The Nepal government should urgently heed the demands of conflict victims and amend the process for appointing commissioners to the country's two transitional justice bodies, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Commission of Jurists said today. To successfully implement the transitional justice law adopted by parliament in 2024, it is crucial to have a transparent and rigorous process that results in the appointment of credible and highly qualified commissioners.
In August 2024, Nepal's parliament adopted a law that victims' groups broadly accepted as a viable basis for the long delayed transitional justice process to address widespread human rights violations and abuses committed during the 1996-2006 conflict between Maoist insurgents and Nepali security forces. Under the legislation there will be two bodies - a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and a Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons. However, survivors and victims' representatives have rejected a short list of candidates published by a committee to appoint commissioners.
"The appointment of competent, impartial commissioners fully independent from any political party is crucial to the credibility and success of transitional justice in Nepal," said Isabelle Lassée, deputy regional director for South Asia at Amnesty International. "The government should immediately allow a revision of the appointment process to include more candidates and strengthen procedures."
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement, signed in 2006, included a commitment to reveal what happened to victims of enforced disappearance within 60 days, and to establish "a High-level Truth and Reconciliation Commission … to probe into those involved in serious violation of human rights and crimes against humanity." For almost two decades these commitments have been thwarted through political maneuvering, unnecessarily deepening the pain of thousands of victims and their families, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Commission of Jurists said.
Nepal has established similar commissions in the past, which have received over 60,000 complaints. However, the previous commissions failed to deliver on their mandate, partly due to political interference in appointments and overall lack of political will to ensure their independence and effectiveness.
In 2015, the Supreme Court determined that an earlier transitional justice law was unconstitutional and violated Nepal's international human rights obligations. While the amended transitional justice law has some positive elements, it also contains some unacceptable provisions, including allowing for amnesty of those involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Therefore, the manner in which commissioners interpret and implement their mandates will be of critical importance to ensure that the commissions' work does not violate international law. The appointment of highly qualified, impartial, and independent people is therefore crucial.
In a statement published on May 1, 38 groups of victims and survivors wrote that the short-listed candidates are "unlikely to carry forward the national responsibility of transitional justice," leaving victims "once again denied justice" and suffering "a deep sense of betrayal and humiliation."
They stressed that the "list was developed through a non-transparent, superficial, and politically influenced process based on power-sharing and [political] access, rather than merit." The appointments committee had failed to "publicly disclose the criteria, basis, and transparent procedures used to prepare the shortlist." According to the groups, the list "includes … individuals who have defended perpetrators, and many who lack knowledge, contribution, or expertise in transitional justice."
Many survivors and the families of those subjected to violations and abuses have lived in hardship for years, often suffering lasting mental harm and physical injuries. They are struggling to learn the truth about their loved ones, are longing to see those responsible for abuses brought to justice in fair trials, and remain in desperate need of reparations and official recognition. The lack of accountability for serious crimes under international law has contributed to ongoing rights violations and a wider crisis of impunity.
The victims said that the appointments committee had "failed to consult them even once," resulting in "a process controlled by the perpetrators' side."
"Conducting a successful transitional justice process is of importance to all Nepalis, but above all to conflict victims who have struggled for decades to receive truth, justice, and reparations," said Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "It has become routine for successive governments to promise that transitional justice will be 'victim centric,' but these words have little meaning unless victims' concerns are addressed and they are able to meaningfully engage in the process."
In their statement, the victims and survivors groups warn that they will "be compelled to initiate the formation of a parallel civil commission" to investigate conflict era abuses if the authorities continue to ignore their concerns and pursue a "superficial process that further inflicts pain and despair on the victims." They say that the United Nations and "entire international community" should only support "a credible transitional justice process."
At a public event organized by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in collaboration with several local organizations in March in Kathmandu, the prime minister of Nepal and leaders of major political parties publicly committed to establishing a credible, victim-centric transitional justice process that rises above political differences.
Nepal's international partners, including donor governments and the United Nations, have a significant role to play in supporting the process and helping to assure its credibility. They should make clear that they will support a process that is genuinely victim-centered and upholds human rights standards.
In a separate statement published on May 6, 10 Nepali human rights organizations called for consultations with victims to be integrated into a selection process that incorporates clear selection criteria, transparency, background checks, and public hearings. They point out that the law gives the government powers to "remove obstacles" to a successful outcome and extend the appointment process.
Nepal's transitional justice process is a crucial opportunity to provide redress for victims and survivors, strengthen the rule of law in Nepal, and establish a significant precedent in the region. Urgent steps for the government to address shortcomings of the appointment process may include:
- Publishing a revised schedule
- Meaningfully consulting with the victim community and identifying additional suitable candidates
- Publishing a revised shortlist
- Ensuring representative participation of victims and survivors, civil society, and the media in public hearings to maintain transparency
- And, if needed, invoking the authority granted by the law to remove obstacles and extend the committee's term
"The delivery of effective justice for those suffering from the atrocities of Nepal's armed conflict is decades overdue, but there is finally a chance to conduct a successful process that enhances human rights and the rule of law in Nepal," said Ian Seiderman, Senior Legal and Policy Director at the International Commission of Jurists. "The government owes it to the victims and survivors, and to all Nepalis, to ensure that credible candidates meeting the highest standards are appointed as commissioners."
