TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR WAR CRIMES: THE WORK OF NEPAL’S TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

Note on how to cite this journal:

Author, Date of the post, WMO Conflict Insight, Title of the post,  ISSN: 2628-6998, https://worldmediation.org/conflict-insight 

On November 14, 2002, a young father of two got on a bus from his village in the eastern part of Nepal, heading towards the country’s capital Kathmandu where he intended to apply for a working visa in South Korea. When the bus crossed a bridge in the rural district of Dolakha, a bomb planted by Maoist rebels exploded. After waking up from a nineteen-day coma, the man realized that he was paralyzed and unable to move. Thousands of people suffered similar fates in Nepal during a decade-long civil war in which security forces and rebels killed approximately 17,000 people and forcefully displaced almost 1,400.[1] The severe battles ended through the Comprehensive Peace Accord, signed on November 21, 2016. During the fighting, uncountable people, mostly civilians, were cruelly hit by gross human rights violations, including rape and sexual violence, forced displacement, torture, and other crimes.[2] Only a few of the war’s victims have received reparations and support with healing through restorative processes, repairing the harm caused by criminal behavior.

The restorative justice concept entered Nepal’s general discourse after the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Accord. Advocated by international and local civil society actors, restorative justice was meant to be a procedure to support the country to deal with its legacy of human rights violations from the past. Officials claimed that processes would include actions such as prosecution, truth-seeking, institutional reforms, and reparations. Therefore, the Government of Nepal implemented two restorative bodies, the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, to tackle atrocities conducted in the period of war.[3]

In light of Nepal’s ongoing peace process, this paper will help readers understand Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s work and limitations. The paper will start with an overview of Nepal’s civil war, highlighting relevant background information on why restorative justice processes are valuable assets and benefit today’s situation. Then, the concept of restorative justice will be defined and explained, including the approach’s benefits and limitations. Further, the paper will provide an overview of Nepal’s restorative justice describing the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s objectives, work, and criticism, followed by a discussion on the Commission’s work.  It will end with a personal conclusion, including a summary of restorative justice work in Nepal and recommendations.

A Period of Trauma and Crimes: Nepal’s Civil War

Nepal is a South Asian country, based around the Himalayan mountain ranges between India to the south, east, and west and the Tibetan Autonomous Region of China to the north. As a landlocked state, almost 30 million people call the country their home.[4] The capital city and business center of Nepal are Kathmandu, located in the country’s hilly region.[5]

Nepal, ruled by a hereditary government that preferred a policy of isolation, was closed to most of the world for decades.[6] Due to the self-inflicted geographical seclusion, the country remains among the least developed nations in the world.[7]

This chapter will provide a brief insight into Nepal’s history and current struggles. ‘

The People’s War

Nepal is still in the process of recovering from its decade-long civil war that shook the state between 1996 and 2006. In this time, approximately 17,000 people were killed, and more than 100,000 displaced. The primary victims of war-related murders were civilians, predominantly indigenous people, the rural poor, and the Dalits. This group stands at the bottom end of the Hindu caste system. During the period of war, violence spread all over Nepal.[8]

Over the centuries, Nepal was led by royal dynasties. When more and more people started to perceive the system as unjust, political groups combined efforts and initiated a democratic movement called the People’s Movement. Through a series of street protests, the movement aimed to overpower the monarchy. Finally, in May 1991, for the first time, Nepal had elections.[9]

The civil war was characterized by escalating violence between the Government of Nepal’s security forces, such as the military and armed police forces, and the Communist Party of Nepal, the Maoists.[10] Through a non-confidence motion in 1994, the back-then leader of the country, Girija Prasad Koirala, was defeated. In the elections that followed, a Communist government was formed, which was again dissolved a year later. The Maoist revolt initiated their movement in 1996 to abolish the monarchy. Importantly, in 2001, numerous of Nepal’s Royal Family members were murdered by Crown Prince Dipendra before committing suicide. Therefore, Gyanendra, the king’s brother, becomes the new king.[11] The event further facilitated the Maoist movement. Following years of battles between the Maoists and the ill-equipped police force, Nepal’s Government announced a national emergency state in 2001 and 2005. The declaration was accompanied by numerous restrictions, such as civil liberties.[12]

In 2006, the conflicting parties created the so-called Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which led to the end of the civil war and initiated a transition phase to become a democratic state. In 2008, the monarchy was officially abolished. Till now, not all sections of the peace agreement are implemented, and tensions among Maoists and numerous political parties remain a threat to Nepal’s peace.[13]

