights violations, the bill failed to table in the legislative-parliament. To resolve the differences in the Disappearance bill, a five-member sub-committee was formed. The Sub-Committee was further expanded with two additional members in May 2011. However, the 10-day time frame at first and repeated extensions of times failed to submit the draft. Arguments and their own priorities between the Nepali Congress and the Maoist party delayed to resolve the differences. Nepali Congress wished to form the TRC, first owing to reconciliation and amnesty provisions as well as to return the property confiscated by the Maoists, but the Maoists preferred to form Enforced Disappeared Commission as most of their victims were their cadres[92].

On November 1, 2011, the political parties signed a historic 7-point agreement. The article 4 of the agreement stated that the bill on the IEDP and the TRC shall be endorsed by the legislative-parliament building consensus in the spirit of reconciliation as per the Comprehensive Peace Accord[93]. A high-level political Task Force was formed to finalize the bill. In January 2012, the Task Force submitted a Suggestion Paper that proposed a merger of the Disappearance Commission and TRC emphasizing truth-seeking. Continuing contradictory views were expressed for granting amnesty on the serious nature of human rights violations. In May 2012, Government decided to withdraw two pending CIEDP and TRC bills for the purpose of merging two Commissions[94]. The process stalled while CA-Legislative Parliament was dissolved by the then PM Baburam Bhattarai on May 27, 2012, announcing a fresh election date for November 22, 2012[95]. On August 27, 2012, the cabinet of the caretaker Government endorsed an Ordinance of transitional justice mechanism and forwarded it to the President for his final approval[96]. The Ordinance includes a provision of pardon for those involved in extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearance during the armed conflict[97]. The single ordinance for the formation of Disappearance and Truth and Reconciliation Commissions was prepared neither based on prevailing international human rights standards, practices and previous historic political and peace agreements. Nor did it follow the Supreme Court directives. Despite protests and criticizes by National Human Rights Commission, victim groups and human rights defenders, the President approved the bill in seven-month or on March 14, 2013.

****************************

Key Elements of the Supreme Court on Enforced Disappeared Persons Ordinance (January 2, 2014)

“[…], the Supreme Court ruled that amnesties for crimes under international law and gross violations of human rights are impermissible (para 34).
[…] these two commissions have to be established in line with prevailing human rights standards (para 20).
[…] commissions should not encourage forced “reconciliation” between victims and perpetrators (para 56. A).
[…] statutes of limitation cannot apply to serious crimes (para 56. C).
[…] amend Nepalese criminal law to allow private investigation and prosecution to ascertain victims’ right […] (para 56).
[…] ‘victims’ as principal actors, the centrality of their role in the amnesty and reconciliation process […] all fundamental provisions to be included in the commissions’ mandates (para 56.D)”.
Source: Advocacy Forum-Nepal, TRIAL and REDRESS: June 2014

**********************

Two human rights defenders filed a petition at the Supreme Court on March 24 challenging the Ordinance. On April 1, 2013, a single bench of Justice Sushila Karki issued the interim order[98]. On January 2, 2014 the Supreme Court handed over its decision regarding a transitional justice mechanism. It annulled the Ordinance as unconstitutional and directed the government to amend its test properly following international standards and practices[99].

Following the directives of the Supreme Court, the Government appointed a 5-member draft committee chaired by Raju Man Singh Malla, Secretary within the Office of the Prime Minister[100] on the course to establish for a Commission on Enforced Disappearance and Truth and Reconciliation Commission[101]on April 3, 2014. While the UCPN (Maoist), the main opposition party, protested to the government on unilateral formation of a draft, the government reformed a 6-member task force on April 6 comprising two representatives of each Nepali Congress, UML and Maoist parties with the mandate to finalize the CIEDP and TRC bills. Second-rank leaders or committee members were: Barsha Man Pun and Khim Lal Devkota of the UCPN (Maoist), Radheshyam Adhikari and Ramesh Lekhak of NC and Pradip Gyawali and Agni Kharel of the UML[102].

The Nepali Congress Government finally tabled an IEDP and TRC Bill at the Legislative Parliament on April 18. The Bill was adopted by the CA on April 25. The CA members had tabled 18 amendments on 119 points of the Bill, but were forced to withdraw them by their respective party leaders[103]. The Bill finally became an Act while the President promulgated it on May 11, 2014.

The Supreme Court directed the establishment of a separate Commission to Investigate Enforced Disappeared Persons while the UNOHCHR submitted credible evidence of systematic enforced disappearances and testimonies and tortures in Bhairabnath Battalion[104] to the Maoist activists under the command of Colonel Raju Basnet in 2003[105]. Even though the same Maoist leader Dr. Baburam Bhattarai-led Government promoted alleged war crime criminal Basnet to Brigadier General on October 4, 2012[106]. Human Rights Watch says, “Cabinet decision reinforces impunity[107]”. Bhattarai took that decision just to remain in the Prime Minister for longer period against the wishes of his party cadres and severe criticism of the international community and the civil society organizations and individuals in Nepal.

It is to be remarkable that the leaders of the ruling class and the Maoists were protected or enjoyed even in the armed conflict, but people of countryside were very much suffered. The same countryside people are being suffered in the name of peace and constitution-making nowadays.

