Nepal’s Violent History Brushed Under the Carpet

Arati Singh

By setting up a High Level Investigation Commission last year, the government in Nepal tried to uncover the crimes of the state during people’s movement of April 2006. Since its inception those who had played momentous roles during the King Gyanendra’s direct rule had been questioned for investigation including the King himself. It is, however pessimistically queer to find our confinement of the spectrum to see only that as a period of atrocities.

A brief analysis on the history of crime by the State or political parties in Nepal reveals how unfair it is to limit ourselves to post 2004 age, when the King took over the political power in Nepal. Certainly the oppressors of the human rights must be punished. But by limiting utterly to a particular period Nepal is obscuring the history of crimes committed by the Maoists and the State.

Political leaders and intellectuals argue that what was done in the past must be forgotten with a commitment not to commit same kind of mistakes again. Moreover they opine that during this transitional phase it is not in the benefits of the peace to bring up the matters related to past atrocities of the Maoists and the State.

By forgetting the past Nepal cannot clean its thirteen year old violent history bloodless. Estimated 300,000 internally displaced people, 17,000 disappeared people by both the State and the Maoist, 1,480 deaths of police personals, a total death of 11,790 of Maoist cadres, civilians and army personals, losses of national property and economy at 1.5 billion USD and unreported but presumably numerous cases of killings, abductions, torture, extortion, and use of children for military purposes by the Maoists, these data design truth of Nepal. How can Nepal afford to bury these facts as if they had never happened? Millions of people still survive by the wounds of the violent past. Many have fled the country, many more have lost their beloved, many are rendered homeless, and tens of thousands of children have lost their educational age. How can the leaders prepare to be oblivion to these facts that has structured Nepal’s modern history?

On 8th November 2006, when Maoist and Seven political parties reached the historic agreement of consensus many leaders including Prime Minsiter Grija Prasad Koirala marked the day as a vantage time for the beginning of a new democratic Nepali era. However I think Nepal’s new era must start by going back to the history not eluding it. The leaders must remember the history and should begin from there. They should begin by being apologetic to the Nepali people for their grave abuses of human rights, torture, national destruction and trauma given. All the parties must start with a political practice of self criticism.

Once I had heard a political intellectual saying that only when political elites are willing to accept negative feedback from people who do not have their power and start structured self criticism, can a government reasonably claim to be “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” We have seen successive governments in Germany being symbolically self critical for its barbarism against Jews and, US governments to the “black” in many ways.

In an interview with BBC Radio on 7 October 2006, Prachanda, Supreme of CPN Maoist said that the lives lost and economic losses during the 13 years long political revolution must be considered as a part of Nepal’s movement towards enlightenment. This clearly shows he and his party are not critical of their past violent actions. And no wonder Young Communist League, a youth wing of Maoist today freely practice atrocities, torture and crimes. The other involved political parties too have so far maintained a kind of carefree attitude towards their past mistakes that had resulted in rampant atrocities and violation of human rights.

The leaders’ political growth directs country towards its development. Therefore the political parties instead of portraying their past actions perfect to the situation, must create their own space for growth by adopting a tradition of self criticism. Unless the leaders take responsibility of their past actions and be apologetic they can never win the trust of people. Attempts to justify the past violence simply give them mileage to continue more violence

The crisis of human rights violation in Nepal and rampantly growing sense of insecurity among civilians have steamed up because people have little or no faith on the leaders. The political leaders have failed to assure people that they have indeed given up violence and the violent history will not be repeated again. How those political parties, that are perceived as a threat and violent by the people can democratize and develop a country? The leaders must politically grow, followed by the country and its people.

Source: The American Chronicle, August 13, 2007