In a detailed report, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, UN OHCHR, highlights that the civil war was marked by severe violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights treaties. Both the Government and the Maoists were involved in the intimidation of villages, contributing to an atmosphere of fear. Offenders misused teenagers and children as porters, cooks, and soldiers.[14]

An additional backlash for the country’s healing process was the 7.8-magnitude earthquake that hit Nepal on April 25, 2015. The natural disaster resulted in the death of approximately 9,000 people. Tens of thousands of people suffered from the losses of their homes.[15] Additionally, transportation and communication were severely interrupted; countless people left their homes due to fear of aftershocks. Older people, children, women, and people belonging to lower castes were disproportionally high affected.[16]

Many people in Nepal argued that the Government took advantage of the chaotic situation in the aftermath of the earthquake to silence opposition voices while creating a long-awaited constitution based on their ideas. Specifically, the Madhesi ethnic group protested that their voices were ignored and claimed that the constitution would further enable injustice to go on. Due to the resulting protests focusing on Nepal’s South, neighboring India imposed an unofficial border blockade, which was justified with security concerns.[17] As a result, many people, such as police personnel, got killed, and essential goods such as cooking gas, medicine, and petrol were not allowed to enter Nepal.[18]

Nepal Today: A Need for Healing

After the elections in 2017, Khadga Prasad Oli became Nepal’s new Prime Minister in 2018. With the support of the Communist Party, he created a majority in the parliament.[19] Human Rights Watch stresses that restorative justice is still a concerning Nepal challenge, criticizing inadequate restorative justice mechanisms for victims and granting amnesties for civil war offenders. Perpetrators who encountered reasonable charges against them are still in powerful positions.[20]

Approximately 81 percent of Nepal’s society follows Hinduism and locates itself within the hierarchical caste system. Over centuries, Nepalis socially defined themselves by the case system’s rules and structure to determine their identity.[21] In many cases, one can identify a person’s caste by surname.[22] Although caste-based discrimination is legally banned in Nepal, the system still concerningly contributes to inequity.[23]

Besides caste-based discrimination, gender inequality is an alarming issue in Nepal, which is, for example, reflected in 37 percent of girls getting married before the age of 18, which is among the highest child marriage rates in Asia.[24] Nepal is an extremely patriarchal country, with women being worse off than men in almost every measure.[25] With a Gender Inequality Index of 0.476, Nepal is located in position 115 out of 162 nations globally.[26]

Caused by Nepal’s least developed economy, thousands of migrant workers go to countries such as India, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Malaysia, where they work under harsh conditions with limited access to government support and health care. Every day, around two Nepali migrant labor workers, die abroad.[27]

While the people of Nepal are still struggling to overcome the country’s recent past, additional events and situations described in this part of the paper have worsened the condition of the Nepalese. To be better prepared to deal with further trauma and pain, it is imperative that the past is overcome and that healing is achieved. The author of this paper believes that an essential part of this is paying attention to gross human rights violations during the civil war. Even though remarkably resilient, Nepal’s people can benefit from restorative processes, which will better equip them to cope with current struggles.

Restorative Justice: A Tool for Healing

When a person is facing injustice or is affected by a human rights violation, feelings such as anger, hatred, helplessness, and trauma might result. Restorative justice comes with great potentials to support survivors to move on and adapt. The statement below of a woman who was abused and confronted with her offender through a victim-centered process emphasizes the healing effects of restorative justice tools:

I told him it was because I didn’t want to carry around what he’d done to me anymore. I’d move on, and forgiving him was for me, not for him. I wanted an apology, and I got one. An apology is one word, but it’s a massive thing. I’m not angry anymore- that’s lifted. And hearing him say that it was all his fault was massive.[28]

Following, the concept of restorative justice will be described.

What is Restorative Justice?

While Howard Zehr and Ali Gohar describe that there is no general definition of restorative justice, they suggest the following which should help to understand what the concept includes:

Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in a specific offense to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations to heal and put things as right as possible.[29]

There are specific pillars and principles which, however, help to understand what restorative justice means.

