The report, a joint work of HRW and Kathmandu-based Advocacy Forum, has pointed out Nepal’s failure to address human rights issues of the conflict period. In this context, myrepublica’s Kiran Chapagain talked to Adams Friday to know his views on the reasons behind the lack of progress in addressing impunity, international efforts to press the Nepal Army (NA) and the Maoists to cooperate in investigation of the conflict-time rights cases and the role of the international community in addressing impunity in Nepal.
Excerpts:
myrepublica: The report paints a bleak progress about Nepal’s efforts in addressing impunity in Nepal. What are the reasons for that?
Brad Adams: There are a number of reasons. First, the army protects its soldiers while the Maoists protect their fighters. They believe nobody in their ranks should be arrested.
Second, institutions like courts, police and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in Nepal are weak. Police investigations are very weak. They do not have proper equipment, training and commitment. They do not wake up in the morning thinking “I am going to solve the crime”. They think of other things. The courts are also very weak though there are good lawyers and judges in this country. Similarly, other institutions like the NHRC are not playing their role. It should be strong enough in challenging the army and the Maoists.
The report has accused the army of not cooperating in investigating and prosecuting human rights abusers. Why do you think the army is not cooperating?
I think there are many reasons. One reason is that if individual soldiers are arrested, put on trial and found guilty, the question that will arise is: Who gave them the orders in the first place? So, the blame would shift to those in the upper ranks in the army. Is it possible that all these killings happened without any order being given?
Second, I think the army believes at the leadership level that they were right and the Maoists were wrong. They believe that they were fighting for a noble cause to save the country, save the monarchy against communism and whatever they did was necessary for the good of the country. They still seem to believe that.
Third, the army, actually the one is senior positions, believes they are above the law. They do not think that the law should cover them.
You have also met army officers. What did they say regarding impunity in the army?
I met the army officers last year when I was here to launch a report entitled Waiting for Justice. They denied almost everything. They said that the abuses in the report were overstated. I told them that the abuses mentioned in the report were real and not overstated. They said that the army did not accept/allow impunity and has held all their people in the ranks accountable for human rights violations. I almost laughed when they said so because it was so ridiculous. There are many different Dorambas and many horrible abuses committed by the army. We know that the perpetrators have not been held accountable. They were either in denial or not telling the truth. It is not true that they are holding everyone accountable. They also got very angry when I suggested that there was impunity in the army.
Some army officers told me that they did not want to affect the morale of the army – the reason why the army was slow to address the cases of human rights impunity.
How are international human rights organizations, including HRW, working at the international level to exert pressure on the army to address impunity?
First, we have been directly or indirectly talking to governments that provide support to the army to do a proper job of vetting.
There is the Lehi Law in the United States. We work very closely with US Senator Patric Lehi to make sure no Nepali soldier with record of human rights violation goes to the US for any training. We talk to the United Nations Department of Peace Keeping Operation (DPKO) about ensuring that no Nepali soldier with human rights abuse record is taken as peace keeper. When I was talking to DPKO last year, the officers were talking to army headquarters [on impunity]. This is a very good way to hold them [army] accountable. We are not targeting the Nepali army as we do not have anything against them but we do not want human rights abusers being awarded by being sent overseas for peace keeping operations.
Similarly, we have been publishing reports like this one to make them accountable.
Are there other efforts going on at the international level to make the army cooperate in addressing impunity?
Military attaches of the countries like the US, UK have been contacted. But I do not think, for example, India is doing anything. India is protecting NA. The Nepali army does not have to worry about other countries [as long as they continue to get support from the Indian army]. So, India is a big problem in this regard. India never talks about impunity and holding the army accountable. India [Indian army] being the most important partner of NA, if they [Indian army] are not taking impunity in NA seriously, NA will not take the issue seriously.
Does it mean that NA will not cooperate with investigation of human rights abuses by its soldiers until and unless the Indian army asks it to do so?
Until the Indian army pressurizes NA or at least stops protecting them, it is going to be very difficult to hold the Nepal Army accountable.
If so, are there any international efforts going on to exert pressure on the Indian army to ask NA to cooperate to address pending human rights issues?
The Indian Army is not interested in such a conversation.
Is the DPKO’s pressure on the Nepali army to address impunity genuine?
I do not know whether DPKO is putting a lot of pressure [on NA or not]. It is hard to tell from outside.
Is DPKO genuinely pursuing the issue of impunity in NA?
It is complicated. On the one hand, they [DPKO officials] are trying to exert pressure [on NA on human rights violation cases]. On the other hand, they are begging for peace keepers from them.
Why do you think the Maoists do not want to see human rights violations investigated and perpetrators prosecuted?
Maoists also believe that the investigation could link the ranks to the leadership. I think both in the Maoists and the army, senior officers were directing human rights violations. I do not think it was done by middle or lower ranks.
Should the Maoist combatants be cleared of their rights record before they are considered for integration?
Yes, there should be 100 percent vetting if the Maoist armies are to be integrated into the national army. Every single member of the army who committed human rights abuses have to be thrown out.
Is there any effort at the international level for the vetting of the Maoist combatants before their integration into the national security agencies?
Absolutely. Vetting is the main demand of human rights community and also of a lot of donors. But such a demand is still not strong as it should be.
Is there any record how many Maoist combatants have poor human rights record?
No. Nobody has established how many Maoist soldiers are involved in human rights violations nor is there a record of how many Nepali army soldiers are involved in human rights violations. But we know that a large number on both the sides were involved in human rights violations.
What is your assessment of Nepal government’s commitment to address the conflict-time human rights issues?
The government’s commitment is very low. We have only heard the Nepali government talk of difficulties and hurdles. Why is it so hard for them? Why cannot they order the police to investigate certain cases? Why do the police not investigate cases of even retired soldiers or those who resigned from the army? They can start from there. If it is too hard for them to go into army barracks because army may use violence against them, they can start with easy cases. They can start with cases in which evidence is easily available such as Doramba and Maina Sunar. Frankly, it is so frustrating and ridiculous.
What can be the reason behind that?
The primary reason is that they have not given priority [to human rights issues]. The priority seems to be for positions at the highest level of government.
What should be done on priority basis to address impunity in Nepal?
First, there needs to be will at the very top of the political system. They must give green light to the police and the justice system to do their job. Second, the police have to be given resources after giving political and physical protection. I have met senior police officers who are quite afraid of the army. That is not healthy. Third, local authorities are afraid of the army, police and Maoists. Those local officials have to be given protection and authority. Fourth, there should be protection program for victims and witnesses. Fifth, there should be more international pressure. International community needs to be united to ensure that justice is a part of the peace process.
Is the role of international community in addressing impunity in Nepal satisfactory?
No. The international community can do more. But they are too busy in international problems and have not given high level of attention. Foreign ministers, defense ministers, senior officials of the World Bank, ADB [Asian Development Bank] – people whom Nepali government cares about – should be able to say that this [human rights issues] is an important issue that the Nepal government needs to address.
Related story
Brad Pitt says his marriage with Jennifer Aniston was a 'sham'