Moreover, single woman of disappeared person (man) suffers a lot each and every movement in compared to children and senior citizens. She lacked of self-identity, quasi-“wife or widow” in the family or society. The severe suffering finds particularly in countryside. While head of the household disappeared, the same woman has been responsible to care children, senior citizens and other works. The position of single woman in poor, marginalized, vulnerable and disadvantaged is further deteriorated in the village. No effective psycho-social counseling or services has reached there yet. Reparation to the family of disappeared person and prosecuting to the confirmed perpetrator[108] are cry in a thin voice.

NEFAD’s Critical Engagement
The National Network of Families of the Disappeared and Mission (NEFAD) is a national common platform of district-based associations of families of disappeared and missing in Nepal. It aims to provide support, advocacy and relief for the families of the disappeared and missing. The NEFAD is an independent network organization that serves the needs and wishes of the conflict-affected family members. Network has now been spread up to 68 districts, almost all over Nepal. It has already welcomed the Supreme Court’s mandamus on enforced disappearance of February 26, 2015, January 2, 2014 and June 1, 2007 and has urged the Government and both Commissions to respect and follow the Supreme Court’s directives. It wishes to create an environment conducive to the formation of victim-centered Transitional Justice in Nepal.

The author himself has done a preliminary assessment review on the data of enforced disappearance collected by the Peace Ministry. There are a total of 1,506 enforced disappeared cases that cover 69 districts of 75 ranging east to west and south to north in Nepal. The male comprises 91 per cent whereas 77 per cent persons were killed by the state security forces, 13 per cent by unidentified groups and 10 per cent by the Maoists. The highest number, 248 (16.5%) persons, were disappeared from Bardia district alone followed by 122 (8%) in Banke, 114 (7.5%) in Dang and 97 (6.5%) in Rolpa districts. Other major 16 districts that attain more than 20 cases of enforced disappearance are: Kanchanpur (42), Kavre (40), Salyan (39), Siraha and Chitwan (37), Sindhupalchowk (35), Kailali (33), Baitadi and Dhading (29), Kalikot (28), Gorkha (27), Nuwakot (26), Kathmandu (25), Baglung (24), Morang (23) and Ramechhap (20).

The NEFAD conducted a national-level meeting in Bardiya district in 45 days of the formation of the CIEDP. It invited almost all representatives from its district networks which finally came up with 9-point Bardiya Declaration as pre-requisites to engagement with the CIEDP.

First, the CIEDP is to respect the Supreme Court verdicts and internationally established principles of transitional justice. Two, the NEFAD asked the Commission to ensure a victim centric approach following with detailed program schedules. Third, the Commission is to engage with NHRC and other concerned agencies. Fourth, NEFAD also wishes to share CIEDP’s engagement with conflict victims. Fifth, it sets Commission’s priority on the issues related to transitional justice mechanism. Sixth, development of rules and regulations and operation procedures shall be incorporated in consultation and participation with victims’ families. Seventh, it solicits to have access to all documents developed by the CIEDP regarding protection of victim’s families and witnesses. Eighth, the Commission is to create an institutional and physical environment to ensure victim rights of all types such as children, persons with disabilities, women and victims of sexual violence. Finally, a support mechanism is to be developed to address families’ practical requirements and legal-administrative challenges.

In response to NEFAD’s 9-point critical engagement, the CIEDP shall truly follow all directives instructed by the Supreme Court of various dates. The formation of a CIEDP is a last step of transitional peace mechanism; it will pursue all theoretical and practical human rights standards and instruments. The program schedule has already been developed. The CIEDP shall not only engage with NHRC and security forces, but it is improving its relations with international communities and other related experts and institutions. The IEDP and TRC Act 2014 has given a mandate to work with conflict victims alone, giving top priority to end the transitional justice mechanism.

The CIEDP website (www.ciedp.gov.np) is under construction, but many documents are already linked in it. The draft Regulations, duly submitted to the Government for its revision and approval, has already mentioned environment conducive in favor of children, persons with disabilities, women, victims of sexual violence and senior citizens. Protection to victim’s families and witnesses shall also be a sole concern of the CIEDP. The Code of Conduct (CoC) and Terms and References (ToRs) of the CIEDP have already stated more issues and concerns than the NEFAD put forward. It means there is no longer any hesitation to accept the NEFAD’s critical engagement. However, confident building measures are to be developed based on direct or indirect and formal or informal dialogues when required.

Working Modalities
The virtual realities given below may help to understand truths about what happened during the tenure of the armed conflict. Based on true bitter incidents and facts, the CIEDP has developed its working modalities. The following are just emblematic case studies.

Virtual Reality I: It was twilight, difficult to recognize newcomers. Someone knocked at the door and asked if the household head or targeted family member was at home. A voice from inside asked, “Who are you?” Someone replied, “It is us; please open the door. We have a little work with you.” Recognizing the voice, those inside opened the door. The visitors entered and seized the embattled family member from the house. Visitors at first asked him/her to go out with them. She or he normally resisted for not wanting to go with them fearing torture, other cruel inhumane and degrading treatment and possible extrajudicial killings or disappearances. The family members screamed, begging them for not to take him or her. The visitors assured them she or he will return the next day or soon after preliminary inquiries and took him/her outside. As the family member tried to protect him or her, the group threatened them with possible retaliation. The visitor group forcefully took out from the house. The arrested or abducted person never returned.