The three pillars of restorative justice, according to Zehr and Gohar, are:

  1. Stakeholder engagement,
  2. Focus on harm and needs, and
  3. The need to make damage right.[30]

Restorative justice focuses on the harm resulting from an offender’s crime, which negatively affected the victim. While state-based justice systems are usually focused on sentencing an offender and imposing punishments through court processes, restorative justice concentrates on the victim. It seeks to repair damage concretely and symbolically. Through a participatory procedure, the roots of a crime are addressed, and victims’ needs are identified.[31] According to Zehr and Gohar, restorative justice strongly considers the obligations that result from harm caused by a crime. State justice systems see accountability as a tool that can be achieved through law-regulated punishment. Restorative justice defines accountability as the need for offenders to acknowledge the harm caused by one’s wrongdoing. Not only offenders but also the affected community has relevant obligations. Thus, restorative justice aims to promote the offender’s engagement, the survivor, and the community.[32]

Tony F. Marshall describes crucial issues that require attention when one develops a restorative justice program. Among others, restorative justice practitioners need to ensure the rights of defendants and victims. Every legal procedure comes with different means for protecting offenders, for example, disproportionate sentences or wrongful convictions. In case these means are entirely removed, such as in prosecution through family conferences, there are chances that offenders pleaded guilty to avoid prosecution. The potential for this event might be low, but it still exists, and therefore, safeguards are needed. Tools to ensure safeguards include detailed guidelines and legal counseling. One safeguarding factor would be to employ neutral practitioners who are free of biases.[33]

Additionally, complaint mechanisms need to be established to prevent unfair treatment. In the case of community-led restorative justice, one should not include tough sanctions such as physical punishment.[34] To ensure victims’ rights, harmed parties should never be put in a situation they require to make unfair choices.[35]

Another issue highlighted by Marshall is the principle of voluntariness. Every engagement in restorative justice, from the offender, victim, or community side, must be voluntary to ensure commitment to participate in creating sustainable outcomes.[36]

Restorative justice can take place through direct or indirect mediation. Direct restorative processes include face-to-face meetings, for example, in victim-offender mediation, circles, or conferences. Nevertheless, in some cases, for instance, due to safety reasons, indirect communication, such as through shuttle restorative justice, are good alternatives to ensure that participants can still benefit from the restorative concept.[37]

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes, UNODC stresses that trained restorative justice professionals need to prepare the parties and facilitate the process.[38] Initially, restorative justice practitioners need to conduct risk assessments to identify possible harms and create mitigation strategies. In every case, assessed risks need to be communicated with all parties in the initial preparation phase.[39]

Limitations of Restorative Justice

As described, restorative justice comes with many great opportunities for the victim, offender, and the community. Nevertheless, the approach also has its limitations, which one needs to be aware of when implementing restorative procedures.

Kathleen Daly describes the following limits of restorative processes:

  1. There is no generally agreed-upon definition of restorative justice.
  2. Restorative justice does not focus on the fact-finding stages of the criminal process.
  3. It is challenging to achieve sincere apologies.
  4. Restorative conferences can help victims recover from the crimes they faced, but they are contingent on their distress level.
  5. Participants of restorative processes should expect modest results and not unrealistic outcomes.[40]

Lawrence W. Sherman and Heather Strang stress that the development and implementation of restorative processes need to be based on detailed research but may backfire in rare cases.[41]

The example of South Africa shows that especially in settings characterized by a high level of violence, the acceptance of soft approaches can be low. Many people who faced severe violent crime incidents may demand higher sentences or even the death penalty for offenders. Thus, one needs to raise awareness of the benefits of restorative justice among the general public, politicians, and the police.[42]

Restorative Justice in Nepal

The peace agreement of 2006 set the foundation for political reforms, reconciliation, and restorative justice processes. Only in 2006, the Nepalese started to hear about restorative justice and its benefits.

This section of the paper describes Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s work, an agency with a restorative mission.

Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was created on February 10, 2015, based on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act of 2014. The objectives of the Commission are as follow:

  • Provision of reparation for victims of the civil war,
  • Creation of an environment for sustainable peace and reconciliation through an improved spirit of tolerance and common good faith in the society,
  • Drafting of recommendations to take legal steps against offender involved in severe crimes, and
  • Finding out and publishing incidents of human rights violations during the civil war and those involved in incidents.[43]

To reach these objectives, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission focuses on investigative tasks, victim and offender identification, the drafting of recommendations for reparations, and the provision of identity cards for the victims. Human rights violations include murder, enforced disappearance, taking hostage, torture, sexual violence, possession or damage of public or private property, forced displacement, and other kinds of inhumane acts regulated by international human rights law and humanitarian law, as well as crimes against humanity.[44]

The work of the Commission is regulated by various protocols and acts, such as the Code of Conduct of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2072. Rules and regulations include the requirement of working impartial, credible, and independent. Human rights violations should be tackled sensitively and following international law. The Commission should exclude discrimination based on any ground and ensure that people are treated with dignity and respect.[45]

