[Power-sharing remains the most tangible dividend coming out
of the peace process to date, though there was no mention of it in the November
2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The formation of a Maoist-led
government in August 2011 was the first factor that made progress possible.
Without that, the party would have been reluctant to give up its army.
Following that was the Maoists’ willingness to unofficially accept the main
opposition party, the Nepali Congress (NC), as leader of the post-constitution
government to oversee the next election, which should take place some months
after the new constitution is adopted. The Maoists’ main coalition partner, the
Samyukta Loktantrik Madhesi Morcha (Morcha), an alliance of five Madhes-based
parties, has often been seen as fractious and anti-Maoist, but the strength of
the front and the new government challenges that perception. Finally, there has
been a gradual shift in India’s policy line in 2011, reversing an often hostile
approach to the Maoists in favour of accommodation and cooperation.]
OVERVIEW
 |
| Yala Peak, Nepal. Courtesy Google |
The breakthrough on 1 November was the result of a series of
realignments between many political leaders and factions of parties, which
strengthened the futures of certain individuals and acknowledged their
political lines. The major players also had few unused tools left in the
negotiating process, and gratuitous inflexibility and stalling had run their
course as bargaining tactics. Major power centres in all three parties,
including a dogmatic faction of the Maoists, resent having been left out of the
talks. But while they can obstruct and slow the process, they cannot derail it.
A consensus government will have to be formed sooner or later, though it is
unclear whether the present government will need to resign or whether the
opposition will join in.
Power-sharing remains the most tangible dividend coming out
of the peace process to date, though there was no mention of it in the November
2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The formation of a Maoist-led
government in August 2011 was the first factor that made progress possible.
Without that, the party would have been reluctant to give up its army.
Following that was the Maoists’ willingness to unofficially accept the main
opposition party, the Nepali Congress (NC), as leader of the post-constitution
government to oversee the next election, which should take place some months
after the new constitution is adopted. The Maoists’ main coalition partner, the
Samyukta Loktantrik Madhesi Morcha (Morcha), an alliance of five Madhes-based
parties, has often been seen as fractious and anti-Maoist, but the strength of
the front and the new government challenges that perception. Finally, there has
been a gradual shift in India’s policy line in 2011, reversing an often hostile
approach to the Maoists in favour of accommodation and cooperation.
After the 1 November agreement, the Maoist combatants were
surveyed and chose either integration into the national army or voluntary
retirement with a cash package. More fighters chose integration into the Nepal
Army (NA) than the 6,500 allowed by the deal. This opens up another negotiation
on the final number. Combatants likewise showed themselves to be unhappy about decisions
made on individual qualifications for entry into the NA. Ranks have not been
decided yet either. The special concerns of fighters with disabilities will
also have to be addressed. Discussions could be protracted, but are not likely
to derail the constitution writing process.
The term of the Constituent Assembly (CA) was renewed for
six months, from 1 December, and the state restructuring commission,
controversial but mandated by the interim constitution, was formed. The
commission should build on proposals already prepared in the CA and also
provide recommendations to that body. Its composition, however, suggests that
critical decisions will be taken elsewhere, at the highest political level.
Indeed, senior leaders are on track to negotiate compromises on the proposed
federal states and system. They will have to balance acknowledging historical
identities and discrimination and the rights of Nepal’s many ethnic, caste and
linguistic groups.
The manner in which negotiations take place matters as much
as the outcome. Historically marginalised communities, their representatives in
mainstream parties and other ethnic formations have to be engaged, rather than
simply be informed of decisions. Centralised, top-down decisions on federalism
cannot be sold easily outside Kathmandu, where identity-based groups and
sceptics of federalism have been mobilising. There is supposed to be public
consultation on proposed constitutional provisions. Rather than treat this as a
formality, the parties should see it as a way to increase the buy-in of various
groups.
As the future landscape becomes clearer, resistance could
well come from traditionally powerful constituencies that are outside the CA
and see the proposed changes as a zero-sum game, including a mix of anti-federalists,
Hindu groups that oppose secularism and some royalists. The parties in the CA
and their factions will also look to extract the most from the process, and
parliamentary parties on the right are regrouping. For many, the temptation
could be to not negotiate, but instead to sharpen social polarisation along the
divisions the peace process seeks to narrow: ethnic, religious, cultural,
regional and class.
The peace process has informally come to mean only the
question of the Maoist fighters, rather than the whole of the CPA. Politicians
do regard the constitution as a matter of urgency, but they are also exhausted
and want to see the process quickly concluded, so Nepal can go back to business
as usual. The commitment to democratise the Nepal Army has already been
dropped. The commission on land reform is a dead-end. The issue of justice for
war-era abuses continues to be defined by the lack of incentive for all actors
to deal with it. These issues and the complexities of federalism will not lose
relevance simply because the mainstream parties decide to ignore them. Whether
or not they prove to be drivers of mass mobilisation or violence in the coming
months, they will be critical ahead of the next general election. Nepal’s
political class needs to make some difficult decisions rather quickly, so as to
ensure its own relevance.
".........nobody would be
benefited by licking the old wounds dating back to the conflict period and that
both the commissions would be formed for building the environment for forging
reconciliation"
Rashtriya Samachar Samiti [RSS]
LALITPUR: Prime Minister Dr. Baburam
Bhattarai has said it is certain that the peace process will get stability
because of the environment of consensus that is emerging among the political
parties of late.
Addressing a special programme
organised by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on the occasion of the
International Human Rights Day here on Saturday, he said the process of
constituting the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission on
Enforced Disappearances, the main part of the peace process, has reached the
final stages.
Prime Minister Dr. Bhattarai said
nobody would be benefited by licking the old wounds dating back to the conflict
period and that both the commissions would be formed for building the
environment for forging reconciliation.
Stating the human rights could not
be guaranteed due to the various activities that took place in the country, he
pledged that the present government is committed to upholding the human rights,
the press freedom and the legal norms and principles.
“The government is working
vigorously towards rendering the NHRC and the National Women’s Commission
capable and resourceful for fully guaranteeing the human rights to the general
public as per the democratic process,” the prime minister said.
At the programme, Chairman of the
NHRC, Kedarnath Upadhyaya said that although the government is in the process
of implementing the different recommendations of the Commission, the action
taken against the culprits responsible for human rights violations of the
serious nature was not encouraging.
Chairman Upadhyaya said the
Commission which has gained the status of a constitutional body as provided for
in the Interim Constitution has made recommendations, following investigations,
to the government on taking action against the perpetrators in 416 complaints
in the last four years and the perpetrators in 566 complaints in the last 11
years since its establishment.
Coordinator of the Human Rights Magna
Meet, Prof. Kapil Shrestha said all governments formed since the restoration of
the Parliament have confined the topic of human rights only to policy and
failed to guarantee its implementation in practice.
Chairman of the NGO Federation Dr.
Netra Timilsina said impunity was gaining ground in the country as the
successive governments failed to implement the various recommendations of the
NHRC.
UN representative to Nepal, Robert
Piper said although the government has expressed its commitment to human rights,
still there are some practical problems in its implementation.