Virtual Reality II: It was nearly sunset or dusk, inviting evening; a man was waiting for public transportation in a lonely place. A vehicle stopped in front of him. A few unfamiliar civilian-dressed personnel got down, surrounded and asked him to go with them for some purposes or inquiries. He simply protested and denied going with them. He argued, “Who are you? What have I done wrong? Why should I go with you? …” keep seeking some help from the surroundings. No one was there. Or none of the stranded or being watched dared to ask, “What are you doing? Leave him out” fearing possible action from them. He was involuntarily taken, dragging and pushing him into the vehicle[109]. As soon as he entered into the cab, he was blindfolded by mask. His hands were forcefully pulled back and handcuffed. He was severely threatened to be killed if he made noise or shouted, asking for help. Public reported his clandestine arrest and someone filed a petition into the Court. Despite Court’s verdict to make him public, he was disappeared for ever.

Virtual Reality III: A person is secretly arrested, detained, tortured and disappears by armed forces from any place and they keep refusing to acknowledge the whereabouts of his/her fate. The forces try hard to decompose, burying his/her dead body in such a way not to ever be found.

The CIEDP shall use certain tools and techniques to collect DNA and burial remains. The working methods or modalities of the CIEDP may lead into eight-step or phase: Internal Office Management, Announcement of Application, Interpretation of Data, Rapid DNA Testing (Collecting DNA Reference Sample), Identification of Victim’s Body Burial Site, Exhumation, Recommendation and Reparation.

The internal management leads to formation of required rules and regulations, office set-up, fulfillment of needed officials, collection of secondary data and literature reviews. This process took more time than expected. The entire Commissioner was compelled to stay in a single room more than six-month of its formation. Besides, CIEDP was without a secretary for about 100 days of its establishment. The absence of administrative and financial head Secretary paralyzed entire office management works of the CIEDP.

However, the CIEDP had already prepared numbers of papers including procedures of meetings, development of code of conduct to Commissioners, organization and management, policy development to hiring experts and terms and references. The regulations of the CIEDP have already been completed and put forward to the concerned ministry for its revision and final approval from the Government of Nepal. Similarly, the CIEDP has already completed the survey of disappeared persons’ data reviewing the literatures. Author’s paper on Enforced Disappearance Commission: Roles of International Community is available in Lund University’s link[110].

Submission of the application to the families of victims shall be announced by electronic-print media, radios, televisions and others. The CIEDP shall also request for political parties, civil society, National Network of Families of the Disappeared and Mission (NEFAD) and other NGOs, government officials and social workers to support the endeavors. Asking support from the GoN, an official shall be deployed at each VDC in 20 districts[111] as a focal person. A focal person shall collect details of the complaint of a victim’s family and shall assist to fill-up the forms. A receipt shall also be provided to the applicant and copy of all collected documents with stamped of the CIEDP shall be given to the applicant in the next interview.

A Special Desk Officer (SDO) shall be established either at District Peace Committee and District Development Committee or Chief District Officer office. A Training of Trainers (SDOs) shall be provided prior to announcement of application. If the application date is lost in local areas, ie, village development office (VDC), the applicant shall submit application at the concerned District Office six months before the working deadline of the CIEDP and TRC Act 2014 mentioned. Such District Desk Office shall be established in all disappeared persons’ affected districts. Special attention shall also be provided to the districts or VDCs as required. Temporary offices shall be established either within the premises of VDC or other local government offices, mobilizing their own officials. That process shall be one kind of action research.

The preliminary investigation of victims’ application shall be studied on the course of interpretation of data. The researchers shall develop a short profile of each victim annulling the duplication. The tameli (postponement) of application shall be done if process of application shall be found weak or enough testimonies could not be furnished. If required documents were found either by researcher of the CIEDP or applicant himself or herself, the postponement of application shall be reopened.

A rapid DNA testing for reference samples (collection) shall be conducted for each victim’s family based on the preliminary findings. For this, trained technicians with kits shall be mobilized to collect biological material, mainly blood samples of the disappearance person’s biological family members (father-mother or daughter-son)[112]. If close family members could not be found, blood from close relatives shall also be taken to use reference samples to confirm individual characteristic identity of possible bodies. Finally, a DNA data bank shall be developed of each disappeared person on the course to matching suspect with evidence received after the extraction of DNA from exhumation remains.

To identify disappeared person’s burial sites, informal-formal and indirect-direct dialogue shall be held with families or relatives of victims, witnesses, former security officials, individuals or institutions working with victims’ families, political parties, civil society and among others. It is to be noted that many of the victims’ dead bodies who were forcefully arrested, tortured and disappeared by the state security forces may be found within the premises of army barracks or police posts, and nearby such barracks and posts and bodies were already burnt during armed conflict. But, the Maoists abducted, tortured and disappeared persons may be found in the jungle of a nearby community. In regards to extract the right information from the informant, there is a provision of reward. Article 35 of the Act 2014 said, “The Commission may reward the person, organization, agency or institution or investigating authority who supported the Commission in matter of enquiry conducted by the Commission to investigate truth and facts pursuant to this Act”.

An audio-visual lab shall be established to hold digital video conference (DVC) in general, to record (audio-visual) interview of the alleged perpetrators and witnesses, to make a documentary film of victim’s family and possible burial sites and to document the process of exhumation among others. The audio-visual lab shall assist in maintaining secrecy and in reducing the security risk. Audio-visual equipments and experts shall also be needed to accomplish the required tasks. Even authority of the CIEDP shall involve conducting public hearings in complex cases of disappearances. Exhumation at possible burial sites is a part of the transitional justice mechanism. It is a lengthy process. A well-equipped forensic lab with high-skilled technicians shall be established before to initiate the field research. The team shall be comprised of archaeologist, anthropologist, post-mortem doctor, pathologist and other concerned specialists.