The Commission consists of five members, including at least one woman and the chairperson. Also, the qualification and standards of the members and their activities are regulated in existing guidelines.[46]

Criticism

Amnesty International criticizes that Nepal’s recent steps are severe setbacks on the country’s restorative justice process. Alongside other NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists, they expressed concern about two commissioners’ latest appointments. The commissioners were assigned without needed consultations and amending legal frameworks to harmonize Nepal’s ruling and international human rights law decisions. International organizations claim that Nepal’s Government carried out secretive and rushed rounds of consultations that failed to respect victims and civil society actors’ demands. Amnesty International states that political parties and the Government increasingly show that they are incapable and unwilling to deliver justice, truth, and reparations to civil war victims.[47]

Additionally, Agni Sapkota was nominated as the speaker of the Federal Parliament. He is accused of the abduction and killing of one individual during the war in 2005. Critical voices stress that authorities should not appoint a person under investigation for human rights abuses if they could disturb the investigation.[48]

South Asia director at Human Rights Watch states:

Nepal’s political leaders know that a transparent process is essential to ensure justice and accountability for egregious rights violations during the conflict, but they keep trying to protect those responsible for the abuses.[49]

The International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other players have repeatedly expressed strong concerns about Nepal’s restorative justice processes. According to them, restorative justice systems need a robust legal basis consistent with international standards and the political will to address the needs of victims of the war.[50]

Concerns include:

  • Disparities between definitions of particular crimes under human rights obligations, international law, and domestic law;
  • Inappropriate means to ensure obligations of international law and criminal accountability; and
  • A reliance on reparations at the costs of other compensation means for survivors of conflicts and their families.[51]

Human rights organizations urge the Government to amend the 2014 Transitional Justice Act to harmonize it with the Supreme Court’s ruling and international guidelines.[52]

Discussion

The work of Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission is controversial. Mia Swart writes that even fourteen years after the peace agreement was signed by the Maoists and the Government of  Nepal, only a little progress has been achieved on restorative justice.[53]

Thousands of complaints by victims and families of harmed people have been ignored, and insufficient findings have been published by the Commission. Activists stress that there is no witness protection policy in place and that the work of the Commission is perpetrator-led, paying no attention to victims’ interests. Also, as stated above, the Commission is often accused of filling positions with political appointments. In 2019, the Commission was not operational as it was waiting for a new commissioner’s appointment. A massive point of discussion is still the lack of adequate consultation and transparency. Considering these issues, the Commission enjoys only limited trust by victims and the international community. Also, many people claim that the Commission grants amnesties for offenders found guilty of torture and extra-judicial killings.[54]

For various reasons, large parts of Nepal’s society perceive the work of the Commission as a failure. On February 9, 2020, the Commission’s operational mandate was due to expire. Even though the commission did not complete a single investigation of the tens of thousands of complaints submitted by human rights violation victims, the Government of Nepal extended the agency’s mandate for one more year until the end of 2020. While the extensions were carefully welcomed by the international community, the achievement of victims’ meaningful justice faces both renewed uncertainties and persistent challenges.[55]

During the years since the Commission become operational, only a little progress has been achieved. One can say that this failure is based on the high number of complaints received, as more than 63,000 complaints were registered. Other voices say that 63,000 complaints are still minimal, considering the high number of violations. Also, the work is challenged by inadequate funding and limited resources.[56]

Another significant challenge is the persisting culture of impunity in Nepal, which leads to assumptions the government created the Commission to ensure that powerful offenders are granted impunity from punishment. Hypotheses are further supported through Nepal’s long-lasting history of failed commissions. For example, the Commission’s guidelines state that amnesties cannot be granted for serious crimes, but the term is not further defined.[57]

Recent reports suggest that Nepal’s Government is currently planning to create restorative justice mechanisms led by its Ministry of Law and Justice. Many victims perceived the announcement positively, who thereby became hopeful that better tools will be implemented.[58]

However, the Commission, if challenges are addressed, would have the potential to assist victims of the war on their way to healing. The work of other truth and reconciliation commissions, such as in South Africa, shows the wide range of possibilities of such a commission. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s work includes granting financial, in-kind, and emotional services and enabling victims to receive psychosocial counseling. Thereby, the responsibilities covered by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission South Africa are broader. In Nepal, one gets the impression that the focus might be more on the offender, and the true restorative spirit of the Commission is questionable.

