Nearly a full year after their formation, the two transitional justice bodies—the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission for Investigation of Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP)—have absolutely nothing to do in the absence of requisite regulations. This is a shame. The families of conflict victims—those who were killed and tortured or those who were made to 'disappear'—had to wait for nearly a decade before the two transitional justice bodies finally materialized. After the long wait the hope was that the two bodies would, without any further ado, look into conflict-era cases and do justice to families of conflict victims. It wasn't meant to be. A year on, largely due to the apprehensions of senior Maoist leaders, the drafts of the regulations of these two commissions have been dumped in the Bills Committee of the Council of Ministers for the past seven months. Maoist leaders are concerned about some of their provisions. For instance they are strongly against provisions in the drafts that make it mandatory to seek the victims' consent for pardons. The Maoist leaders are also unhappy with cases which they believed should have been handled by transitional justice bodies being taken up by regular courts.When the twin transitional justice bodies were formed a year ago, it was done with the consent of the Maoist party. Apparently the Maoists signed onto it in haste. Either that or they were under pressure to give their silent nod. These kinds of suspicions would not have cropped up had there been proper debate over the importance of such bodies within the Maoist party. Nor have other parties, it seems, been able to take the Maoists into confidence that the two bodies are not meant to corner them, or to settle old political scores. True, the drafts do include provisions whereby serious rights violations won't be pardoned without the consent of victim families. But that is the international practice. If the victim families can't have a sense of closure for the old wounds, the very concept of transitional justice becomes redundant. If there have been serious breaches of human rights during the conflict period, the perpetrators must face the consequences.
In most of other cases, there is unlikely to be persecutions. The human rights organizations, both in the country and outside, argue that there should be no general amnesty, which they believe will increase impunity in the days ahead. There is that risk. But what we also have to keep in mind is that the two warring forces—government security forces and the Maoist militia—fought the war to a standstill. The guns fell silent with the understanding that some of the uglier aspects of the decade-long war would be overlooked in return for lasting peace. In many ways it was a Faustian bargain. But post-war settlements are seldom neat. Even South Africa, the poster child for transitional justice, ended up pardoning most rights violators from apartheid-era. The Maoists should thus be open to some persecutions; just as the other political parties need to take the Maoists into confidence that the spirit of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement has not been forgotten.
Related story
An infinite longing