The article 14.6 of the Act 2014 stated that, if disappeared person has already been killed and dead body has already been buried, the Commission shall carry out the exhumation of such places. Similarly, the article 32.1 of the Act said that the Commission shall accomplish the tasks of hiring native or foreign experts or specialized agencies of the concerned field, as per necessity.

There are no problems in conducting exhumation at the burial sites in the jungle, but it is very much challenging to identity and exhume the burial sites committed by the state security forces. Networking tracking methods or snowball techniques shall be followed to trace and identify the possible burial sites for the exhumation. The DNA of the human remains found in the course of exhumation shall be extracted and matched with a data bank of concerned victims. Finally, the remains shall be delivered for victim’s family to conduct last rites and rituals.

The Government shall be responsible to provide all required personnel to the Commission. If government fails to provide needed personnel, the CIEDP shall hire short term-long term national and international researchers-consultants to accomplish the task. At the end of the research, a complete report shall be submitted to the Government to take action against the perpetrators and provide reparation to the victims’ families.

A rapport and good coordination shall be developed with the concerned International Community, Ministries and Institutions either directly by the CIEDP or by seeking support from the line-Peace Ministry. The active participation of all with full accountability shall subsequently conclude transitional justice or the last step of peace process of Nepal.

Critical Appraisal
With respect to criminal prosecutions, Amnesty International identified 40 truth commissions established around the world between 1974 and 2010. Of the 40 commissions examined, only three: South Africa, East-Timor and Grenada, had given the power to grant immunity even for serious human rights violations under international law in connection with truth-seeking processes[113]. Nepal’s two truth-commissions, namely Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons and Truth and Reconciliation Commission, are the newest ones formed in February 2015. There are no provisions of reconciliation and amnesty into the CIEDP, but the TRC has them in the Act 2014.

On February 26, 2015, the Supreme Court annulled the amnesty and reconciliation provisions of the transitional justice. Responding to the appeal filed by 234 conflict victims in June 2014, the Supreme Court curtailed the discretionary power to grant amnesty for war crimes and crime against humanity. The verdict formally ends the provision that perpetrators would get acquitted without trail[114]. Earlier, the TRC could recommend amnesty to perpetrators except in cases of rape and other serious human rights violations. Article 2.j of the IEDP and TRC Act, 2014 stated that murder, enforced disappeared persons, rape and other sexual violence fall under the category of serious violation of human rights. Article 22.4 of the Act 2014 provision, “the Commission may encourage the perpetrator and the victim for reconciliation” has been cancelled.

There is a single IEDP and TRC Act, 2014. Because of experiences, nature of works, title of the Commission and mandates incorporated into the Act, some people believe that TRC is liable more to perpetrator rather than to ensure justice and reparation for dignified citizens (to the victims and victims’ families). CIEDP is victim-centric owing to its reserve nature, low profile activities and mandate. The Act 2014 repeats 26 times of reconciliation and 21 times of amnesty instead of 4 times disappearance and 5 times disappeared persons. No provisions of reconciliation and amnesty attract to the CIEDP. There is sharp interest of Government, political parties and security forces between the two Commissions. Ruling Nepali Congress has a sharp interest in TRC as it wants to return confiscated private properties from the Maoist cadres. The main opposition UCPN (Maoist) has given a priority to CIEDP while more than fourth-fifths of its activists are involuntarily disappeared by the security forces.

The CIEDP is shadowed due to Government’s low priority to it in reality. The policies and programs and budget of 2015-2016 have been stressed upon to provide all necessary resources and equipment to the CIEDP, but Nepal Government allocated just 20 per cent of actual cost put forward by Rs. 270 million Nepalese currency. The Peace and Reconstruction Minister, in our first meeting on February 13, 2015, stated that they are ready to provide whatever the resources and assistance the CIEDP needs. He also asked for not having to take any financial support from the donor agencies.

The article 14.6 of the IEDP and TRC Act 2014 has mentioned right to exhumation stating, “If the Commission is convinced of the fact that a person made to disappear has already been killed and the dead body has been buried in a particular place, the Commission may ascertain the reality by carrying out the exhumation of such place”. Similarly, article 14.7 of the Act stress, upon carrying out exhumation and if the Commission finds the dead body or human remains of a victim, there is a provision to conduct DNA and autopsy tests to identify the concerned victim. No standard guidelines and protocols relating to exhumation and autopsy have been formed. The exhumation, DNA extract and test and autopsy are expensive, time consuming and require international forensic experts. The following example shall be praiseworthy to understand more on this.

Five youths were arrested from Janakpur on October 8, 2003, but disappeared since then. A complaint was lodged at the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Nepal immediate after they disappeared. The Commission recommended to the Government of Nepal for the legal action against erstwhile senior Nepal Police officers[115]. The District Attorney of Dhanusha district issued directives to the District Nepal Police Office, Dhanusha on November 25, 2009 to exhume the dead bodies. The NHRC Nepal initiated exhumation 10 month later in September 2010 only. A total of 64 trenches, 9 extensions and 4 blocks had been excavated at the suspected sites. For DNA tests, 19 reference blood samples were collected from biological family members. Human remains of all five dead bodies were examined at the Forensic Department of Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, Maharajgunj. Those remains were sent to Laboratory of Biology Department, Forensic Medicine Hjelt Institute of University of Helsinki, Finland for DNA tests in 2011. The final report of DNA test arrived in July 2014 only[116].