Conclusion

Nepal and its people have been severely affected by painful social wounds since 1995 when the unrest started to kick in. While restorative justice comes with great opportunities and chances for healing, restorative processes remain a low priority.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has been formed to reconcile gross human rights violations and draft needed recommendations. So far, many people claim that the Commission only achieved little due to limited capacities, insufficient funding, and a lack of transparency.

The demand for restorative justice in Nepal needs to be linked to broader structural reforms promised in the Comprehensive Peace Accord. Also, restorative justice elements of the ongoing peace process must be taken back on track, respecting the Supreme Court’s orders and international obligations. Discussions should be extended to include the wider society and should not be limited to victims of international human rights NGOs. Partners of Nepal should develop and follow a common strategy and work closely with national actors working in peace. Also, Nepal’s donors seem to have become more indifferent to challenges concerning peace and restorative justice.

I would like to make the following recommendations:

  • The work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission requires additional funding, based on a detailed needs assessment. The process should also include a re-analysis of Government budgets supported by international development partners. Funding support should be provided through neutral institutional donors.
  • International and local experts should assess the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s capacities and provide need-based capacity-building support through training and coaching in a transparent and participatory manner.
  • Processes of the Commission, including the appointment of commissioners, must take place in transparent ways following intensive transparent consultations. Appointments and processes must be re-designed to meet international human rights standards and procedures.
  • The last extension of one year’s mandate is not enough to handle the high workload and satisfactorily manage all complaints. Thus, a long-term mandate needs to be established.
  • Trust among the public must be gained through effective campaigning and educational activities.
  • Regulatory measures must be developed and implemented to prevent corruption and fraud.

In case the developments over the past years will go on in a similar direction, there is little ground to think that Nepal’s Government’s processes will not further entrench impunity, probably intensifying the pain of victims like the paralyzed man in the introduction.

Certainly, restorative justice cannot heal all his pain and suffering. Still, the approach might help him live as well as possible with the consequences, reach an understanding, and overcome likely anger and bitterness.

Bibliography

Amnesty International. “Nepal: Recent Steps Undermine Transitional Justice,” 2020. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/01/nepal-recent-steps-undermine-transitional-justice/.

Bennet, Lynn, Dilli R. Dahal, and Pav Govindasamy. Caste, Ethnic and Regional Identity in Nepal: Further Analysis of the 2006 Nepal Demographic and Health Survey. Calverton, United States of America: Macro International Inc., 2006.

Center for Restorative Process. “Restorative Justice and Restorative Practices,” 2015. http://www.centerforrestorativeprocess.com/restorative-justice-and-restorative-practices.html.

Daly, Kathleen. “The Limits of Restorative Justice,” 2006. https://euclid.egnyte.com/dl/XFlA7o47Ct/?

Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Kathmandu: National Capital, Nepal,” 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Kathmandu.

European Institute for Gender Equality. “Gender Inequality,” n.d. https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1182.

Gill, Peter. “Nepal’s Sisyphean Struggle for Justice,” 2019. https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/nepals-sisyphean-struggle-for-justice/.

Government of Nepal. “The Codes of Conduct of the Truth and Reconciliaiton Commission, 2072 (2015),” 2015. http://trc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/codesofcoduct.pdf.

———. “The Enforced Disappearance Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2071 (2014),” 2014. http://trc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/actsrulesguidelines.pdf.

———. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Nepal,” n.d. https://trc.gov.np/about-commission/.

Human Rights Watch. “Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Civilian Struggle to Survive in Nepal’s Civil War,” 2004. https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/nepal1004.pdf.

———. “Nepal: Events of 2018,” 2018. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/nepal.

Jeffery, Renee. “Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Limps On,” 2019. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/nepal-truth-and-reconciliation-commission-limps.

Kathmandu Post. Gender Inequality Continues to Plague Nepal, 2019. https://kathmandupost.com/editorial/2019/12/12/gender-inequality-continues-to-plague-nepal.

K.C., Luna. “Conflict, Disaster and Changing Gender Roles in Nepal: Women’s Everyday Experience.” PhD diss., Wageningen University, 2019.

Maepa, Traggy. Beyond Retribution: Prospects for Restorative Justice in South Africa. Pretoria: The Restorative Justice Centre, 2005.

Marshall, Tony F. Restorative Justice: An Overview. London: Home Office: Research Development and Statistics Directorate, 1999.

Oxfam. “Nepal Earthquake Response: Creating Lasting Change for Survivors,” 2020. https://www.oxfam.org/en/nepal-earthquake-response-creating-lasting-change-survivors.

