Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Development & Aid, Headlines, Human Rights

RIGHTS-NEPAL: National Commission in ‘Deep Coma’

Marty Logan

KATHMANDU, Sep 30 2006 (IPS) - When government and Maoist leaders sit across from one another, a week from now, they will discuss a handful of deals on various issues that are supposed to culminate in a ‘pivotal’ meeting. At least two of the agreements specify a role in the peace process for the local United Nations human rights office (OHCHR) – none mention Nepal’s own National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

Sixteen months ago the young commission took what has proven to be a crippling body blow when King Gyanendra’s government – ruling by decree after the monarch staged a bloodless ‘royal coup’ Feb. 1, 2005 – reappointed the chief commissioner and named four new NHRC members after the incumbents’ terms expired.

Reaction was quick. “We have already decided to stop sharing our information with the commission,” Gopal Siwakoti from noted human rights NGO ‘Himrights’ told ‘Nepali Times’ newspaper, illustrating the backlash from local rights activists who had lobbied hard to create the NHRC.

The king’s appointees retired after last April’s ‘people’s movement’ forced the monarch to hand over power to a restored parliament and now the human rights community is pressing the democratic government to name new members quickly using a transparent, consultative process, so that the NHRC can finally resume growing into an independent, working body.

It is “in a deep coma”, says Kapil Shrestha, who served on the first commission from 2000 to 2005. “They’re trying to demonstrate that they’re still alive by issuing statements (but) most of the trained and experienced cadres have left,” he told IPS.

But, adds Shrestha, with the right appointments the NHRC could regain its credibility in a few months. “It depends upon the quality of the members…previously the biggest bottleneck was the chairman.”

A parliamentary committee is now examining the NHRC appointments process. On Aug. 1 it held talks with the local and international human rights community in the capital Kathmandu. “The NHRC should not be regarded as a pie to be carved up among political parties,” said David Johnson, officer in charge at OHCHR.

After the return to democracy a number of key appointments, including ambassadorships, have been delayed, reportedly over wrangling between the members of the seven-party alliance (SPA) of political parties that tentatively united to fight the king.

In a later interview, Johnson added that the law should be changed to allow commissioners to name the NHRC’s secretary and that the practice of seconding civil servants on temporary work assignments should end to ensure NHRC employees’ independence.

And he said he was “concerned” that the body was not playing a major role in the ongoing peace process. “It’s the biggest monitoring body in the country; it’s bigger than OHCHR,” said Johnson.

Asked if the two organisations were competing for a role, he responded, “We never wanted to step onto their turf; we all have our own niches.OHCHR will never be the one to rush first to the scene – we do things thoroughly and leave it to the NGOs to publish their findings first.”

OHCHR set up its Nepal office 17 months ago after the king’s government was pressured by the former UN human rights commission to take substantive steps to respond to growing reports of rights abuses by both Maoists and state security forces. Local expectations were high that it could put effectively press both sides to respect their international legal obligations.

Roughly 14,000 people were killed in the 10-year Maoist uprising. Thousands were disappeared and more than four months after the two sides agreed a truce, hundreds are unaccounted for.

The UN rights office has impressed many people. “When OHCHR produced a report about disappearances it was very comprehensive, although many people remain missing,” says Bhola Bhattarai, campaign coordinator in the Nepal office of Amnesty International. “NHRC should have done a lot of things because they have the knowledge and regional offices…but a lot of victims are still waiting,” he told IPS.

“We have a great backload of work,” says the NHRC’s newly-appointed senior human rights adviser, Keith Leslie. But without commissioners, he adds, there is an authority gap: no hiring can be done nor recommendations forwarded to the government.

Leslie told IPS he would like to see a clear commitment from donors to the national body. “I want the international community to encourage the human rights NGOs to work with the NHRC and ensure that

their funds are fairly distributed between the NGOs and the NHRC. Don’t short-change the NHRC as it is the only legal body – soon to be a constitutional body – with a national mandate.”

“OHCHR has done excellent work here, but it is only temporary. The long-term investment needs to be made in the country’s national human rights agency,” Leslie added.

The new adviser also wants the commission to address issues of social inclusion and social justice, which are at the heart of the political debate now raging around the ‘new Nepal’. For example, while the Maoists are calling for a republican system with autonomy for indigenous and other “oppressed” peoples, the mainstream political parties are split on moving from a central to a federal system.

“We should be proactive so we don’t have the conflict reappear – these are moral issues,” says Leslie.

Kundan Aryal of local human rights group Informal Sector Service Centre says his group has asked the government to change the provision in the law that says the NHRC chairman must be a former Supreme Court judge. “We have suggested that any person who has already contributed 15 years in the human rights field can be appointed chairperson,” he said in an interview.

“It is an established organisation that could be revived by changing the law,” added Aryal.