The above-mentioned case study took more than a decade. A number of cases of enforced disappearance shall also be exhumed by the CIEDP. A credible forensic lab is to be established before identification of burial sites and exhumation initiated. International forensic experts shall be hired. However, Government of Nepal, principally Finance Ministry, denied allocating money to establish a forensic lab. On the whole, present Finance Minister Dr. Ram Saran Mahat is not sensitive to conclude Nepal’s peace process. It might happen because of his clandestine link with alleged or suspicious perpetrators. The devalued of CIEDP-mandated works by Minister Mahat shall derail the entire peace process.

Article 18 of the Act 2014 mentioned the provision to establish an audio-video lab to conduct public hearing on the cases of enforced disappearance, but the budget did not allocate for this in the 2015-2016 fiscal year. This is just a small example of Government of Nepal bias against the CIEDP. If the CIEDP derailed its works in the lack of resources, equipments and experts, the author shall compel to initiate hunger strike “fast unto death” and file a case in the Supreme Court for mandamus to ensure justice to the victim’s families.

The work of the CIEDP is very much tough and challenging. It may even invite inquiry for former Prime Ministers, Ministers, bureaucrats, leaders and security personnel who were taking position during a decade tenure of the Maoist-launched People’s War. Because of high risks, the officials are hesitating to join with the CIEDP. Financial incentive shall need to encourage the officials. The Government should be proactive on this provision too.

The Accountability Watch Committee (a forum of victims), some lawyers and human rights defenders and a few civil society leaders issued a statement on May 13, 2014 calling for a boycott of the Commissions, unless the main areas of concern victims and human rights organizations are addressed in line with international standards and practices[117]. Both CIEDP and TRC are truth-seeking Commissions. A number of international community, forefront victims’ families and civil society individuals and institutions protested the formation of the CIEDP and TRC because of their vested zest and zeal. A few raised questions on selection procedures, experiences and qualifications of the Commissioners. They criticize mainly due to the appointment of afno manchhe (leaders’ trusted person) rather than ramro manchhe (qualified, independent and neutral professionals).

Why did some civil society organizations become critical of supporting CIEDP and TRC? There are numbers of reasons. First, a large number of international human rights individuals and institutions want to correct their mistakes and wrongdoings from Nepal and the forthcoming Commission in Sri Lanka, learning negative consequences from South Africa. It is remarkable that a great number of alleged perpetrators were white people in comparison to black. The amnesty and reconciliation provisions protected the elite people in South Africa. Thus, they have a fear whether a repetition shall occur in Nepal too. Second, some individuals and institutions shall have general desire to be in compliance with international standards, practices and domestication for them. Third, the forefront civil society actors could not be come out from their existing superior complexity, self-centeredness and jealousy. Fourth, a few transitional justice veterans wish to appoint experienced and qualified commissioners to accomplish the tasks successfully.

Fifth, a few international organizations who are working in the name of restoring peace and justice protested the CIEDP fearing of losing their jobs from NGOs if transitional justice ends in Nepal. Lastly, some of them want to make truth-seeking commissions as independent, neutral, high-moral character and professional bodies. They want to initiate both retributive justice and restorative justice in this transitional Nepal.

The CIEDP is not formed respecting peace accord and Interim Constitution, but from the pressure of the international community and human rights organizations and a strong network of the victim’s families. Thus, Nepal Government desires to form the Investigation of Enforced Disappearance Persons for not having truth and justice, but to calm the international community and victim’s families.

Nepal is yet to ratify the UN Convention 2006 to stop the acts of forceful disappearance to persons. Even though Nepal is compelled to ensure international human rights provisions and some of the laws are related to ban enforced disappeared persons. UN Human Rights Committee stressed that transitional justice mechanisms cannot rule out criminal prosecution of serious human rights violations. It recommended that Nepal Government follow transitional justice in accordance with the Supreme Court mandamus.

Enforced disappearance has a long, neglected and complex history. The CIEDP discovers and reveals the truth of actual facts whereabouts the fate of disappeared persons. It assists seeking justice in prosecuting perpetrators related for war crime and crimes against humanity. It also assists in redressing justice for victim’s families, recommending reparation to live and let live with full dignity.

Dignity is a quality of being worthy of honor. The concept of dignity expresses the innate idea of rights to valued, respected and ethical treatment for each and every citizen of the nation. Thus, the dignity is a non-derogatory, inalienable and inherent right. The prime duty of state is to respect, protect and promote human dignity without distinction of caste, ethnicity, race, sex, age, religion, class, geography, color and profession.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Pathak, Bishnu. May 18, 2015. Nepal’s Enforced Disappearance Commission: Roles of International Community. TRANSCEND Media Service.

[2] ‘they’ refer to Enforced Disappeared Persons

[3] During 1996 to 1999, a total of 142 persons were disappeared after taken into custody by the security forces. While Civil Society members visited the then Prime Minister of Nepal in August 1999 and asked him to respect the international human rights standards and humanitarian practices, Bhattarai said so. This is just a representative example of how elected government was irresponsible to respect the life, liberty, security and dignity of the sovereign citizens. Pathak, Bishnu. 2005. Politics of People’s War and Human Rights in Nepal. Kathmandu: BIMIPA Publications. Also, Sapkota, Dhani Ram. 2008. Enforced Disappearance in Nepal and the Responsibility of Protect in the Context of International Law. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master in Arts (Human Rights), Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahido University.

[4] more than eight years of the CPA was signed.

[5] Both justices complement each other

[6] Pathak, Bishnu. 2005. Politics of People’s War and Human Rights in Nepal. Kathmandu: BIMIPA Publications.

