“If the politicians were serious about justice, we would already have it.”
— Daughter of a disappeared person
From Dang to Kathmandu to Kavre, family members of the disappeared have little faith that the upcoming Constituent Assembly elections will have a transformative impact on Nepal’s justice agenda.[break]
In a series of interviews conducted from October 15–29, families of the disappeared expressed a distinct pessimism concerning the upcoming election; indeed many family members stated that they have no intention of even participating in the upcoming polls.
Controversy has mired the polls for some time now, for numerous reasons, ranging from insufficient registration time to the deployment of the Nepal Army. However, the main point of contention put forth by the majority of those interviewed with regards to the polls seems to be that the last seven years have given little reason to be hopeful that the election of new officials will translate into substantial progress on the ground with regards to justice and post conflict transformation. Many family members discussed the upcoming election in contrast to that of 2008, which had, at the time, instilled a general sense of hope, and feeling that the country was starting anew, that justice and the address of grievances were at hand.
In the five years that have passed since the 2008 elections (seven years since the signing of the CPA), precious little has been achieved with regards to justice for conflict victims. Promises were made in the Interim Constitution including the formation of strong and independent commissions for Truth and Reconciliation as well as an independent commission for the investigation of the more than 1,400 enforced disappearances that took place between 1996 and 2006. To date, neither has been formed.
In its latest failed iteration, the TRC and Disappearance Commissions have been combined into one bill that allows for the provision of amnesty should the government see fit. In essence, the justice agenda has fallen victim to politicians that are both vying for power and seeking to protect their own, many of whom remain in power despite their involvement and complicity in the human rights violations that plagued Nepal’s ‘People’s War’.
Enforced disappearance is but one lasting legacy of the People’s War, but it would be a folly to assume that the sentiments expressed by families of the disappeared—the frustration, lack of hope and deep discontent—for the upcoming elections are isolated to this group of conflict victims. It is likely that similar frustrations and discontents can be found across Nepali society for a myriad of reasons.
At the root of these discontents lie the faltering societal foundations that have yet to be properly addressed, from ethnic and caste discrimination to lack of livelihood opportunities and pervasive corruption and impunity. While the past five years have paid significant lip service to the notion of a ‘New Nepal’, more has been done to obfuscate and paper over these structural issues than to truly deal with them.
It is against this backdrop that the November 19 elections quickly approach. By now, it is certain that the elections will take place, though voter turnout and extent of violence and disruption remain to be seen. What is almost certain however is the slim likelihood of a new constitution being completed within a year of the elections as political parties stake their ground and firm up their ideologies, particularly around the issue of federalism.
The November 19 polls are being treated akin to a parliamentary election, instead of one focused on constitution drafting, with constituents and parties pushing for general reforms and a renewed focus on establishing a majority stake in the new government. These realities suggest that Nepal is likely to be left with another ineffectual constitutional body that lacks the support and faith of significant portions of the population—such as those affected by enforced disappearance.
If Nepal’s ruling elite is indeed serious about creating the long touted ‘New Nepal’, serious consideration must be given to the legacies of conflict. To achieve what Johan Galtung has called a positive peace—or a peace that transcends the simple absence of armed violence—attention must be given to the structural roots of violence in order to begin the healing process and empower those most affected by conflict to heal and in turn engage constructively with Nepali society.
The TRC ordinance presents one such opportunity. Having received presidential approval, the ordinance is awaiting passage by the courts prior to becoming law. The discussion around this ordinance post election will shed light on whether the new government intends to address the past or allow amnesty and impunity to prevail.
The author is a development professional and researcher based in the US. He works actively on transitional justice issues in Nepal
Related story
Disillusion of announcement