Pattisson, Pete. “Nepal Border Blockade ‘Threatens the Future of the Country Itself’, Says UN,” 2015. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/nov/18/nepal-border-blockade-india-threatens-future-un-unicef.

Peace Insight. “Nepal: Conflict and Peace,” 2020. http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/nepal/.

Pherali, Tejendra J. “Education and Conflict in Nepal: Impact of Violence on Schools and the Role of Education in Peacebuilding.” Liverpool John Moores University, 2012. http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/6125/1/570726.pdf.

Restorative Justice Council. RJC Practitioners Handbook. Norwich: The Restorative Justice Council, 2016.

Rose, Leo E., Pradcumne P. Karan, Matinuzzaman Zuberi, and Richard R. Proud. “Nepal,” 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Nepal/Climate.

———. “The Economy,” 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Nepal/The-economy#accordion-article-contributors.

Sherman, Lawrence W., and Heather Strang. Restorative Justice: The Evidence. London: The Smith Institute, 2007.

Swart, Mia. “Nepal Transitional Justice Making Little Progress: Rights Groups,” 2019. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/4/nepal-transitional-justice-making-little-progress-rights-groups.

thelongestwayhome.com. “Nepali Caste System Culture & How It Effects Society Today,” 2012. https://www.thelongestwayhome.com/blog/nepal/nepalese-caste-system-culture-in-nepal-today/.

UN OHCHR. Nepal Conflict Report: Executive Summary. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 2012.

UNDP. “Earthquake in Nepal,” 2015. https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/crisis-response/past-crises/nepal.html.

UNODC. Handbook on Restorative Justice Programmes: Second Edition. 2nd ed. New York: United Nations, 2020.

Human Rights Watch. “World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Nepal,” December 18, 2018. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/nepal.

Zehr, Howard, and Ali Gohar. The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Peshawar: Uni-Graphics, 2003.

 

Bennet, Lynn, Dilli R. Dahal, and Pav Govindasamy. Caste, Ethnic and Regional Identity in Nepal: Further Analysis of the 2006 Nepal Demographic and Health Survey. Calverton: Macro International Inc., 2006.

Center for Restorative Process. “Restorative Justice and Restorative Practices,” 2015. http://www.centerforrestorativeprocess.com/restorative-justice-and-restorative-practices.html. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Daly, Kathleen. “The Limits of Restorative Justice,” 2006. https://euclid.egnyte.com/dl/XFlA7o47Ct/? Accessed October 23, 2002.

Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Kathmandu: National Capital, Nepal,” 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Kathmandu. Accessed October 23, 2002.

European Institute for Gender Equality. “Gender Inequality,” n.d. https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1182. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Gill, Peter. “Nepal’s Sisyphean Struggle for Justice,” 2019. https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/nepals-sisyphean-struggle-for-justice/. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Government of Nepal. “The Codes of Conduct of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2072 (2015),” 2015. http://trc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/codesofcoduct.pdf. Accessed October 23, 2002.

———. “The Enforced Disappearance Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2071 (2014),” 2014. http://trc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/actsrulesguidelines.pdf. Accessed October 23, 2002.

———. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Nepal,” n.d. https://trc.gov.np/about-commission/. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Human Rights Watch. “Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Civilian Struggle to Survive in Nepal’s Civil War,” 2004. https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/nepal1004.pdf. Accessed October 23, 2002.

———. “Nepal: Events of 2018,” 2018. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/nepal. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Jeffery, Renee. “Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Limps On,” 2019. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/nepal-truth-and-reconciliation-commission-limps. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Kathmandu Post. Gender Inequality Continues to Plague Nepal, 2019. https://kathmandupost.com/editorial/2019/12/12/gender-inequality-continues-to-plague-nepal. Accessed October 23, 2002.

K.C., Luna. Conflict, Disaster and Changing Gender Roles in Nepal: Women’s Everyday Experience. Ph.D. diss., Wageningen University, 2019.

Maepa, Traggy. Beyond Retribution: Prospects for Restorative Justice in South Africa. Pretoria: The Restorative Justice Centre, 2005.

Marshall, Tony F. Restorative Justice: An Overview. London: Home Office: Research Development and Statistics Directorate, 1999.

