Nepal: Protection of human rights in anarchy

Irrespective of whether the 60^th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights adopts the Chairman’s statement for technical cooperation assistance to Nepal, the rejection of UN Secretary General’s offer for mediation for resolution of the Maoists crisis in Nepal is akin to King Canute asking the waves to go back. The United States and India have been opposing the Chairman’s statement for technical cooperation assistance to Nepal. Constance C Jones, spokesperson of the United States embassy in Kathmandu in an interview to The Kathmandu Post on 17 April 2004 stated that the US had objection to “some element in the text” of the statement. The element reportedly pertains to the requirement of submission of a report to the 61^st session of the CHR on human rights situation in Nepal.

While Nepal wants to its hide gross, systemic and flagrant human rights violations, the United States and India, which arm the Royal Nepal Army (RNA), are aware of the disproportionate use of force by the RNA. A report to the CHR would entail scrutiny of the use of disproportionate force by the RNA. Indian helicopters are being used for aerial bombing by the trigger-happy RNA personnel. Recently on 12 April 2004, many civilians including school children were killed when the RNA personnel dropped bomb from helicopters at Bidhya Mandi Higher Secondary School at Binayak, Acham. Subsequently, the RNA blocked supplies of food, medicine and stationary supplies to at least 24 Village Development Councils in Acham in clear violation of international human rights and humanitarian laws. The RNA justified its actions as a preventive measure against possible hijacking of the supplies by the Maoists. The Maoists need not preach dialectical materialism to garner support thanks to the complete alienation in rural Nepal because of the crimes committed by the RNA with impunity.

Since 1^st April 2004, Kathmandu and many parts of Nepal have been crippled by “anti-regression” strikes sponsored by the Nepali Congress, Communist Party of Nepal (UML), People’s Front of Nepal, Nepal Workers’ and Peasants’ Party and Nepal Sadbhawana Party. All the major professional organisations such as the Federation of Nepalese Journalists, Gurkha Army Ex-servicemen’s Organization, Nepal Medical Association, Nepal Engineers Association, Nepal Bar Association and students’ organisations have joined the chorus of the political parties for restoration of multi-party democracy.

The response of the government has been brutal and despotic. On 9 April 2004, the government banned demonstrations. Hundreds of political activists were arrested. The journalists covering the events were subjected to arbitrary arrest and brutal beatings at the hands of security forces on 16 April 2004. At least 17 prominent students leaders have been put under house arrest. The brutal repression in the heart of the Kathmandu valley showed the hollowness of the 25 point commitments for human rights announced by Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa on 26 March 2004.

While cracking down the demonstrators, King Gyanendra and his cronies sought to divide the political parties by alleging that the Maoists have infiltrated into the demonstrators. The Jana Morcha (Peoples Front), which has some ideological sympathy with the Maoists but does not support the armed struggle, has been main target. While hundreds of political leaders were arrested, it was reportedly only 21 senior leaders of Jana Morcha including Vice-chairmen Lila Mani Pokhrel and Pari Thapa, who were charged under the draconian Public Safety Act. They have been held under incommunicado detention. A habeas corpus petition was filed on 16 April 2004. Although the Supreme Court of Nepal directed to justify the arrest by 22 April 2004, re-arrest of the suspects within the court premises under frivolous chares after their release by the same court has been a phenomenon in Nepal. Repression and denial of democratic space often forced many political parties to go underground.

As the strikes crippled the Kathmandu valley, King Gyanendra undertook de-tour of some countryside. In an attempt to boost the moral of the security forces and restore credibility of the army, King Gyanendra wore camouflaged RNA uniform during receptions. In the light of the atrocities perpetrated by RNA, King has become a subject of ridicule and dirty jokes. The Maoists have not lost the opportunity to identify King Gyanandra as one the RNA personnel who have committed rape on an unprecedented scale. The country is ruled by Unified Command under the RNA directly reporting to King Gyanendra. Armed helicopters fitted with .50 machine guns have been dropping 81 mm bombs over suspected Maoist hideouts which have caused collateral damage to the civilians. The democratically elected government served as a buffer between the King and the Maoists. Since the dismissal of the Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba on 4 October 2002, the buffer has become blurred. King Gyanendra can no longer escape the blame for the atrocities perpetrated by the security forces. In a country where many still suspects the integrity of the King Gyanendra over a range of issues including the massacre of the Royal family on 1 June 2001, the recent actions of King Gyanendra are best described as “Vinasht kale bipritha buddhi” (inverse intelligence at the time of destruction).

Mainstream political parties have picked up the refrain of the Maoists for the abolition of monarchy. The powerful students organisations decided to hold referendum in campuses across the country about the kind of governments desired by students out of three options – republic, constitutional monarchy or absolute monarchy. “If the students vote in favour of a republic, all campuses will be declared as republic” – declared Gagan Thapa, General Secretary of Nepal Students Union.

Many governments including India put all their eggs in the basket of King Gyanendra. Indian authorities lately seem to have realised that the King is no longer a safe bet. Indian Ambassador to Nepal, Shyam Saran has been parleying between opposition parties and Narayanthi palace to break the impasse. The King reportedly has objections to CPN UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal and Nepali Congress leader, Girija Prasad Koirala to become head of the government. It is clear that King is not interested to play the role of a constitutional monarch.

The failure of the political parties to reach unity on whether they would form a national unity multi-party government or restore parliament and deposed Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba has so far benefitted the King. Even if multi-party democracy is restored, under the constitution of Nepal the army will continue to remain under the command of the King. Holding of elections is a mission impossible. Beyond the Kathmandu valley, it is the Maoists' writ which run the country. Most governments underestimated the Maoist problem in Nepal by comparing with other insurgencies, especially the Naxalites, in the region. The fact that Maoists had full control over at least 35 out of 75 districts forced G P Koirala to agree with his betenoire, then Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Debua in September 2002 that elections could not be held in the country. The situation has worsened further since the King took over power. Though RNA has obtained 12,000 M-16 rifles from the US, 5000 mini machine guns from Belgium and at least 20,000 SLR and INSAS rifles from India, since the Unified Command took over the number of police stations are down from 1500 a few years ago to 350 now. The Maoists who had control over mid Western Nepal have consolidated their control over the rice bowl of Nepal – the Terai region. The Maoists have the capacity to strangulate capital Kathmandu valley. During the three days strike called by the Maoists in early April 2004, the prices of essential commodities shot up sky high in Kathmandu.

The opponents of UN mediation are pushing Nepal to the brink of complete collapse. As ACHR Features stated earlier, domestic interlocutors for peace process have no leverage either on the government or the Maoists and serve as mere post box. India and the United States are unlikely to qualify as impartial mediators.

If the mainstream political parties were not to declare Nepal as a republic before the Maoists, Nepal Development Forum must make its appropriate intervention in it’s meeting to be held on 5-6 May 2004. First, Nepal Development Forum must recognise that Maoist insurgency in Nepal is not similar internal armed conflicts which have afflicted various regions of South Asian countries. Nepal is caught in a full scale civil war. Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world; and even the rich countries found no military solution to such problems. Second, the King must handover powers to the political parties for initiating national unity. Third, the government of Nepal must accept mediation by Secretary General of the United Nations. Above all, the government of Nepal must ensure full respect for human rights and accountability for human rights violations at all times. As the third preambular paragraph of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”