(This is the second in a series of statements on the challenges facing democracy, rule of law and human rights in Nepal at present. The first statement, NEPAL: The need for a comprehensive appeared on March 31, 2007)
Hope for democracy, which arose with the uprising of the people that brought down the king and paved the way for power being handed over to parliament is sometimes marred by very tragic events that indicate the as yet many unresolved problems regarding the maintenance of the rule of law and order in Nepal. Once such was the incident at Gaur on March 21, 2007 which claimed the lives of 29 persons including five women who were murdered after being raped.
The incident was a result of two political groups wanting to have meetings at the same time and place. The Madhesi People¡¦s Rights Forum (MPRF) announced a meeting to be held in Gaur at 11:00 a.m. and publicized the meeting over loud speakers. Another group, Madhesi Mukti Morcha (MMM) who are said to be affiliated to the Maoists, also decided to hold a public meeting at the same time and place. There was no effective intervention on the part of the law enforcement agencies to separate the parties and to ensure that the meetings were held peacefully, in separate places. It is perhaps a mark of the post democratic uprising that the police and other authorities do not play any part at all in ensuring law and order at public meetings.
According to a report at around 10:00 a.m. rallies of both parties began and met near the District Court. At the beginning the participants of both rallies greeted each other good naturedly. However, there soon came the dismantling of the stage of one group by the other and shots were fired at MMM cadres. Within a few minutes over a dozen of them were killed. Later, according to reports, professional killers were engaged by the MPRF who chased the MMM cadres and killed some of them as far as eight kilometers away from where the rallies were to be held.
During all this the police did nothing. It is perhaps an indication that the Nepali police have become passive bystanders even when serious violence takes place and the law and order situation is completely out of control.
The rise of the MPRF is an indication of the growing consciousness among the minorities that many of their grievances have not been addressed in the political process that is now taking place in Nepal. The political parties involved in the democratic process, including the Maoists seemed to have paid little attention to the grievances of the minorities. The minorities on their part do not appear to feel that the political process, as it is taking place now, will bring them much benefit. The Maoists have demanded the banning of the MPRF. However, discerning human rights leaders are of the view that groups such as the MPRF should have the right to organise. Dr. Mathura Shrestha, a prominent human rights activist, in an interview to a newspaper stated “What I have been advocating for the past several months is that we should not have opposed MPRF organised protest programmes.” He points to the reasons for disappointments of Madhesi and other ethnic groups in the hill country. He goes on the say, “Now we must realise that democracy did generate hope. But doubts are undermining our hopes for democracy. I see this as the emergence of peoples’ resentment. It is there in Madhes hill and mountain.”
Nepal today is faced with several serious problems. On the one hand the police force, which served the former regime of the king, suffers from a serious credibility problem. They have in the past engaged in serious acts of repression. Naturally the democratic uprising was also spurred by such acts of repression. Now the police force has to serve parliament and to ensure that democracy is allowed to function. However, there have been no attempts so far to re-orientate the police or to bring about the necessary changes that would reestablish their legitimate role. The political parties as well as international agencies such as the United Nations agencies have paid little attention to this problem. What is involved is not just having police training programmes but bringing about a completely new orientation to enable them to play a role in a democratic setting. This naturally would involve some changes in the higher command since the old leadership of the police still owes their loyalties to a feudal system which is now highly resented by the people. This change will not happen automatically. This has to be done consciously and the duty of doing this lies with the Prime Minister and the political leadership of the country.
There have been demonstrations and sit-ins in Katmandu where people, particularly the human rights groups, have asked for investigations and accountability regarding the incident at Gaur. For the incident not to be investigated and prosecuted would pave the way to impunity and a sense of lawlessness. This would be dangerous, particularly in a time of transition such as now.
There is much to celebrate about the positive changes towards democracy in Nepal. However, such celebrations may not last long if more serious questions regarding impunity and law and order are not addressed. The Gaur incident points to the need for a comprehensive .