Oxfam. “Nepal Earthquake Response: Creating Lasting Change for Survivors,” 2020. https://www.oxfam.org/en/nepal-earthquake-response-creating-lasting-change-survivors. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Pattisson, Pete. “Nepal Border Blockade ‘Threatens the Future of the Country Itself’, Says UN,” 2015. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/nov/18/nepal-border-blockade-india-threatens-future-un-unicef. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Peace Insight. “Nepal: Conflict and Peace,” 2020. http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/nepal/. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Pherali, Tejendra J. “Education and Conflict in Nepal: Impact of Violence on Schools and the Role of Education in Peacebuilding.” Liverpool John Moores University, 2012. http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/6125/1/570726.pdf. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Restorative Justice Council. RJC Practitioners Handbook. Norwich: The Restorative Justice Council, 2016.

Rose, Leo E., Pradcumne P. Karan, Matinuzzaman Zuberi, and Richard R. Proud. “Nepal,” 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Nepal/Climate. Accessed October 23, 2002. Accessed October 23, 2002.

———. “The Economy,” 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Nepal/The-economy#accordion-article-contributors. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Sherman, Lawrence W., and Heather Strang. Restorative Justice: The Evidence. London: The Smith Institute, 2007.

Swart, Mia. “Nepal Transitional Justice Making Little Progress: Rights Groups,” 2019. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/4/nepal-transitional-justice-making-little-progress-rights-groups. Accessed October 23, 2002.

thelongestwayhome.com. “Nepali Caste System Culture & How It Effects Society Today,” 2012. https://www.thelongestwayhome.com/blog/nepal/nepalese-caste-system-culture-in-nepal-today/. Accessed October 23, 2002.

UN OHCHR. Nepal Conflict Report: Executive Summary. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 2012.

UNDP. “Earthquake in Nepal,” 2015. https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/crisis-response/past-crises/nepal.html. Accessed October 23, 2002.

UNODC. Handbook on Restorative Justice Programmes: Second Edition. 2nd ed. New York: United Nations, 2020.

Human Rights Watch. “World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Nepal,” December 18, 2018. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/nepal. Accessed October 23, 2002.

Zehr, Howard, and Ali Gohar. The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Peshawar: Uni-Graphics, 2003.

 

[1] Peter Gill, “Nepal’s Sisyphean Struggle for Justice,” 2019, accessed October 23, 2020, https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/nepals-sisyphean-struggle-for-justice/.

[2] Mia Swart, “Nepal Transitional Justice Making Little Progress: Rights Groups,” 2019, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/4/nepal-transitional-justice-making-little-progress-rights-groups.

[3] Swart.

[4] Leo E. Rose et al., “Nepal,” 2020, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.britannica.com/place/Nepal/Climate.

[5] Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Kathmandu: National Capital, Nepal,” 2020, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.britannica.com/place/Kathmandu.

[6] Rose et al., “Nepal.”

[7] Leo E. Rose et al., “The Economy,” 2020, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.britannica.com/place/Nepal/The-economy#accordion-article-contributors.

[8] Human Rights Watch, “Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Civilian Struggle to Survive in Nepal’s Civil War,” 2004, accessed October 23, 2002, https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/nepal1004.pdf, 1.

[9]  Ibid., 1.

[10] Ibid., 1.

[11] Tejendra J. Pherali, “Education and Conflict in Nepal: Impact of Violence on Schools and the Role of Education in Peacebuilding” (Liverpool, United Kingdom, Liverpool John Moores University, 2012), accessed October 23, 2020, http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/6125/1/570726.pdf.

[12] UN OHCHR, Nepal Conflict Report: Executive Summary (Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 2012), 14-16.

[13] Ibid., 14-16.

[14] Human Rights Watch, “Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Civilian Struggle to Survive in Nepal’s Civil War,” 2.

[15] UNDP, “Earthquake in Nepal,” 2015, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/crisis-response/past-crises/nepal.html.

[16] Oxfam, “Nepal Earthquake Response: Creating Lasting Change for Survivors,” 2020,  accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.oxfam.org/en/nepal-earthquake-response-creating-lasting-change-survivors.

[17] Pete Pattisson, “Nepal Border Blockade ‘Threatens the Future of the Country Itself’, Says UN,” 2015, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/nov/18/nepal-border-blockade-india-threatens-future-un-unicef.

[18] Peace Insight, “Nepal: Conflict and Peace,” 2020, accessed October 23, 2020, http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/nepal/.

[19] Human Rights Watch, “Nepal: Events of 2018,” 2018, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/nepal.

[20] Human Rights Watch.

[21] Lynn Bennet, Dilli R. Dahal, and Pav Govindasamy, Caste, Ethnic and Regional Identity in Nepal: Further Analysis of the 2006 Nepal Demographic and Health Survey (Calverton, United States of America: Macro International Inc., 2006), 1.