[7] Asian Human Rights Commission. February 15, 2012. NEPAL: Families of the disappeared in a legal and emotional limbo. That statement was submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), a non-governmental sister organization of the AHRC.

[8] Pathak, Bishnu. March 8, 2008. Human Rights and Nepal Police. Kathmandu: CS Center. p. 2.

[9] Asian Human Rights Commission. February 15, 2012. NEPAL: Families of the disappeared in a legal and emotional limbo. Asian Legal Resource Centre

[10] Pathak, Bishnu. March 8, 2008. Human Rights and Nepal Police. Kathmandu: CS Center

[11] UNHR. October 8, 2012. Nepal Conflict Report. Geneva: OHCHR. p. 18

[12] Pathak, Bishnu. December 2011. Comprehensive Peace Accord: Human Rights Status 2006-2011. Kathmandu: NHRC. p. 5

[13] Informal Sector Service Center.1997. Human Rights Yearbook 1997. Kathmandu

[14] Amnesty International. February 12, 2002. Fear for Safety/Possible “disappearance”/ Fear of Torture/ Possible Extrajudicial Execution: Surya Prasad Sharma. ASA 31/015/2002

[15] Amnesty International. March 1999. Nepal: Human Rights at a Turning Point? AI Index: ASA 31/01/99.

[16] Ibid

[17] Pathak, Bishnu. 2005. Politics of People’s War and Human Rights in Nepal. Kathmandu: BIMIPA Publications.

[18] In November 2001, the Nepal Government proclaimed a state of emergency promulgating the Terrorist and Disruptive (Control and Punishment) Ordinance (TADO). TADO was re-promulgated into the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Control and Punishment) Act, 2002 (TADA) on April 10, 2002 initially with a validity of two years, till 2004. Subsequently, it was re-enacted five times through Ordinances each lasting for six months. The last re-promulgation was March 27, 2006 which expired on September 26, 2006.

[19] UNHR. October 8, 2012. Nepal Conflict Report. Geneva: OHCHR. p. 18-19.

[20] Dhakal, Rajendra et al. Jan 21, 1999. The Government of Nepal (writ no.3575) Disappearance Case. OHCHR

[21] Human Rights Yearbook 2007. 2008. Enforced Disappearances in Nepal. Kathmandu: INSEC

[22] UNOHCHR. May 2006. Report of investigation into arbitrary detention, torture and disappearances at Maharajgunj RNA barracks. Kathmandu.

[23] UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. Online Available in http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/DisappearancesIndex.aspx (Accessed on August 13, 2015)

[24] Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons and Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act 2014.

[25] Finucane, Brian. 2010. “Enforced Disappearance as a Crime Under International Law: A Neglected Origin in the Laws of War”. Yale Journal of International Law. Vol. 35, p.171.

[26] Vermeulen, Marthe Lot. February 2012. “Enforced Disappearance: Determining State Responsibility Under the ICPPED”. School of Human Rights Research Series, Volume 51. Utrecht University of School of Law

[27] Pathak, Bishnu. May 18, 2015. Nepal’s Enforced Disappearance Commission: Roles of International Community. TRANSCEND Media Service.

[28] A/RES/47/133. December 18, 1992. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. United Nations General Assembly.

[29] General Comment on Enforced Disappearances as a Crime against Humanity. Online Available in www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Disappearances/GCas_crime_against_humanity.pdf (Accessed on July 17, 2015)

[30] Ibid

[31] Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, June 9, 1994. Online Available in www.cidh.oas.org/Basicos/English/Basic11.Disappearance.htm (Accessed on July 17, 2015)

[32] United Nations. 2005. “Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind with commentaries 1996”. Yearbook of the International Law Commission 1996. vol. II. Part Two.

[33] A/CONF.183/9. July 17, 1998. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. United Nations.

[34] ICPPED. Online Available in https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CTC/Ch_IV_16.pdf (Assessed on July 17, 2015).

[35] General Comment on Enforced Disappearances as a Crime against Humanity. Online Available in www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Disappearances/GCas_crime_against_humanity.pdf (Accessed on July 17, 2015)

[36] A/RES/47/133. December 18, 1992. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. United Nations General Assembly.

[37] Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances: General Comment on Enforced Disappearance as a Continuous Crime. Online Available in http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Disappearances/GC-EDCC.pdf (Accessed on July 16, 2015)

[38] Ibid

[39]UN Human Rights. Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. Online Available in http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/DisappearancesIndex.aspx

[40] Ibid

[41]Ibid

[42] Practical Information: The Working Group of Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID). Online Available in http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Disappearances/how_to_use_the_WGEID.pdf (Accessed on July 15, 2105)

[43] Reliefweb. December 19, 2009. UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances welcomes report on disappearances in Nepal. Online Available in http://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/un-working-group-enforced-or-involuntary-disappearances-welcomes-report-disappearances (Accessed on July 5, 2015)

[44] Ibid

[45] A/HRC/13/31. December 21, 2009. Report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. Human Rights Council. UN General Assembly.

[46] Ibid.

[47] E/CN.4/2005/65. December 23, 2004. Civil and Political Rights, including the Questions of: Disappearances and Summary Execution. Human Rights Council. UN General Assembly.

[48] The Working Group’s delegation was headed by Professor Stephen J. Toope, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group and Professor Saed Rajaie Khorasani, member of the Working Group.

[49] Reliefweb. December 14, 2004. Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights concludes visit to Nepal. Kathmandu

[50] A/HRC/WGEID/104/1. November 27, 2014. Human Rights Council: Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. UN General Assembly.

