It has been a
decade since Nepal entered into the formal peace process with the signing of
Comprehensive Peace Accord in November 2006. The CPA had not only formally
ended the decade-long armed insurgency afflicting the country, but also paved a
solid way for peace, development and prosperity. With the passage of 10 years
now, it is pertinent enough to mull how Nepal has fared on peace process and
its progression towards more functional and inclusive democracy.
Counting the
achievements, integration of rebel Maoist fighters into the Nepal Army, two
elections of the constituent assembly, and promulgation of constitution in 2015
are the most significant. However, have people realized the peace they had
aspired after the rebel Maoist party laid down the arms? It is still a burning
question.
It was not
unusual that we Nepalese placed unprecedented hope on the political parties
after the signing of the CPA. Similar hope piled on then rebellion party Maoist
during the first election of the Constituent Assembly, which however failed to
bring constitution. Needless to say, the dissolution of the first CA was not
only the huge loss of money and waste of time but it also mounted dejection
among the people (voters) thereby eroding trust on the political parties.
The second
election of the Constituent Assembly brought the constitution, but the
dissatisfactions are rife on it before it goes to full implementation. The
political parties especially the region-centric from the southern plains have
emerged so aggressive that they are warning of barring the activities on
implementing federalism and the constitution. The ruling political parties- CPN
(Maoist Centre) and the Nepali Congress- are making utmost efforts to amend the
constitution in the name of ensuring broader acceptability, while the major
opposition, CPN-UML, is adamant on not letting any change in the national
charter. The UML is smelling a rat, arguing the amendment would jeopardize
national interest. Thus eludes consensus. It is not sure how long this
difference goes on inviting conflict.
Are there not
anything worth mentioning that Nepali are to witness peaceful days with change
in system and economic prosperity? Is mere political development enough to
ensure peace? Of course, the national incidents have shown that political
developments do not ensure the peace to the people. Internalization of changed
system- federalism- is a long process, as the preparation for these are occurring
but slowly. Interestingly, federalism, frankly speaking, is publicly assured as
a solution of many problems! Yes, in the legal and administrative fronts too,
initiatives have been forwarded for the federal system to put in place as
fixing high courts and judges for them.
Despite some
achievements in the decade-long peace process, one of the most important parts
to mention is transitional justice. How have we experienced to this regard? It
is really worrying to state here that Member of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (TRC), Madhabi Bhatta, was saying recently in a program that the
Commission was yet to begin the investigation on the people murdered and
forcefully disappeared. She urged all to be watchful on the TRC's activities to
ensure justice to the victims.
Similar regret
came from Chairman of the Commission on Inquiry of Enforced Disappeared
Persons, Lokendra Mallik. He said the CIEDP was desperately waiting for the
laws to make the CIEDP more functional, to accelerate its activities. He however
expressed commitment that the CIEDP would investigate into the complaints on
murder and disappearance.
The political
indifference towards forming these transitional justice mechanism was so
blatant that these two commissions- TRC and CIEDP- were formed only after eight
years of the signing of CPA. When do these mechanisms carry out their works?
How do the conflict victims get relief and justice? Do mere elections ensure
stability and peace?
An observation by
political analyst Professor Lokraj Baral about election seems so pertinent now
in Nepal, "Election mere does not ensure democracy. It's only
electo-cracy." It suggests elections are not enough for sustainable
democracy where people feel peace and country witnessed stability. But our political
parties are now concentrating on elections with differences intact.
Needless to say,
peace is not the mere absence of war/conflict. Nepal is waging conflict but
still in need of peace. The meaning of peace process rests on how political
activities ensure ownership of constitution by all Nepali citizens, hold
elections peacefully, reduce gap between different classes and most importantly
cater justice to the conflict victims.
Narayan Prasad Ghimire
Kathmandu
No comments:
Post a Comment