[22] thelongestwayhome.com, “Nepali Caste System Culture & How It Effects Society Today,” 2012, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.thelongestwayhome.com/blog/nepal/nepalese-caste-system-culture-in-nepal-today/.

[23] Bennet, Dahal, and Govindasamy, Caste, Ethnic and Regional Identity in Nepal: Further Analysis of the 2006 Nepal Demographic and Health Survey, 3.

[24] European Institute for Gender Equality, “Gender Inequality,” n.d., accessed October 23, 2020, https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1182.

[25] Luna K.C., “Conflict, Disaster and Changing Gender Roles in Nepal: Women’s Everyday Experience” (PhD diss., Wageningen University, 2019).

[26] Kathmandu Post, Gender Inequality Continues to Plague Nepal, 2019, accessed October 23, 2020, https://kathmandupost.com/editorial/2019/12/12/gender-inequality-continues-to-plague-nepal.

[27] “World Report 2019: Rights Trends in Nepal,” Human Rights Watch, December 18, 2018, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/nepal.

[28] Center for Restorative Process, “Restorative Justice and Restorative Practices,” 2015, accessed October 23, 2020, http://www.centerforrestorativeprocess.com/restorative-justice-and-restorative-practices.html.

[29] Howard Zehr and Ali Gohar, The Little Book of Restorative Justice (Peshawar: Uni-Graphics, 2003), 40.

[30] Ibid., 21.

[31] Ibid., 21.

[32] Zehr and Gohar, 22.

[33] Tony F. Marshall, Restorative Justice: An Overview (London: Home Office: Research Development and Statistics Directorate, 1999), 23-24.

[34] Ibid., 23.

[35] Ibid., 24.

[36] Marshall., 24.

[37] Ibid, 28.

[38] UNODC, Handbook on Restorative Justice Programmes: Second Edition, 2nd ed. (New York: United Nations, 2020), 5.

[39] Restorative Justice Council, RJC Practitioners Handbook (Norwich: The Restorative Justice Council, 2016), 17.

[40] Kathleen Daly, “The Limits of Restorative Justice,” 2006, accessed October 23, 2020, https://euclid.egnyte.com/dl/XFlA7o47Ct/?, 1-10.

[41] Lawrence W. Sherman and Heather Strang, Restorative Justice: The Evidence (London: The Smith Institute, 2007), 75-76.

[42] Traggy Maepa, Beyond Retribution: Prospects for Restorative Justice in South Africa (Pretoria: The Restorative Justice Centre, 2005), 43.

[43] Government of Nepal, “Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Nepal,” n.d., accessed October 23, 2020, https://trc.gov.np/about-commission/.

[44] Government of Nepal.

[45] Government of Nepal, “The Codes of Conduct of the Truth and Reconciliaiton Commission, 2072 (2015),” 2015, accessed October 23, 2020, http://trc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/codesofcoduct.pdf, 3-4.

[46] Government of Nepal, “The Enforced Disappearance Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2071 (2014),” 2014, accessed October 23, 2020, http://trc.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/actsrulesguidelines.pdf, 5-12.

[47] Amnesty International, “Nepal: Recent Steps Undermine Transitional Justice,” 2020, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/01/nepal-recent-steps-undermine-transitional-justice/.

[48] Ibid.

[49] Ibid.

[50] Ibid.

[51] Amnesty International.

[52] Ibid.

[53] Mia Swart, “Nepal Transitional Justice Making Little Progress: Rights Groups,” 2019, acessed October 23, 2020, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/4/nepal-transitional-justice-making-little-progress-rights-groups.

[54] Swart.

[55] Renee Jeffery, “Nepal’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Limps On,” 2019, accessed October 23, 2020, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/nepal-truth-and-reconciliation-commission-limps.

[56] Ibid.

[57] Jeffery.

[58] Ibid.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on telegram
Telegram
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp

2 Responses

  1. Thank you for the great article.
    Do you think the recent dissolution of Parliament will have very similar effect in absence of any powerful leader and people might turn to ex-monarch again(may be by electing him as a leader?)

    1. Thank you, Sonal for your comment. Good questions, my experience is that there are many people in Nepal who favor a monarchy over the current system and believe that the country was in a better stage during the monarchy. Nepal had so many leaders during the last 10 years with corruption being high on all levels. Nevertheless, I don’t believe this will happen, but it is hard to predict.

Leave a Reply