[51] Ibid.

[52] Ibid.

[53]UN Human Rights. Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. Online Available in http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/DisappearancesIndex.aspx

[54] Comprehensive Peace Accord signed on November 21, 2006 between the CPN (Maoist) and the Government of Nepal.

[55] Interim Constitution of Nepal was promulgated on January 15, 2007 that constitutionalzed the provisions of peace accord.

[56] International Commission on Jurists. March 2009. A Briefing Paper on Disappearances in Nepal: Addressing the Past, Securing the Future. Kathmandu

[57] Ref. Ares(2013)3763804. December 19, 2013. Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA. European Commission.

[58] The reparation obtains from restitution, rehabilitation, satisfaction, restoration of dignity, reputation and guarantees of non-repetition

[59] Article 9.5 of the International Convent on Civil and Political Rights.

[60] International Commission on Jurists. March 2009. A Briefing Paper on Disappearances in Nepal: Addressing the Past, Securing the Future. Kathmandu.

[61] Gade, Christian B.N. June 2012. Restorative Justice and the South African Truth and Reconciliation Process. Denmark: Aarhus University.

[62] Final Report of the Commission of Truth and Friendship (CFT) Indonesia-Timor-Leste. Online Available in https://file.wikileaks.org/file/commission-for-truth-and-friendship-indonesia-and-east-timor-2008.pdf (Accessed on August 15, 2015)

[63] Truth and Reconciliation Commission Grenada Report on certain political events. Online Available in http://www.thegrenadarevolutiononline.com/trccontents.html (Accessed on August 15, 2015).

[64] In general, victim and witness protection law

[65] Spotlight. March 18, 2015. Bill created to make provision for victim protection: A review. Kathmandu

[66] Regmi, Khilaraj and Kalyan Shrestha. June 1, 2007. Habeas Corpus writ files on behalf of Rajendra Prasad Dhakal. Kathmandu: Division Bench of the Supreme Court.

[67] Adhikari, Kopila. August 2007. The Making of Nepal’s Anti-Disappearance Law. Kathmandu: Advocacy Forum.

[68] Ibid.

[69] Regmi, Khilaraj and Kalyan Shrestha. June 1, 2007. Habeas Corpus writ files on behalf of Rajendra Prasad Dhakal. Kathmandu: Division Bench of the Supreme Court.

[70] Ibid.

[71] International Commission on Jurists. March 2009. A Briefing Paper on Disappearances in Nepal: Addressing the Past, Securing the Future. Kathmandu.

[72] UN Human Rights. Human Rights Bodies. Online Available in http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/Pages/HumanRightsBodies.aspx (Accessed on July 18, 2015)

[73] UNOHCHR Nepal. June 4, 2007. A Press Release on OHCHR-Nepal welcomes Supreme Court’s ground-breaking decision on disappearances. Kathmandu.

[74] Regmi, Khilaraj and Kalyan Shrestha. June 1, 2007. Habeas Corpus writ files on behalf of Rajendra Prasad Dhakal. Kathmandu: Division Bench of the Supreme Court.

[75] Ibid.

[76] Ibid.

[77] Competent Body on Disappearances Needed. Online Available in http://hrcsa.org/Nepal/competent%20body%20on%20disappearances%20needed.htm (Accessed on May 10, 2015).

[78] Amnesty International. Nepal: Disappearances Law must meet international standards. Online Available in http://www.amnestynepal.org/campaigns/ai-nepal-activities/nepal:-%E2%80%9Cdisappearances%E2%80%9D-law-must-meet-international-standards.html (Accessed on May 10, 2015)

[79] Kathmandu Post. November 17, 2008. Disappearance bill to be retroactive. Kathmandu: Kantipur Publication

[80] “”Perpetrator” means a person involved in a crime committing gross violation of human rights in the course of armed conflict and the term also includes a person giving order to commit such crime as well”. Article 2 of the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons and Truth and Reconciliation Act 2014

[81] Kathmandu Post. November 17, 2008. Disappearance bill to be retroactive. Kathmandu: Kantipur Publication

[82] Advocacy Forum-Nepal, TRIAL and REDRESS. June 2014. Nepal Playing Lip Service to Justice: The Newly Adopted TRC Act Breaches International Law and Flouts the Decision of the Supreme Court of Nepal. The Report Submitted to UN Special Rapporteur on Promotion of Truth, Justice and Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, UN Working Groups on Enforced Disappearance or Involuntary Disappearances, etc.

[83] International Commission of Jurists. January 30, 2009. Nepal Government Should Allow Parliament to Debate Laws on Disappearances and Truth and Reconciliation. Geneva

[84] Amnesty International. September 2, 2009. Nepal ‘disappearances’ law must meet international standards. London

[85] Human Rights Watch. August 31, 2009. Nepal: Joint Memorandum on the Disappearances of Persons (Crime and Punishment) Bill.

[86] Amnesty International. September 2, 2009. Nepal ‘disappearances’ law must meet international standards. London.

[87] International Coalition against Enforced Disappearances on July 2009 from Netherlands.

[88] International Commission of Jurists on December 1, 2009 from Geneva.

[89] Advocacy Forum. January 2014. Nepal: Transitional Justice at Crossroads. Special Brief. Year 4, No. 1

[90] National Network of Families of Disappeared and Missing Nepal. Online Available in https://nefad.wordpress.com/category/enforced-disappearance-advocacy/ (Accessed on August 1, 2015).

[91] Advocacy Forum, International Centre for Transitional Justice, International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International and INSEC

[92] Advocacy Forum. January 2014. Nepal: Transitional Justice at Crossroads. Special Brief. Year 4, No. 1

[93] UCPN (Maoist). November 1, 2011. Historic Seven-point Agreement. Kathmandu

[94] Sigdel, Santosh et al. May 2012. Prolonged Legislative Process: Law Making in Nepal. Kathmandu: Citizens’ Campaign for Right to Information (CCRI)

[95] Briefing note on the recent political developments in Nepal leading to a lack of access to justice for victims of gross human rights violations and international humanitarian law. Online

Available in http://www.trial-ch.org/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/CAJ/Nepal/Briefing_Note_ to_the_SR on_TJ_23.08.2012_-_copie__1_.pdf (Accessed on August 5, 2015)

[96] Adhikari, Ankit. August 29, 2012. “Move on ordinance riles NHRC, civil society activists”. Kathmandu Post. Kathmandu: Kantipur Publications

[97] Bhandari, Ram Kumar. August 31, 2012. “Disappearance of truth”. Nepali Times. Kathmandu.

[98] Kharel, Pranab. April 2, 2013. “Supreme Court stays TRC move”. Kathmandu Post. Kantipur Publication

[99] Koirala, Kosh Raj. January 3, 2014. “SC rejects TRC ordinance over blanket amnesty”. Republica. Kathmandu: Nepal Republic Media.

[100] Other members were Dhan Bahadur Tamang, secretary at the Peace Ministry, Rajendra Kishor Chhetri, secretary at the Nepal Law Commission, Tek Prasad Dhungana and Kamalshali Ghimire, joint-secretaries at the Law Ministry.

[101] Republica. April 4, 2014. Panel submits draft TRC, Disapperance Commission bills. Kathmandu: Nepal Republic Media.

[102] Ibid.

[103] Nepalnews.com. April 26, 2014. House passes bill on TRC and enforced disappearance commission. Kathmandu

[104] On May 26, 2006, the UN OHCHR Nepal published a report on investigation of disappeared persons arrested by the Nepal Army and held in Maharajgunj barracks in Kathmandu in 2003 on suspicion of being linked to the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). The report says, “…at least 49 persons, and probably a significantly higher number, remain disappeared.” During interrogations, officers stopped asking questions related to any of these former detainees. Most former detainees interviewed by OHCHR believe that these detainees were executed. However, few of them are now on public. For more see, Pathak, Bishnu and Chitra Niraula. September 15, 2006. Ratification of International Criminal Court to Just Peace. Situation Update 8. Kathmandu: Peace and Conflict Studies Center.

[105] Human Rights Watch. October 5, 2012. Nepal: Promotion of War Crimes Suspect Affront to Justice: Cabinet Decision Reinforces Impunity. New York

[106] Dahal, Phinendra. October 5, 2012. “After all the hue and cry, Basnet Gets Promotion”. Kathmandu Post. Kantipur Publications.

[107] Human Rights Watch. October 12, 2012. Nepal: Promotion of War Crimes Suspect Affront to Justice. Washington.

[108] Determine by Courts and National Human Rights Commission, Nepal

[109] Without or with private number place

[110] http://www.sasnet.lu.se/content/bishnu-pathak-report-nepals-enforced-disappearance-commission (Accessed on August 22, 2014).

[111] Where large number of enforced disappearance persons’ are found by the survey. They are: Bardia, Banke, Dang, Kanchanpur, Kavre, Salyan, Siraha, Chitwan, Sindhupalchowk, Kailali, Baitadi, Dhading, Kalikot, Gorkha, Nuwakot, Kathmandu, Baglung, Morang and Ramechhap.

[112] Child inherits half of the DNA from its parents.

[113] Amnesty International. 2010. Commissioning Justice: Truth Commission and Criminal Justice. London

[114] eKantipur.com. March 7, 2015. OHCHR hails Supreme Court verdict on TRC amnesty provision. Kathmandu: Kantipur Publication

[115] Senior Superintendent of Police Chuda Bahadur Shrestha, Superintendent of Police Kuber Singh Rana, Major Anup Adhikari of Dharapani Army Barrack of Number 9 Field Battalion, and the Chief District Officer of Dhanusha District Rewati Raj Kafle. NHRC Nepal. July 23, 2014. A Brief Report on the Exhumation at Tallo Godar of Dhanusha District. Janakpur.

[116] For more, see Ibid.

[117] Advocacy Forum-Nepal, TRIAL and REDRESS. June 2014. Nepal Playing Lip Service to Justice: The Newly Adopted TRC Act Breaches International Law and Flouts the Decision of the Supreme Court of Nepal. The Report Submitted to UN Special Rapporteur on Promotion of Truth, Justice and Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, UN Working Groups on Enforced Disappearance or Involuntary Disappearances, etc.

____________________________________

*Bishnu Pathak, a Ph.D. holder in conflict management and human rights, is president and director of the Conflict Study Center. He is a Board Member of TRANSCEND International for Nepal and also a BM of the TRANSCEND Peace University. Besides writing the book Politics of People’s War and Human Rights in Nepal, he has published a number of research articles on issues related to Human Rights, UN, Security, Peace, Civil-Military Relations, Community Policing, and Federalism.

Related posts:

1. EU Law and Rule of Law on the Balance: Justice for Hungary?
2. Land, Dignity & Democracy: South Africa’s Constitution Does Allow for Expropriation
3. Reflections on Selma & Activism 50 Years Later